NotMyOldRedditName

I wasn’t talking about FSD, I was talking about AP.

Although if you use FSD, to sign up, you need to acknowledge this (among other things)

“Full Self-Driving is in early limited access Beta and must be used with additional caution. It may do the wrong thing at the worst time, so you must always keep your hands on the wheel and pay extra attention to the road. Do not become complacent,”

If it leaves Beta in V12, and that warning is gone, there will be problems probably =( It’s not ready to lose such an extreme warning. And it legit shouldn’t leave beta until they take on liability and it’s legit FSD.

When you sit in the car, it really doesn’t though. When you enable it, it clearly warns you about the dangers involved and to always pay attention. The radar versions even warned you about specific situations it would fail in and potentially cause a fatal accident. All cars that rely on radar have that issue and warn their users.

Anyone who’s used it knows it clearly has problems, and honestly, it can be a little nerve racking getting used to using at first as well, because it does have problems and you need to learn them. My partner doesn’t like using it because of those problems.

The majority of people causing accidents on it have simply grown accustomed to it. They know when it will usually fail, and then make poor choices and end up in a rare circumstance. People are just people and make all sorts of bad choices. Some people follow the GPS off a bridge or into a lake.

That’s not to say I don’t think there’s room for Tesla to improve on this, like using the in cabin camera to further help detect if someone is paying attention or not, but ultimately it falls on the driver to pay attention.

If you happen to be given a Tesla with AP already enabled on your profile, and you’ve only gone off what you heard in the media then sure maybe, but those aren’t the people causing problems. And really, if you rent a Tesla, I really do hope it’s all disabled by default so you have to turn it on and go through the setup. That would be a legit problem in my mind otherwise.

I’m going to get downvoted to hell here, but if you defend google here, you should be defending Tesla when someone severely misuses auto-pilot.

Play games on AP and don’t pay attention causing crash, not Tesla’s fault. Drive off a bridge cause the GPS tells you to, not Google’s fault.

You’re responsible for driving your car at all times.

Energy density on these are woefully inadequate for cars, but that doesn’t matter for stationary storage which is what this is for.

daaaaaaamn. That’s brilliant.

Was just thinking on this more and had a laugh at someone saying this out loud

Them: “Did you see my X last night, i ripped them a new one!”
Friend: “You did what to your ex last night? Does your wife know!?”

I wonder what term will replace tweet… it worked so well. Oh I tweeted this last night…

People aren’t going to say I X’d that last night. Sure you can say I posted something on X or I dunno, but I don’t think they’ll ever get something as good as tweeting on twitter.

Please find me a post by Elon where he supports people jailbreaking his cars to get features for free that isn’t about a white hacker hacking competition to expose bugs.

We don’t pay for phone updates, but there is software out there that’s a buy a version and get all updates to that version, but not a new version.

E.g buy 5.0, get 5.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, 5.3 etc but not 6.0

Usually that kinda software stays on a version for years.

My Jetbrains IDE is a subscription fee like that. Yearly fee gets you all major version updates, but you keep it as is if you stop paying.

Phone updates don’t come for the life of the car phone either.

Would you pay a yearly fee to continue getting updates for your now no longer being updated but perfectly fine otherwise phone? I would.

If your problem with my statement is that Tesla shouldn’t even be allowed to charge them for it in the first place then we’ll have to disagree. They can sell whatever product they want with features locked away. If people don’t want to buy a SR because it doesn’t have heated seats without a fee then don’t buy it.

Trying to make heated seats a subscription is where I’d draw the line and say regulators should step in.

And again, no qualms with people jailbreaking heated seats

See my original edit which was before this reply, and my follow up to another person on the same post replying like you.

I’m not objecting to unlocking heated seats. I do object and consider something like FSD entirely different though.

You left with the hardware, and accepted that it was locked. You didn’t pay for access to it.

In my edit which was well before your reply, I explicitly stated I’m okay with you bypassing a lock like that to gain access to heated seats. You have a right to modify your car and tough luck if tesla didn’t protect it well enough. That’s not your problem, that’s theirs.

FSD is another matter though. It’s actively developed software that’s pushed to the car if you paid for it. Software that will in the future push liability onto Tesla if they are successful. Tesla doesn’t have any obligation to provide that software, updates, or access to it regardless of any hack that’s done, and I imagine the NHSTA would even require them to devise a way to prevent access due to liability issues that might arise.

Edit: one is accessing something you own but don’t have access to through a hole they left open. The other is piracy/theft

You didn’t pay for it.

Tesla includes it at loss because it’s cheaper than making you a special version without it, and it opens up new sales by reducing the price (e.g the originally locked batteries let them sell a substantially cheaper car than they could have otherwise)

Subscriptions for that should be banned, but including heated seats and making you pay once to access them is fair game.

Manufacturers dont owe you anything for free.

Edit: also, short of something like FSD which depends on future work from Tesla, I don’t think they have a right to prevent you from bypassing a lock and accessing those heated seats if you can

I actually had a glimmer of hope that maybe, just maybe he wouldn’t behave like this and he wouldn’t fuck with the people he didn’t like by abusing twitter once he owned it, but that hope was dashed pretty quickly.

deleted by creator

Well we really can’t speak to any ulterior motives that aren’t public and maybe there is. Killing rail outright helps sell more cars, but like you said I doubt we’ll ever know one way or the other.

In theory, excluding unknowable hidden motives, the goal was to help halt this very specific plan in hopes they’d come up with something better.

By the time it was cancelled the cost had gone from mid 40 billion to 77 billion and it wasn’t going to stop there.

I imagine that the vast vast majority of this isn’t the cost of the actual train hardware but the cost of land rights, environmental studies etc. It’s expensive as fuck.

I wouldn’t be surprised if 3/4 of the cost has nothing to do with the train or engineering itself, especially as it ballooned to 77b (edit this could actually be looked up to some extent I’m sure, I just don’t know) I did some more looking and while it’s a factor I was indeed off. Things like expensive tunnels are a big factor.

Knowing this, wouldn’t it make sense to spend more and make something better and more advanced if you have to sink so much money into all the other stuff before you can even build it? Put the best thing we can through that expensive tunnel.

I think there’s a fair distinction of, wanted to kill high speed rail in California (this post) and wanting some form of high speed rail / transport that would be better than what was proposed given the expected costs and overruns, and better technology in general

We’ll really never know, but there is a difference in context there.

Edit: looks like it actually is still happening, I thought things got halted other than 1 section of track. Estimates are now 88b-128b.

There’s a difference between an apologist and correcting something entirely somewhat out of context.

If I was trying to say it’s okay for musk to say FSD is going to be ready this year every year for the past 6 or whatever years it is, that’s different.

Right, but the point wasn’t to make it a hyperloop, but to try and do something, anything better.

And it already wasn’t going to be cheap

Elon didn’t want the government to in his mind waste money building the train system which would go over cost and not even be state of the art by the time it was built.

He wanted them to do something substantially more innovative. He never wanted to build the hyperloop, it was meant to try and get others to see if they could make it work, but also as an example of how California should be looking to lead and do something really next level.

Hyperloop wasn’t meant to stop it so they’d build it instead. It was there to try and foster any kind of innovation rather than have the existing plan go forward.

So out of context, the thread title can be seen as true, but it’s not the whole story, and not what he meant.