Live data from Hacker News

California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

theverge.com

1–10 of 85 posts

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#2
Good. Having sold my Tesla after 8 years of ownership, I can't believe what that company is getting away with.

The car was fun to drive, but the build quality and service were terrible. And the continuous upsell to FSD, even 8 years ago, was such a hassle.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#3
I can see that "Autopilot" is arguably a marketing term. I don't like it, I feel like it's irresponsible, but I can see the argument that it's not false advertising.

It's hard to see ambiguity about "Full Self Driving". What's next, will they argue that "The Car Drives Itself, You Can Take a Nap" isn't meant to be taken literally?

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#5

I can see that "Autopilot" is arguably a marketing term. I don't like it, I feel like it's irresponsible, but I can see the argument that it's not false advertising. It's hard to see ambiguity about "Full Self Driving". What's next, will they argue that "The Car Drives Itself, You Can Take a Nap" isn't meant to be taken literally?

[deleted]

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#6

Good. Having sold my Tesla after 8 years of ownership, I can't believe what that company is getting away with. The car was fun to drive, but the build quality and service were terrible. And the continuous upsell to FSD, even 8 years ago, was such a hassle.

What they were producing 8 years ago and what they produce nowadays is an order of magnitude different. It’s like comparing your PC from 8 years ago to today’s PCs.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#7

I can see that "Autopilot" is arguably a marketing term. I don't like it, I feel like it's irresponsible, but I can see the argument that it's not false advertising. It's hard to see ambiguity about "Full Self Driving". What's next, will they argue that "The Car Drives Itself, You Can Take a Nap" isn't meant to be taken literally?

“Full self driving” isn’t just ambiguous, it’s fraudulent.

The car can in no way fully ‘drive’ itself unless you define ‘driving’ as not including many things that are universally thought of as necessary skills to operate a car.

[edit: rereading your comment, I see we’re actually in agreement!]

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#8

Good. Having sold my Tesla after 8 years of ownership, I can't believe what that company is getting away with. The car was fun to drive, but the build quality and service were terrible. And the continuous upsell to FSD, even 8 years ago, was such a hassle.

What they were producing 8 years ago and what they produce nowadays is an order of magnitude different. It’s like comparing your PC from 8 years ago to today’s PCs.

True, but a few years ago they had a huge problem with Model3 and ModelY quality- you had to be very careful and inspect the whole car for serious problems before accepting delivery.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#9
I have no issue with the term autopilot. Boeing sells planes with autopilot, no one expects them to be fully autonomous.

The FSD name makes more sense for the software they've got in public beta than their current offering. Interestingly the only difference between "enhanced autopilot" and FSD right now is the ability to stop at stop lights.

Re: California DMV accuses Tesla of making false claims about Autopilot and FSD

#10

I have no issue with the term autopilot. Boeing sells planes with autopilot, no one expects them to be fully autonomous. The FSD name makes more sense for the software they've got in public beta than their current offering. Interestingly the only difference between "enhanced autopilot" and FSD right now is the ability to stop at stop lights.

Boeing doesn't sell to consumers, their customers are large companies. There's quite a difference in the level of knowledge/competence to be expected between those two markets. So "this is fine in B2B" does not automatically translate into "this is fine when targeting John Q Public".
Post reply on HN