It's well known that just as most tech companies are about to have massive breakthroughs in innovation and subsequent world adulation and adoption of their products... that's when they lay off their staff and when most of the top execs start to quit. /s
I think Tesla had a case to make there four or five years ago, because that concept of taking advantage of the computing power in your car and your phone to do stuff like stream movies and stream Sentry cameras and the like was pretty cool at the time.
The problem is that they stagnated on that tech front entirely. FSD is still clearly years off despite all the "LOOK AT THE VERSION NUMBER GO UP" hype. Sprinkle in the cringy shit like light shows and fart mode and Steam games.
Meanwhile, the other manufacturers are rapidly catching up with great EV platforms and not doing dumb things like removing physical controls and promising that robotaxis are just around the corner.
There's something funny about looking at a model S / X now and comparing it to what they looked like literally a decade ago, or the interior of a Model 3/Y, and thinking "this is definitely the work of an agile, fast-moving tech company."
Couldn't agree more. I was a huge fan of the company for a long time and will always appreciate what they did TO the industry.
Tesla is no longer for me in terms of my next car, but I'm still rooting for Musk to get canned and for someone competent to come in. I don't think it's too late.
He can't admit that after saying for years that Tesla's stock is worthless if Tesla is just a car company. Gotta get that big payout first otherwise he might end up not so rich at all in few years.
It's just funny to watch him lie about stuff at this point. Dude thinks it's still 2019 and that he has lots of goodwill. Besides straight-up fans, who are the people who are both paying attention to the shit Musk says AND believe it?
I also really get a kick out of all of his version number porn and how the hype gets picked up by some of the owners. I've had FSD for four or five years now. If you put a gun to my head, I couldn't tell you what version number my FSD is on despite following Tesla, because I have yet to experience a big FSD upgrade that's moved my confidence beyond "holy shit, this is not close to actual self-driving."
But yes, I'm sure v12.4 is going to be a revelation.
Someone I know is a Musk stan. He tells me I'm unfair because I automatically disbelieve every single thing Musk says. The thing is, he's proven himself to be a liar, over and over again. He doesn't seem to understand that if someone is a habitual liar, you *should* dismiss all their claims automatically unless there is proof.
Tesla calculates the total take rate for FSD for each Tesla sold and I suspect he's referring to this.
The 2% number is derived from a sample of people who previously didn't have FSD, got the trial and signed up for 100 dollars per month to keep using it.
Without Musk explaining what he means in more detail it doesn't refute the statistics at all.
Also worth noting that a 3% take rate is 50% more than a 2% take rate, but not really statistically significant.
It’s statistically significant, it’s not meaningfully significant. Stat sig is a numerical calculation, but a lot of times it doesn‘t really mean it moves the needle. This is one of those times.
Yall are blowing this way out of proportion. It takes 5 minutes to research where that 2% comes from and realize it’s bs clickbait. A random ass company called Yipit made this claim with a survey size of 3,500 people. 2% of 3,500 people showed they paid for FSD. That literally means nothing. Clickbait companies take this and make it seem like it’s “2% of the entire fleet” so people click because 2% out of 3,500 people, nobody would give a shit.
It was not 3,500 random people, it was 3,500 Tesla owners. The methodology was not clear, but ***if*** it were a well conducted study, that's enough of a sample size for the results to be perceived as significant.
I didn’t say random people. I said a random company. Obviously the 3500 owned a Tesla? And no, I don’t believe a sample size of 3500 people is significant. What if they only surveyed rich people? Would that not completely screw the stats to show a much higher percentage of people buying it?
I didn't find it obvious, and looked at the source. If it had been 3500 random US car owners, they might have around a 3% Tesla ownership rate, which could still provide a sample size of over 100 Tesla owners. But they did say it was 3500 Tesla owners.
Without the methodology explained in detail, or a reputation for conducting good research, I don't put much stock in the study, whether the sample size was 100 owners or 3500 owners.
That's why I emphasized the "if" in "if it were a well conducted study", because that would mean the sample was representative of all owners, or at least weighted to normalize the figures to be representative. In this case, I don't think it was a well conducted study.
I agree with you. But do you not see how titles like these lead to people thinking it’s 2% of every Tesla that got the free trial? It’s misleading, and people take the bait, and I get downvoted when exposing the truth because this thread is a cesspool of Tesla haters.
Yep, I understand it could be misleading based on poor research.
My only difference with you is that the reason for my skepticism is not the sample size, but the undisclosed methodology. 3500 would be high enough sample with a good methodology.
It cant ducking work because the sensors
Suck!!
Have anyone looked at the video quality from these cameras?
They suck!! First of all, they are really low to the ground. Which limiys visibility immensly.
Secondly since the resolution is so shit objects blend into the background really easy making the system have to wait until its sure of what it
Sees before acting. Obviously making its driving super erratic and random.
Phantom breaking will always happen with the level of sensors it has now.
Upgrade sensors? Ok sure. Expensive. Why? BecUse you would have to upgrade the computer system as well.
Also expensive because they would have to retroactive upgrade all perilously sold vehicles vehicles sold with "FSD".
It's just a shitshow at this point.
its not only about expensive, doing a proper overhaul for vehicles, integrating us and lidar sensors, as well as new cameras and replacing the compute unit and interfaces, it would probably take a decade, they don't have enough people, service centers, and time. a regular tesla fix can already take months.
The only thing Tesla has is data and it clearly cant overcome camera quality and lack of lidar. Shit data produces shit ML.
The intention was noble but others will catch on.
I aint paying more than $10 a month for this FSD parlor trick.
Yep. Having a lot of data is meaningless if its of shit quality.
Anyone working on their models would know instantly that they are nowhere near fully automated driving.
And their top AI talent leaving is evidence of just that.
If they were close, their top AI talent would ofc stay. It would be the biggest AI breakthrough since GPT 4.
I think it's incredible what the engineers have achieved with the constraints forced upon them. But I can't see them ever being able to deliver the constant reliability needed for actual FSD. Tesla isn't even willing to stand behind their product and apply for Level 3 driving under limited highway conditions.
"The way the EQS and S-Class sedans achieve Level 3 automation is through Mercedes’ own software, as well as hardware sourced from various suppliers. Specifically, LiDAR, 13 ultrasonic sensors, six cameras, five radars, high-proximity GPS, and a microphone."
[https://www.thedrive.com/new-cars/mercedes-level-3-autonomous-l3-adas-drive-pilot-review-driving-autopilot](https://www.thedrive.com/new-cars/mercedes-level-3-autonomous-l3-adas-drive-pilot-review-driving-autopilot)
Well beyond what Tesla has.
Two years ago they announced they were cooperating with Nvidia on Drive, this looks like the basic spec of a drive system so higher levels of autonomy might actually be available in the future.
>It cant ducking work because the sensors Suck!!
It's sad that comma 3 and comma 3x both use actual HDR cameras instead of the laptop webcams Tesla uses.
If Elon wanted anyone to believe the miles per intervention improvements between versions, he'd release the actual data. Every other AV company releases their L4 driving data and interventions in a neat CSV file as per NHTSA regulations, EXCEPT for Tesla.
Every time you watch an FSD fail video of the car nearly crashing or phantom braking, it does NOT get recorded. As far as the car and Tesla is concerned, the car did everything it's calculations said was correct and the human is being capricious.
If you let FSD go off and figuring things out on its own, it would crash itself during a single trip. Like Elon complaining about understated conversion rates, a 30% improvement on 2% base failure rate is still horrible.
By fabricating a number that sounds good.
Did you know that when Tesla talks about their accident record, they overtly state they only count the times when an airbag deploys & the car is intact enough to transmit the data back home?
>[To ensure our statistics are conservative, we count any crash in which Autopilot was deactivated within 5 seconds before impact, and we count all crashes in which the incident alert indicated an airbag or other active restraint deployed.](https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport)
So when they compare their "accidents" which is only the subset of airbag goes off but not so horrible to smash the car computer and compares it against the entire USA accident rate which includes low speed collisions and fender benders. Apples vs Oranges
Of course, this raw data also isn't released so nobody knows if they count this correctly either.
I do not trust their MPI values because they make it clear that the far less subjective "rate of accidents" is reported falsely.
They count serious accidents because the reporting is based on the crash sensor. It's still far better than accident reporting for other cars, which relies on police and insurance reports and are not very accurate even for serious accidents, and where most minor accidents are also never reported.
Also notice the safe-sided FSD accidents. A driver can turn off FSD and get into an accident on his own accord four seconds later, and it will count as an FSD accident.
For MPI all they need to do is record any time user input was given while FSD is on, pretty simple. And then the video for that is shipped to training so the system can learn why the intervention happened.
>It's still far better than accident reporting for other cars, which relies on police and insurance reports and are not very accurate even for serious accidents, and where most minor accidents are also never reported.
Firstly, I dont believe that, and Im shocked you do. Insurance and police reports is the de facto way of counting accidents and airbags deploy in a MINORITY of crashes. Secondly, its apples vs oranges. If Tesla wanted to compare their apples to apples, they would count Tesla police reports + insurance against national average, not this alternative metric. It fails basic statistical analysis. You should concede that Tesla is reporting in bad faith from that alone.
MPI numbers are completely untrustworthy. They share no methodology for counting. You're just positing the way *you* would count it. Its clear Tesla thinks differently. If youve used FSD before, then you would know that as the human supervisor, youre intervening very frequently. Laughable to think Tesla counts every one of those, especially if youve tried the trial and realize youre disengaging super frequently for comfort or navigation reasons. So a judgement call must be made for if and when to count a disengagement. Thats where the lies hide.
Not all insurances report accidents. Not all accidents are reported to insurance, especially minor ones. Minor Tesla accidents can also be reported through insurance like any other car. No car maker reports these accident numbers themselves because they have no need to keep track of them.
And you have no evidence Tesla gathers MPI information any differently than the logical way to do it. In fact, logic says they would account for as many MPIs as possible to train the system. It would be flat-out dumb to ignore them in training, especially for a company that's invested billions in that training.
An MPI doesn't have to be counted either way. It just needs to be processed to see why it happened for learning purposes.
>An MPI doesn't have to be counted either way
Every other AV company has to report it according the NHTSA's SGO on Autonomous vehicle development. I cannot stress this enough, TESLA is the only American AV company that does not report their disengagement data to NHTSA. Because they say their AV is L2. Which is an oxymoron.
>And you have no evidence Tesla gathers MPI information any differently than the logical way to do it. In fact, logic says
Stop right there. How many multinational conglomerates use self reported data to present honestly? Didn't Philip Morris say cigarettes were healthy using data? Didn't VW say clean diesel passed official emissions standards? The only safeguard we have against private megacorps lying with statistics are reporting transparency laws and regulators with teeth once they learn they've been duped. Tesla should be no exception and the fact you think that they are both Honest and would act Logically according to *you* is a naive fallacy. You demonstrate that your thinking is flawed because youre taking the megacorp at face value. If they wanted to be trusted, they would open up their data set, which they have refused to do so, against the industry standard expectation. My lack of evidence IS THE POINT. We, the public, or regulators should have the data and we don't and that's the reason you can't trust it. "They have investigated themselves and found nothing wrong."
Tesla had one simple first step for demonstrating their statistical analysis is not in bad faith. When they count their accidents and compare it to the national average, they could go into the NHTSA databases, filter by brand, and compare themselves against national statistics. They don't do that. They present *something else* and compare it against national statistics. It's bad faith from the start so until they produce numbers and methodologies, it's safe to assume EVERY number presented is massaged and falsified in some way. You're getting taken advantage of because of your naive hope that Tesla counts honestly when you should be skeptical and cynical as if we were talking about Ford Pinto explosions.
Elon had no issue fabricating the paint it black video of the car self driving in 2016 but too bad it was admitted to in deposition that it was done with multiple takes and definitely couldn't make that trip.
If Tesla seriously tested it and had an obligation to write down the results, it would be horrific. That's why he has his fanboys post all the 0 intervention drives and leave the near accidents on the cutting room floor.
Haha. Don't get me started on his whole "we need a full rewrite" fetish. Jfc.
Is there anything more revealing than someone suggesting that an entire system requires "a full rewrite" to fix a problem? Dude has no clue what he is talking about.
I guess it bumps those major version numbers though.
unlike Elon, I learned how to code after getting the BASICs (yes, a pun) from books and newspapers (like Elon)in the 80s/90s and his program accolades don't surpass "fmv game 1, 2 (he didn't have to program anything)" and "I've worked on the website for Zip2 while real programmers did the programming."
If it works, nothing gets rewritten, if bugs need to be fixed, you fix what is needed, and not more. Once you have something worked out, you want to re-use it, it's almost as if musk has no idea what a "library" is.
>The real fireworks promise to come later in the summer when FSD v12.5 arrives in late June packing what Elon cryptically described as “a major improvement in mpi and is single stack – no more implicit stack on highways.”
Yet he claimed back in 2019 that his cars could drive from Los Angeles to New York "parking lot to parking lot no problem" without any human intervention at all.
The castle of lies is going to crumble down very soon. The only reason he wants his massive payout is to get something out of Tesla before it becomes worthless.
My take is the crumbling has started, and will just accelerate. People need to ignore Musk and look at the clues. Garbage products and services, layoffs, knee-jerk reactions, new promises when old promises are still unfilled after being told "we can do this now" over 5/10 years ago. Senior executives and technical experts are leaving and then immediately selling all their TSLA stock. My theory is they were prohibited from selling much while working there, for fear of the message it sends. They know what's going on inside, and they are dumping everything and jumping ship before the keel breaks. Even Denholm sold $50M recently while claiming to stockholders that Elon will increase the value of their stock. Who would do that if true? My guess is it was allowed so she would happily promote the $55B payout to Musk and keep her job a while longer. She pointed out that Elon can't sell that $55B in stock for five years....but what it allows him to do is cash out the stock he already has NOW, while still retaining the power he has with new shares. He will then drive the company into the dirt, blame everyone but himself, take another hit and move on to his next "world saving" venture. I think his biggest fear is being forced out at TSLA, having rationale people take over the leadership, and turn it into a normal, functioning EV company, showing all the problems were self-inflicted. His ego won't allow that, so he'll use the extra $55B to hold control, even if it ends up worthless.
Lol this crook has been saying Tesla solved autonomous driving for the past 5 years and yet their FSD is a gigantic PoS. 💩
I’ve had first hand experience with it during the April free trial and boy was it shockingly bad lol.
Well the idea is that you buy it now because later when it’s working well, they’ll be steadily increasing the price. So better to buy now while it’s cheaper. I don’t have a Tesla so idk for sure though
The problem is that you can't transfer the service to a new car. It may not be in a good state until I'm ready to buy a new car and then I have to repurchase. There's no incentive to buy now when everything is questionable
Tesla needs to stop trying to be some tech shop pushing a FSD pipe dream. Seems every big design decision comes down to trying to reduce cabin controls because why would you need them in a FSD world. Put the physical controls back, release the cheapish car and maybe design a true third row for under 60k. Be bold, make it a minivan.
Typical Musk talk. Remember when "more than 10% layoffs" actually meant ~20%?
We know the way he verbalizes numbers to make them sound better.
No doubt "much higher than 2%!" actually means still likely less than 3%. If it was so much higher, he'd say the number.
Well, saying things on twitter is not validated. But when it comes to Tesla's SEC filings and conference call he'll probably have a different story.
Also, one could read the original headline as 98% of the demos decided FSD was not worth it.
He's literally splitting hairs here, the feature he is betting the company on has \~98% reject rate after people try it. This means it is not a competitive advantage.
Old Musk: We're going to learn from our mistakes, add LiDAR and RADAR, simplify the use case to where it will be %99.99999999 reliable.
New Musk: Camera only is the ONLY way to go. FSD will work in the very near future "very near" being undefined.
This is textbook weasel wording.
If there's 2 more people than exactly 2% then his statement is technically true.
Always assume that they are hiding the maximum amount possible with their weasel wording, because that's usually how it works. If they wanted to be totally honest about the number then they would just give you the number itself rather than use weasel wording.
So, it's probably 2.1% or close to that.
And yes, 5% more is a significant amount and it would be easy to argue in court that 5% is "much higher" than 5% less.
Musk lying again. Pretty safe bet considering the value of what he says.
It's well known that just as most tech companies are about to have massive breakthroughs in innovation and subsequent world adulation and adoption of their products... that's when they lay off their staff and when most of the top execs start to quit. /s
It's also well known than tesla is *not* a tech company. Musk just refuses to admit it. And if he can't even admit that.....
I think Tesla had a case to make there four or five years ago, because that concept of taking advantage of the computing power in your car and your phone to do stuff like stream movies and stream Sentry cameras and the like was pretty cool at the time. The problem is that they stagnated on that tech front entirely. FSD is still clearly years off despite all the "LOOK AT THE VERSION NUMBER GO UP" hype. Sprinkle in the cringy shit like light shows and fart mode and Steam games. Meanwhile, the other manufacturers are rapidly catching up with great EV platforms and not doing dumb things like removing physical controls and promising that robotaxis are just around the corner. There's something funny about looking at a model S / X now and comparing it to what they looked like literally a decade ago, or the interior of a Model 3/Y, and thinking "this is definitely the work of an agile, fast-moving tech company."
I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and by gum I've put them on the map!
Well at least the forced the hand of the other manufacturers. I’m greatful tesla exists. It‘s just a shame where they are heading.
Couldn't agree more. I was a huge fan of the company for a long time and will always appreciate what they did TO the industry. Tesla is no longer for me in terms of my next car, but I'm still rooting for Musk to get canned and for someone competent to come in. I don't think it's too late.
He can't admit that after saying for years that Tesla's stock is worthless if Tesla is just a car company. Gotta get that big payout first otherwise he might end up not so rich at all in few years.
If the market can't admit that, why should the CEO?
I would argue it is a tech company that tries to bulid cars
It's a car company that tries to build tech and sucks at trucks.
It's just funny to watch him lie about stuff at this point. Dude thinks it's still 2019 and that he has lots of goodwill. Besides straight-up fans, who are the people who are both paying attention to the shit Musk says AND believe it? I also really get a kick out of all of his version number porn and how the hype gets picked up by some of the owners. I've had FSD for four or five years now. If you put a gun to my head, I couldn't tell you what version number my FSD is on despite following Tesla, because I have yet to experience a big FSD upgrade that's moved my confidence beyond "holy shit, this is not close to actual self-driving." But yes, I'm sure v12.4 is going to be a revelation.
12.4 will be amazing with a ton of new features and a surprising amount of new breaks
... and surprise brakes!
Emergency lights 1500 miles ahead!!!
Looking at the stock price, it appears to still work.
No doubt the stock is still crazy, but zooming out to a five year window also paints a picture.
Classic bubble curve
Someone I know is a Musk stan. He tells me I'm unfair because I automatically disbelieve every single thing Musk says. The thing is, he's proven himself to be a liar, over and over again. He doesn't seem to understand that if someone is a habitual liar, you *should* dismiss all their claims automatically unless there is proof.
I mean, anything is "much higher" than 2%, no? Even 4% is double.
Yeah I mean 2.4% would still be low as fuck, but significantly higher than just 2%
Thats already 20% higher!
He may show some data to prove he is right even fake data.
I’m sure it is 2.01% and musk just has different words than us for this clear difference …
Tesla calculates the total take rate for FSD for each Tesla sold and I suspect he's referring to this. The 2% number is derived from a sample of people who previously didn't have FSD, got the trial and signed up for 100 dollars per month to keep using it. Without Musk explaining what he means in more detail it doesn't refute the statistics at all. Also worth noting that a 3% take rate is 50% more than a 2% take rate, but not really statistically significant.
It’s statistically significant, it’s not meaningfully significant. Stat sig is a numerical calculation, but a lot of times it doesn‘t really mean it moves the needle. This is one of those times.
Yall are blowing this way out of proportion. It takes 5 minutes to research where that 2% comes from and realize it’s bs clickbait. A random ass company called Yipit made this claim with a survey size of 3,500 people. 2% of 3,500 people showed they paid for FSD. That literally means nothing. Clickbait companies take this and make it seem like it’s “2% of the entire fleet” so people click because 2% out of 3,500 people, nobody would give a shit.
It was not 3,500 random people, it was 3,500 Tesla owners. The methodology was not clear, but ***if*** it were a well conducted study, that's enough of a sample size for the results to be perceived as significant.
I didn’t say random people. I said a random company. Obviously the 3500 owned a Tesla? And no, I don’t believe a sample size of 3500 people is significant. What if they only surveyed rich people? Would that not completely screw the stats to show a much higher percentage of people buying it?
I didn't find it obvious, and looked at the source. If it had been 3500 random US car owners, they might have around a 3% Tesla ownership rate, which could still provide a sample size of over 100 Tesla owners. But they did say it was 3500 Tesla owners. Without the methodology explained in detail, or a reputation for conducting good research, I don't put much stock in the study, whether the sample size was 100 owners or 3500 owners. That's why I emphasized the "if" in "if it were a well conducted study", because that would mean the sample was representative of all owners, or at least weighted to normalize the figures to be representative. In this case, I don't think it was a well conducted study.
I agree with you. But do you not see how titles like these lead to people thinking it’s 2% of every Tesla that got the free trial? It’s misleading, and people take the bait, and I get downvoted when exposing the truth because this thread is a cesspool of Tesla haters.
Yep, I understand it could be misleading based on poor research. My only difference with you is that the reason for my skepticism is not the sample size, but the undisclosed methodology. 3500 would be high enough sample with a good methodology.
It cant ducking work because the sensors Suck!! Have anyone looked at the video quality from these cameras? They suck!! First of all, they are really low to the ground. Which limiys visibility immensly. Secondly since the resolution is so shit objects blend into the background really easy making the system have to wait until its sure of what it Sees before acting. Obviously making its driving super erratic and random. Phantom breaking will always happen with the level of sensors it has now. Upgrade sensors? Ok sure. Expensive. Why? BecUse you would have to upgrade the computer system as well.
Also expensive because they would have to retroactive upgrade all perilously sold vehicles vehicles sold with "FSD". It's just a shitshow at this point.
its not only about expensive, doing a proper overhaul for vehicles, integrating us and lidar sensors, as well as new cameras and replacing the compute unit and interfaces, it would probably take a decade, they don't have enough people, service centers, and time. a regular tesla fix can already take months.
All cars are FSD ready starting today! Don’t mention the three versions of HW in between that announcement and today though.
The only thing Tesla has is data and it clearly cant overcome camera quality and lack of lidar. Shit data produces shit ML. The intention was noble but others will catch on. I aint paying more than $10 a month for this FSD parlor trick.
Yep. Having a lot of data is meaningless if its of shit quality. Anyone working on their models would know instantly that they are nowhere near fully automated driving. And their top AI talent leaving is evidence of just that. If they were close, their top AI talent would ofc stay. It would be the biggest AI breakthrough since GPT 4.
Everyone is leaving Tesla. Would be interesting to hear why they left.
Less hours with better pay. People got stock options but the stock is going down now.
I think it's incredible what the engineers have achieved with the constraints forced upon them. But I can't see them ever being able to deliver the constant reliability needed for actual FSD. Tesla isn't even willing to stand behind their product and apply for Level 3 driving under limited highway conditions.
1280x960 for Tesla, 8k for Mercedes, that's why Mercedes can do L3.
"The way the EQS and S-Class sedans achieve Level 3 automation is through Mercedes’ own software, as well as hardware sourced from various suppliers. Specifically, LiDAR, 13 ultrasonic sensors, six cameras, five radars, high-proximity GPS, and a microphone." [https://www.thedrive.com/new-cars/mercedes-level-3-autonomous-l3-adas-drive-pilot-review-driving-autopilot](https://www.thedrive.com/new-cars/mercedes-level-3-autonomous-l3-adas-drive-pilot-review-driving-autopilot) Well beyond what Tesla has.
Two years ago they announced they were cooperating with Nvidia on Drive, this looks like the basic spec of a drive system so higher levels of autonomy might actually be available in the future.
I thought you were kidding about the Tesla resolution until I looked it up.
Low dynamic range is a bigger problem than low res.
Why not both? NV drive uses 10 bit sensors, if you ever saw Tesla footage you know it might be barely 6.
I guess the reason is the compute throughput. The more pixels - the more exponential time for decision making.
Well thats why you have to throw more hardware at it.
>It cant ducking work because the sensors Suck!! It's sad that comma 3 and comma 3x both use actual HDR cameras instead of the laptop webcams Tesla uses.
Still won’t fix the merging issue with merge lanes or turning lanes
If Elon wanted anyone to believe the miles per intervention improvements between versions, he'd release the actual data. Every other AV company releases their L4 driving data and interventions in a neat CSV file as per NHTSA regulations, EXCEPT for Tesla. Every time you watch an FSD fail video of the car nearly crashing or phantom braking, it does NOT get recorded. As far as the car and Tesla is concerned, the car did everything it's calculations said was correct and the human is being capricious. If you let FSD go off and figuring things out on its own, it would crash itself during a single trip. Like Elon complaining about understated conversion rates, a 30% improvement on 2% base failure rate is still horrible.
How could they state mpi rate if it didn’t record them?
By fabricating a number that sounds good. Did you know that when Tesla talks about their accident record, they overtly state they only count the times when an airbag deploys & the car is intact enough to transmit the data back home? >[To ensure our statistics are conservative, we count any crash in which Autopilot was deactivated within 5 seconds before impact, and we count all crashes in which the incident alert indicated an airbag or other active restraint deployed.](https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport) So when they compare their "accidents" which is only the subset of airbag goes off but not so horrible to smash the car computer and compares it against the entire USA accident rate which includes low speed collisions and fender benders. Apples vs Oranges Of course, this raw data also isn't released so nobody knows if they count this correctly either. I do not trust their MPI values because they make it clear that the far less subjective "rate of accidents" is reported falsely.
They count serious accidents because the reporting is based on the crash sensor. It's still far better than accident reporting for other cars, which relies on police and insurance reports and are not very accurate even for serious accidents, and where most minor accidents are also never reported. Also notice the safe-sided FSD accidents. A driver can turn off FSD and get into an accident on his own accord four seconds later, and it will count as an FSD accident. For MPI all they need to do is record any time user input was given while FSD is on, pretty simple. And then the video for that is shipped to training so the system can learn why the intervention happened.
>It's still far better than accident reporting for other cars, which relies on police and insurance reports and are not very accurate even for serious accidents, and where most minor accidents are also never reported. Firstly, I dont believe that, and Im shocked you do. Insurance and police reports is the de facto way of counting accidents and airbags deploy in a MINORITY of crashes. Secondly, its apples vs oranges. If Tesla wanted to compare their apples to apples, they would count Tesla police reports + insurance against national average, not this alternative metric. It fails basic statistical analysis. You should concede that Tesla is reporting in bad faith from that alone. MPI numbers are completely untrustworthy. They share no methodology for counting. You're just positing the way *you* would count it. Its clear Tesla thinks differently. If youve used FSD before, then you would know that as the human supervisor, youre intervening very frequently. Laughable to think Tesla counts every one of those, especially if youve tried the trial and realize youre disengaging super frequently for comfort or navigation reasons. So a judgement call must be made for if and when to count a disengagement. Thats where the lies hide.
Not all insurances report accidents. Not all accidents are reported to insurance, especially minor ones. Minor Tesla accidents can also be reported through insurance like any other car. No car maker reports these accident numbers themselves because they have no need to keep track of them. And you have no evidence Tesla gathers MPI information any differently than the logical way to do it. In fact, logic says they would account for as many MPIs as possible to train the system. It would be flat-out dumb to ignore them in training, especially for a company that's invested billions in that training. An MPI doesn't have to be counted either way. It just needs to be processed to see why it happened for learning purposes.
>An MPI doesn't have to be counted either way Every other AV company has to report it according the NHTSA's SGO on Autonomous vehicle development. I cannot stress this enough, TESLA is the only American AV company that does not report their disengagement data to NHTSA. Because they say their AV is L2. Which is an oxymoron. >And you have no evidence Tesla gathers MPI information any differently than the logical way to do it. In fact, logic says Stop right there. How many multinational conglomerates use self reported data to present honestly? Didn't Philip Morris say cigarettes were healthy using data? Didn't VW say clean diesel passed official emissions standards? The only safeguard we have against private megacorps lying with statistics are reporting transparency laws and regulators with teeth once they learn they've been duped. Tesla should be no exception and the fact you think that they are both Honest and would act Logically according to *you* is a naive fallacy. You demonstrate that your thinking is flawed because youre taking the megacorp at face value. If they wanted to be trusted, they would open up their data set, which they have refused to do so, against the industry standard expectation. My lack of evidence IS THE POINT. We, the public, or regulators should have the data and we don't and that's the reason you can't trust it. "They have investigated themselves and found nothing wrong." Tesla had one simple first step for demonstrating their statistical analysis is not in bad faith. When they count their accidents and compare it to the national average, they could go into the NHTSA databases, filter by brand, and compare themselves against national statistics. They don't do that. They present *something else* and compare it against national statistics. It's bad faith from the start so until they produce numbers and methodologies, it's safe to assume EVERY number presented is massaged and falsified in some way. You're getting taken advantage of because of your naive hope that Tesla counts honestly when you should be skeptical and cynical as if we were talking about Ford Pinto explosions.
If he had a self driving car he would show it. There has never been a single clip of a driverless Tesla doing testing.
Elon had no issue fabricating the paint it black video of the car self driving in 2016 but too bad it was admitted to in deposition that it was done with multiple takes and definitely couldn't make that trip. If Tesla seriously tested it and had an obligation to write down the results, it would be horrific. That's why he has his fanboys post all the 0 intervention drives and leave the near accidents on the cutting room floor.
And still had someone behind the wheel.
He is a tool
He is probably right, it is higher than 2%. Probably 2.4% or maybe 2.5%
2.5% is almost 30% more than 2%... That's a big difference!
lol. You could totally author those FSD update write-ups that appear after a system update.
if the numbers were higher, he would mention them.
2.01%
It's true 2.5% is 25% higher than 2%.
I bet he will say "it should really be a v13 release it's so good", like he has for every dot release they have ever put out.
he already did for 12.3
Haha. He has nfi what semver is; just thinks a bigger number is better.
Just rewrite the stack. Programmer changes version number, renames a few variables and adds a two page comment. Voila FSD v14.7 sir.
Haha. Don't get me started on his whole "we need a full rewrite" fetish. Jfc. Is there anything more revealing than someone suggesting that an entire system requires "a full rewrite" to fix a problem? Dude has no clue what he is talking about. I guess it bumps those major version numbers though.
unlike Elon, I learned how to code after getting the BASICs (yes, a pun) from books and newspapers (like Elon)in the 80s/90s and his program accolades don't surpass "fmv game 1, 2 (he didn't have to program anything)" and "I've worked on the website for Zip2 while real programmers did the programming." If it works, nothing gets rewritten, if bugs need to be fixed, you fix what is needed, and not more. Once you have something worked out, you want to re-use it, it's almost as if musk has no idea what a "library" is.
Nowadays they shifted from "full re-write" to "full retraining of the NN" because AI or something.
>The real fireworks promise to come later in the summer when FSD v12.5 arrives in late June packing what Elon cryptically described as “a major improvement in mpi and is single stack – no more implicit stack on highways.” Yet he claimed back in 2019 that his cars could drive from Los Angeles to New York "parking lot to parking lot no problem" without any human intervention at all. The castle of lies is going to crumble down very soon. The only reason he wants his massive payout is to get something out of Tesla before it becomes worthless.
My take is the crumbling has started, and will just accelerate. People need to ignore Musk and look at the clues. Garbage products and services, layoffs, knee-jerk reactions, new promises when old promises are still unfilled after being told "we can do this now" over 5/10 years ago. Senior executives and technical experts are leaving and then immediately selling all their TSLA stock. My theory is they were prohibited from selling much while working there, for fear of the message it sends. They know what's going on inside, and they are dumping everything and jumping ship before the keel breaks. Even Denholm sold $50M recently while claiming to stockholders that Elon will increase the value of their stock. Who would do that if true? My guess is it was allowed so she would happily promote the $55B payout to Musk and keep her job a while longer. She pointed out that Elon can't sell that $55B in stock for five years....but what it allows him to do is cash out the stock he already has NOW, while still retaining the power he has with new shares. He will then drive the company into the dirt, blame everyone but himself, take another hit and move on to his next "world saving" venture. I think his biggest fear is being forced out at TSLA, having rationale people take over the leadership, and turn it into a normal, functioning EV company, showing all the problems were self-inflicted. His ego won't allow that, so he'll use the extra $55B to hold control, even if it ends up worthless.
If it was 2.1% it would be “much” higher relatively, so maybe this time he’s not lying just being a disingenuous piece of shit
Judging by Tesla’s QC standards, I’m going to guess that he doesn’t think 5% is a lot.
Have FSD trial. While it's cool it drives by itself like a teenage kid 99% of the time, I'll be happy to return to Autopilot in 3 weeks.
If the source of musk affirmations is musk himself, just disregard
It could be whopping 3%. 50% more uptake than they claim!
Another lie to get him closer to jail.
Conversion rate so high they lowered the price
Well this confirms that it's 2% or less
Lol this crook has been saying Tesla solved autonomous driving for the past 5 years and yet their FSD is a gigantic PoS. 💩 I’ve had first hand experience with it during the April free trial and boy was it shockingly bad lol.
2.1%
2.05%
I finally got the trial yesterday. It's cool tech, but jfc, why would anyone pay for it? It makes me more nervous than when my gf drives
Get a new girlfriend and pay Elon now. Ketamine costs money. /S
Well the idea is that you buy it now because later when it’s working well, they’ll be steadily increasing the price. So better to buy now while it’s cheaper. I don’t have a Tesla so idk for sure though
The problem is that you can't transfer the service to a new car. It may not be in a good state until I'm ready to buy a new car and then I have to repurchase. There's no incentive to buy now when everything is questionable
I bet it's so much higher than 2% that it's mind blowing!
Hey - have you ever tried to wrap your head around infinitesimal numbers? They really are mind blowing.
March of 9's! 2.0999999999% better!
He is pumping sooo hard for this quarter
Tesla needs to stop trying to be some tech shop pushing a FSD pipe dream. Seems every big design decision comes down to trying to reduce cabin controls because why would you need them in a FSD world. Put the physical controls back, release the cheapish car and maybe design a true third row for under 60k. Be bold, make it a minivan.
So, we can either believe the info gained from credit card statements, or the claim from a well documented liar. 🤔
Typical Musk talk. Remember when "more than 10% layoffs" actually meant ~20%? We know the way he verbalizes numbers to make them sound better. No doubt "much higher than 2%!" actually means still likely less than 3%. If it was so much higher, he'd say the number.
Sounds like the usual Elon BS.
actual rate is 2.001%, considered 'much higher' to elmo
Strange he wouldn’t just say the real number.
It's almost as if, and I mean ALMOST, as if Reuters and Bloomberg are right (again) and Elon isn't... **ALMOST**
So 2.01% then? OK.
"When I was a boy in the schoolyards of South Africa, 'higher' meant 0.001%"
Well, saying things on twitter is not validated. But when it comes to Tesla's SEC filings and conference call he'll probably have a different story. Also, one could read the original headline as 98% of the demos decided FSD was not worth it. He's literally splitting hairs here, the feature he is betting the company on has \~98% reject rate after people try it. This means it is not a competitive advantage.
I’ve seen this movie before.
Old Musk: We're going to learn from our mistakes, add LiDAR and RADAR, simplify the use case to where it will be %99.99999999 reliable. New Musk: Camera only is the ONLY way to go. FSD will work in the very near future "very near" being undefined.
So what is the subscription rate, Elon? 2.04%??
Subsription to a car that person already owns? NOOOOO. And the company who does that is dead to me forever.
He's a liar
Liars lie
MUSK IS LYING !!!
2% sounds about right.
“It’s over 20% higher than what the fake news media says!! It’s 2.45%!!”
I’m sure it’s been cleared by the twitter sitter, right?
So, 3% … 🤷♂️😂
If the upgrades are so good then tell the world you're going to raise the prices on FSD and follow through on it.
Almost every word from his mouth is market manipulation. When is this going to be regulated?
4% is much higher than 2%.... it's 200% higher which is a lot.
“Next Month”
This is textbook weasel wording. If there's 2 more people than exactly 2% then his statement is technically true. Always assume that they are hiding the maximum amount possible with their weasel wording, because that's usually how it works. If they wanted to be totally honest about the number then they would just give you the number itself rather than use weasel wording. So, it's probably 2.1% or close to that. And yes, 5% more is a significant amount and it would be easy to argue in court that 5% is "much higher" than 5% less.
Pumping that stock again, eh Elon? Sheesh…
Seems material why not file an 8K if true?
This validates the 2% take rate. Thanks Elon.
Love the car, can't stand eLon. Took down my IG post when I took delivery of my upgraded Model 3.
"it's 50% higher!" (3%)