[freerobby]

The first one.

> Tesla has changed the meaning of “Full Self-Driving”, also known as “FSD”, to give up on its original promise of delivering unsupervised autonomy.

They have not given up on unsupervised autonomy. They are operating unsupervised autonomy in Austin TX as I type this!

[addaon]

> They have not given up on unsupervised autonomy. They are operating unsupervised autonomy in Austin TX as I type this!

Setting aside calling a driver in the driver's seat "unsupervised"... that's exactly the point. People paid for this, and they are revoking their promise of delivering it, instead re-focusing on (attempting) operating it themselves.

I'd have no objection to this if they offered buy-backs on the vehicles in the field, but that seems unlikely.

[electriclove]

I would like to understand what population feels they were fleeced. The FSD available on their cars with HW3 (some as old as 2017?) is quite impressive when you consider what the capabilities were back then. Sure, it won’t be as good as a 2025 Juniper Model Y. But who are the people that bought FSD in the early days and are unhappy and how big of a population is that? Is this the main thing people are upset about?

Or are people upset about the current state of autonomous vehicles like Waymo (which has been working for Years!) and the limited launch of Robotaxi?

[freerobby]

I haven't closely followed which rides have drivers where, and what is driven by Tesla vs what is regulatory -- but I thought some "drivers" were still in the passenger seat in Austin?

At any rate, I don't think they are revoking their prior promises. I expect them to deliver L4 autonomy to owners as previously promised. With that said, I'm glad they are ceasing that promise to new customers and focusing on what the car does today, given how wrong their timelines have been. I agree it's shitty if they don't deliver that, and that they should offer buybacks if they find themselves in that position.

[panarky]

> The first one

That's not a fact, it's a conclusion drawn from all the other facts in the article.

Did you find the facts that support this conclusion to be false?

[narrator]

Yeah, they never said this. This article smells like anti-Elon FUD. "Elon is a dummy, everything he tries will fail, replace him with someone who isn't so controversial and supports the proper politics for a powerful global figure" and repeat in 100 minor internet blogs until the money to write these articles runs out.