Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 152 posts

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#141

Post by FireBeyond »

testing22321 wrote: post #84
827a wrote: post #72

The real problem, which I think the article does a poor job of making clear: Tesla sold millions of cars before the current generation Hardware 4 vehicles with $10,000 full self driving packages which never really materialized convincingly ‘full’ self-driving capability. There’s fair arguments for the HW4 vehicles not having FSD either, maybe because it needs to be supervised or isn’t perfect or whatever. But the HW4…

On the recent earnings call they did finally acknowledge they will have to upgrade the hardware in HW3 cars so they can fully self drive. The flayed the solution of “popup factories” in cities across the US to carry out the upgrade.

Even then they're playing fuck fuck games. People have pushed on this and been told "We won't actually upgrade your hardware until you pay for FSD first" which is also horseshit. It wasn't "contains all the hardware necessary for FSD, provided you've bought it", it was "contains all the hardware necessary for FSD, full stop".

I get why Tesla will resist this, but a part of me admires the pettiness (but reasonableness) of a bunch of owners demanding the hardware upgrade and then never buying FSD.

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#142

Post by FireBeyond »

fouc wrote: post #110
827a wrote: post #72

The real problem, which I think the article does a poor job of making clear: Tesla sold millions of cars before the current generation Hardware 4 vehicles with $10,000 full self driving packages which never really materialized convincingly ‘full’ self-driving capability. There’s fair arguments for the HW4 vehicles not having FSD either, maybe because it needs to be supervised or isn’t perfect or whatever. But the HW4…

Seems like HW3 has been pretty good since FSD v12.3+ came out. If we describe HW4 as 99% of the way to true FSD, then HW3 is probably 95% of the way. Though approaching 100% (maybe 2x the human standard) is going to be exponentially harder to get to.

> If we describe HW4 as 99% of the way to true FSD

What part of that final one per cent includes "will not blow through railroad crossing gates when a train is approaching"?

Or "will work in a Pittsburgh winter's night on a snow covered, poorly line marked road"?

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#143

Post by ndkap »

bobro wrote: post #67
fhn wrote: post #31

"court made a judgment in his favor in the amount of $10,672.88, the amount Gawiser paid for FSD, including taxes and court fees." should include interest as well

The judgement also includes interest, 6.75% per year.

It starts from the day of judgement

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#144

Post by FireBeyond »

linsomniac wrote: post #86
walrus01 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be truly fair should also adjust for inflation of US dollar of $10672 at the time he purchased it vs. April 2026. For instance CPI inflation calculator says 10672 in Jan. 2022 is $12,534.44 today.

I'm of the opinion that it'd be fair to treat that money as an investment in Tesla at that time. In my case, the $8K in Dec 2016 would translate to them being on the hook for ~$260K today. Which is why I think Tesla shouldn't be slow-rolling their doing whatever is necessary to get those of us who pre-bought FSD up to the HW4 level. HW4 won't physically fit in a 2016 Model S? Give us a 2026 Model X (they dropped Mode…

> it'd be fair to treat that money as an investment in Tesla at that time

Garbage. It was never advertised as that, and all the subsequent "clarifications" or "scoping" of FSD have been because Tesla has been dragged kicking and screaming into adding them, by lawyers, by attorneys general, by the NHTSA, etc.

"The car CAN (emphasis mine) drive itself. The driver is only in the seat for legal purposes." is how it was sold, not "invest in the vision of a FSD future". Then there was "well, providing regulators allow us", then "well, once we actually finally finish the software", and all that garbage.

I don't see how you reconcile "it'd be fair to consider it an investment" with "outright fraud". Even if you ignore my lens, it's not "fair" to rope some into an "outright fraud" "investment".

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#145

Post by throw7 »

nradov wrote: post #70
throw7 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When full liability is put on the manufacturer, then we can talk about "cars driving themselves".

Mercedes-Benz accepts full liability when their Drive Pilot autonomous system is active. https://www.mbusa.com/en/drive-pilot

I appreciate the link and information, but are you sure about that? I don't see or read anything about liability...

And footnote 2 on that page says:

2 DRIVE PILOT is an SAE Level 3 (conditional automated driving) system: the automated driving function takes over certain driving tasks. However, a fallback-ready user is still required. The fallback-ready user must be ready to take control of the vehicle at all times when prompted by the vehicle. Availability and use of DRIVE PILOT on freeways depends on options, compatible wireless networks, countries, states and relevant laws. Service subject to change at any time without notice. Mercedes me connect Terms of Use apply. Please refer to the Operator's Manual for additional instructions and limitations.

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#146

Post by brokenmachine »

petre wrote: post #90
fc417fc802 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have a "modern" vehicle but automated following distance is the only thing I feel like I'm missing out on. Everything else feels like I'm dodging bullets. Unfortunately not upgrading means missing out on improvements to physical safety in the event of a crash.

Auto headlights switching is nice as well. We have it on the Lexus.

Is it really that onerous to turn headlights on manually? That's not a feature that I envy.

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#147

Post by petre »

boredishBoi wrote: post #108
petre wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it does beep a lot but you can adjust the volume to low. Source: we had a 2025 replacement Yaris. It's annoying but the older ones' seat belt alarm is even more annoying, although I use the seatbelt at all times. It also turned me off, not wanting to get a new post-2025 Toyota. Now they all have mandatory alcohol testers and speed alarms. Use hand sanitizer and you have to Uber to work. No thanx. I'll keep my ol…

Sorry new Toyotas have mandatory alcohol testers? Which locale are you in? I’ve heard of mandatory breathalysers for work vehicles or DUI drivers but all new cars?

Not only Toyotas, all new cars sold in the EU need to have an interface for alcohol testers. They already have beepers and other detterents for exceeding speed limits since june 2025.

https://www.ietl.net/news-details/no-more-drunk-driving.html

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#148

Post by petre »

brokenmachine wrote: post #146
petre wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Auto headlights switching is nice as well. We have it on the Lexus.

Is it really that onerous to turn headlights on manually? That's not a feature that I envy.

It switches automatically from low beam to high beam. Very useful as I don't have to continously fiddle with the switch. The auto lights and daylight running lights are standard on all new cars. I love it. I never forget to turn on the lights. Even if the illumination from streetlights is sufficient to see, we also have to be seen by ohers.

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#149

Post by nradov »

throw7 wrote: post #145
nradov wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mercedes-Benz accepts full liability when their Drive Pilot autonomous system is active. https://www.mbusa.com/en/drive-pilot

I appreciate the link and information, but are you sure about that? I don't see or read anything about liability... And footnote 2 on that page says: 2 DRIVE PILOT is an SAE Level 3 (conditional automated driving) system: the automated driving function takes over certain driving tasks. However, a fallback-ready user is still required. The fallback-ready user must be ready to take control of the vehicle at all times w…

Yes, I'm sure about that. Mercedes-Benz accepts legal liability for collisions when Drive Pilot is active.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a39481699/what-happens-if-...

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#150

Post by 827a »

ModernMech wrote: post #126
827a wrote: post #72

The real problem, which I think the article does a poor job of making clear: Tesla sold millions of cars before the current generation Hardware 4 vehicles with $10,000 full self driving packages which never really materialized convincingly ‘full’ self-driving capability. There’s fair arguments for the HW4 vehicles not having FSD either, maybe because it needs to be supervised or isn’t perfect or whatever. But the HW4…

> the HW4 experience is good enough that I don’t think many HW4 owners are angry Selection bias. The only people buying Teslas anymore are people who can explain away a Nazi salute. They'll explain away anything bad about HW4 as well.

Mhm. Yeah I'd definitely trust the opinion of someone who has never driven a HW4 Tesla over someone who has, because (checks notes) all owners of one of the top 3 best selling vehicles on the planet over the past four years are nazis.
Post reply on HN