comment: >
  
  They are a public company. As Oscar in accounting would say there is a word for this, “fraud.”
context: Fully Self Driving! Coming “Soon” in 2015. >
  
  i'd like to go back to 2015. >
  
  Fuck that, if we are going back take me back to 1992, those years fucking rocked >
  
  90’s looked like it was a good time to be alive this is coming from a younger person >
  
  It was. Businesses sought to put the customer first in many situations generally leaving the consumer with the advantage, a single income could afford a family to live comfortably (generally), music and television was really breaking into the scene with recording tech getting better and there were no mobile devices, meaning people interacted more with each other. 
  It was just comfortable. 
  If your mom wasn't sleeping with everyone she could find leaving two young children to wonder what they did wrong and watch it eat their dad alive, that is. >
  
  As long as you weren't colored it sure was great >
  
  This always perplexes me! It seems like racism is more of a thing today than it was back then. This is even coming from someone that grew up in Mississippi. We seemed to just... coexist. Sure there were the occasional hillbilly trash that only existed to make others that didn't look like them miserable, but the communities always seemed to hate those folks.
  But I was also young at the time. Through 2004, I never saw as much racism as I do today. It's really sad. I hope you didn't have to go through a lot of it. >
  
  It was so much more hidden back then. Now it's out in the open and everybody recognizes the micro aggressions but my name was literally "flat face" until I moved out of New Jersey. They called my ching Chong all the time even though Im Vietnamese. Countless incidents that due to a TBI I probably don't even remember anymore. 
  We tolerated it more because it was so common place. Then we stopped tolerating it and that's what you're seeing now >
  
  This is great perspective - we couldn't so easily interact with everyone, so it must have been a lot more contained. Now everyone feels like they have a soap box and throw their opinions all over social media and I can see where the anonymity can make racism so much worse today.
  And sorry you had to go through that. I was the only red head in my school and got it bad, too. The one good thing about being red headed is - white, black, yellow or green... Everyone seems to all come together when there's a ginger joke to be made lol. Eeerrybody gets offended at classifications, but when the ginger guy shows up, the masses are united.
  Sigh..lol >
  
  That was a great exchange.  I'm glad I got to read it. >
  
  I'm beginning to believe this Musk fellow lacks integrity. >
  
  Did he buy Twitter to hide the market manipulation? >
  
  He bought Twitter because his bot nets were being detected. It's not a coincidence that the whole thing started shortly after investigative reporters showed how bot nets were amplifying his messages in conjunction with major upward swings in the price of Tesla. >
  
  While it is true he was doing this, the reason for the purchase seems like it's even dumber.
  Basically he was chatting with Twitter board members when he was considering joining the board, including Jack Dorsey, about how to improve Twitter. While this was happening, he was tweeting out some anti Twitter stuff. Jack told him that "you can tweet what you want, but this isn't helpful". This cause Musk to have a meltdown and say "I can't deal with this bullshit, I'm going to buy Twitter and take it private".
  Yeah. Jack sold Twitter for 4x it's value by respectfully speaking to Elon like he was an adult while he was behaving like an edgy teenager on his website. >
  
  Parag told him that, not Dorsey if I remember correctly. >
  
  Thanks for the correction, I thought it was Dorsey. >
  
  Its extremely pertinent though as Musk respects Dorsey and seemingly has less than zero respect for Parag. >
  
  A guy who grew up in apartheid south Africa doesn't respect a person of color? Say it ain't so! >
  
  Hey dude, I get what you mean by this post but there’s a whole lot being said here that I think you probably don’t mean.
  I’m literally “A guy who grew up in apartheid South Africa” my mom was a PoC and my dad was white, she had to endure the pencil test (look it up) in order to marry him when she discovered she was pregnant or they could both face jail time and possible ‘disappearance’ by the SAP. If I’d turned out like a single shade darker the same fate could have befallen them. 
  My dad was active in the struggle and I have a half brother who we kept a secret because he was too brown.  They are both literally “A guy who grew up in apartheid South Africa.”
  This country has a very dark, painful history so all I’m asking is that you consider what you are invoking when you use this line against Elon who, I totally agree is one of the more reprehensible characters of our time. >
  
  I'm pretty sure op meant Elon was a rich white person in apartheid South Africa >
  
  This seems like misrepresenting risk and worth to investors. >
  
  How is this not fraud for a public company? The CEO said that these were the capabilities of the vehicle and that's patently false.
  There's no doubt that investors saw this as a demonstration of the product's capabilities and invested accordingly. Especially since Tesla has been positioning itself as a "tech" company rather than a car company. 
  This is fake, misleading, and still not present in Tesla vehicles.
  Next you're going to tell me we won't start colonizing Mars this year. >
  
  The same way all of the other tings he lied about, like deliveries, cash on hand and burn rate, weren't considered fraud. Because the SEC isn't doing their job. >
  
  And neither did the NHTSA or FTC; Tesla's marketing has been in direct confliction with their legalese terms of use this whole time and regulators have done NOTHING about it.
  My cynical view is that Republicans did nothing because they brag about letting corporations run the country and Democrats did nothing, basking in Musk's lies that would have crumbled under any scrutiny, until he started openly calling for their heads last year. >
  
  Au contraire, is quite busy with more important matters /s >
  
  Time for a false advertising lawsuit on top of the growing pile of lawsuits aimed at Musk >
  
  The cyber truck pulls near infinite mass!  Such a nonsense statement, though legally accurate if pulling doesn’t mean moving it (towing), and near isn’t defined by an amount. >
  
  Anything can pull infinite mass if the rolling resistance is small. On a windstill day you can pull a cruise ship towards you. >
  
  Citroën C3 pulls a 13,000 tonne freight ship
  yes, I know clarkson is an asshat, but the video basically proves your point >
  
  When the option is spinning the tires or smoking the clutch, you'll probably get more pull out of spinning the tires >
  
  Yeah, at the start he was burning clutch and realized that wouldn't work >
  
  Musk's arguement against using LIDAR is it would require too many sensors per car to make the option affordable. 
  im over here scratching my head one why something like "Full self driving" needs to be affordable, before its even proven on a small scale.   
  this technology is not mature enough to do what Tesla is selling it to do. and we all get to share the road with it so TSLA shares dont shit the bed. >
  
  Musk's real genius was realizing that Full Self Driving could be made affordable simply by not making an actually functional product. >
  
  This is called the “Boeing” strategy in government contracting. 
  If Boeing build a plane or rocket that flies, or a software product that functions, it is a side effect of their main objective which is the capture of federal dollars. >
  
  Of course. Why do the thing you were paid for when you can just... not? >
  
  Because they’re really good at pretending to fail elaborately, and in a way that embarrasses their supporters, so their supporters will spend more money to save them. 
  I got on a contract that we won from Boeing. The work we took over was really poorly done. They delayed getting us documentation and source code until Christmas week, knowing we wouldn’t have time to review before they could wipe their hands of the whole situation. 
  Then it turns out that everything depended on a server Boeing had running in their facility that, whoops, they were going to turn off in two weeks to save money. 
  They ended up being paid more to keep that server on for three months, than we got paid for the whole two-year contract to replace them. 
  I’m still bitter about that. >
  
  
  “The intent of the video was not to accurately portray what was available for customers in 2016. It was to portray what was possible to build into the system,” Elluswamy said, according to a transcript of his testimony seen by Reuters.
  
  That might have been the intent of your and your coworkers.
  
  When Tesla released the video, Musk tweeted, “Tesla drives itself (no human input at all) thru urban streets to highway to streets, then finds a parking spot.”
  
  It was clearly the boss's intent to say that those possibilities were already reality. >
  
  Yeah, but the iPhone actually worked when it launched. Nobody would care if the FSD video was faked if it actually worked when it launched. Instead, it's been 6 years and it's still bad. It's like if the iPhone 5s still had all of the problems with the first they hid, and Steve Jobs was like "trust me bros, it's gonna be awesome this time!" >
  
  Well no.  During the original iPhone launch presentations, the units would often fail and Steve Jobs needed to secretly swap out crashing phones for working ones.
  The iPhone mostly worked then, but wasn't as reliable as advertised. >
  
  It wasn't advertised, it was demoed, and demoed early because otherwise FCC filings would've spilled the beans. 
  The iPhone came out 6 months after that demo. >
  
  So investor fraud? Got it >
  
  When all the dust settles people are gonna realize he has already extracted more than what that company is truly worth through selling stocks already. Some epic fraud. There isn’t enough popcorn in the world for when this all falls down >
  
  RemindMe! 2 years >
  
  all of muskrat's con games seem to be unraveling at the same time.  It's just terrible LOL. >
  
  This seems to happen whenever the person perpetrating multiple cons gets overconfident and overextends themselves, and the twitter debacle was obviously just that. The house of cards suddenly comes crashing down. >
  
  Specifically, it happens more with loud mouthed asshole narcissists that get so cocky that they decide to revel in being the "bad guy".  They've become so successful at pulling off what they, themselves, know to be cons that they fully delude themselves into believing that they can do ANYTHING, no matter how rotten offensive and public, and still get away with it.  This ends up painting a MASSIVE target on their back.  Other examples include Trump and Martin "Pharma Bro" Shkreli. >
  
  Serial killers do this too!  It’s called “berserker mode.”. They get lazy with hiding bodies and stuff because they assume they’re invincible. >
  
  Maybe people should stop worshiping a car brand just because they want to feel the same as buying a new iPhone in the old days and instead ask for a test drive and buy whatever the heck fill their interest >
  
  I did that and bought a Tesla anyway, despite Musk. It's a really good car.
  Edit: I'll note I didn't pay extra for the self driving scam and I don't give a shit about "Tesla culture".  I just like how the car drives. >
  
  Relevant section: 
  
  To create the video, the Tesla used 3D mapping on a predetermined route from a house in Menlo Park, California, to Tesla’s then-headquarters in Palo Alto, he said.
  
  So the car did drive itself but not using the capabilities available in any production package. Also, the sensors incorporated into all Teslas would not be able to create this 3D map data on the fly as Tesla has claimed is their goal. They'd need to completely overhaul their entire FSD philosophy in order to make their cars work with 3D mapping. >
  
  It didn't even do that much
  
  Drivers intervened to take control in test runs, he said. When trying to show the Model X could park itself with no driver, a test car crashed into a fence in Tesla’s parking lot, he said.
  
  To my understanding, Tesla's driver assist (probably best not to call it "self driving" at this point) technology is supposed to work without reliance on maps for negotiating the road itself. Rather than memorize where obstacles are, it's supposed to be adaptive like a human driver.
  Fantastic technology if they can ever get it right, but our roads need reliable technology that improves safety, not potentially-someday-awesome beta software that only drives as well as a teenager with a learner's permit. >
  
  
  When trying to show the Model X could park itself with no driver, a test car crashed into a fence
  
  Automated parking is one of the only aspects of self-driving technology that actually works. Several companies have cars that can already do it. The fact that Tesla can't even do that without faking it is hilarious.
  Also, I typed "self-parking" into youtube. The first video that comes up is one that shows self-parking being tested on a number of vehicles. Between an Audi, a Ford, a BMW, and a Tesla, the Tesla is the only one that can't do it. >
  
  I think other car companies were wise to roll out driver assist tech with low-stakes, high payoff stuff like self parallel parking. Tesla kinda screwed up by going for something that can mostly drive itself at high speed but screws up enough that you can't actually stop "driving". >
  
  People in the space have been saying it for years. 
  You cannot trust humans with level 2+ through level 4 of self driving. 
  Humans are not built for that level of focus when they are not controlling the thing. 
  We're gonna need to jump right to level 5. >
  
  Yep. Human attention simply isn't able to intervene in an emergency if it isn't engaged enough. 
  Am a mechanical engineer that deals with error prevention. Human attention has been very well studied for things like control room management. It is really tough even for trained professionals to take in the info and act quickly with long periods where nothing happens.  I've never reviewed an incident where the control didn't act fast enough or well enough in one way or another. 
  Yet human driver are at fault if they can't perform like magic with a system like Tesla's. >
  
  
  I've never reviewed an incident where the control didn't act fast enough or well enough in one way or another.
  
  did you mean "where the control did" and not "didn't"? Or am I misunderstanding something here?
  thanks! >
  
  My poorly phrased point is that there are always problems with a control room's response to an incident. Ignored or misunderstood data points, communication gaps etc. Disbelief that something is actually happening and not a false alarm. I can't think of an incident in my field where performance was flawless.
  Humans are really bad at figuring things out at a moments notice. >
  
  
  Disbelief that something is actually happening and not a false alarm.
  
  I work in critical facilities. This is a big one. >
  
  Alarm fatigue is a bitch. >
  
  Ok, so put this on the pile along with the RoboTaxi, Cybertruck, Solar Roof Panels, Hyperloop, Mars Colonies... >
  
  They were already sued for faking the solar roof demos. >
  
  “Wanna see me throw a rock against the Cybertruck window? It won’t break, I swear” >
  
  Didn’t the Nikola founder go to jail for doing the same thing? >
  
  That was a little bit worse. They didn't even have a functional drivetrain and just rolled the truck down a hill lol >
  
  the bad bets podcast covered it pretty good.  the investor recorded himself going "does this work now or in the future, let's get the tense right" and he said now, and now he's going to jail.  some good youtube videos go find that spot and roll down their own cars which is fun >
  
  Eem Elon is there something you need to tell us? >
  
  I don't keep up with Tesla, but this article made me realize that with FSD we could have traffic from cars with no people in them. Seriously let's just have a better public transit system instead. The idea of a car in traffic for 0 humans because someone wanted to summon their car somewhere is frustrating. >
  
  
  Seriously let's just have a better public transit system instead.
  
  Not to be that person, but it's not like people aren't trying. Not every place is a dense urban environment suited towards high-capital-cost, high-throughput public transit.
  And if it's not high throughput/density, you're gonna get destroyed on latency (e.g. even for a long trip-to-airport suited towards a transit network, you might be looking at 30m by car vs. 3h+ by transit because walking time + the relevant routes just don't run frequently enough).
  "Better public transit" is great, but it's not always enough to replace car use cases, not by a very long shot. >
  
  I've often wondered if there's an intermediate option that combines flexibility of individual cars/routes with the regularity/simplicity of rail. 
  Like some advanced trolley/light-rail network with individual or large-capacity cabs, with the flow of traffic automated to improve efficiency.
  The rail network would be expensive as heck, but with power delivered via rail, the "cars" would get a lot simpler and cheaper. >
  
  
  The rail network would be expensive as heck
  
  The problem isn't just expense, it's that unless you spend even more money to bury or elevate all that rail, it needs to contend with existing roads and just ends up adding to the congestion rather than solving it. Unfair as it may feel, there is definitely an "early bird gets worm" kind of effect here, and established roads have a LOT of advantages to overcome if you want to just replace them with "something better".
  
  the "cars" would get a lot simpler and cheaper.
  
  But it is much easier to convince people to spend money on individually-owned cars than to convince people to chip in in aggregate to spend on an expensive rail network (even if that ultimately comes out cheaper). As an example, just look at how hard it is as-is to get people to even spend in aggregate to fix the roads they already have. >
  
  
  Unfair as it may feel, there is definitely an "early bird gets worm" kind of effect here, and established roads have a LOT of advantages to overcome if you want to just replace them with "something better".
  
  Back in the day, San Francisco had far, far more rail lines for streetcars than it has today. The majority of them were torn up decades ago to make way for lanes for more cars. In this case the early bird got shot and the carcass was stuffed and left as a tourist attraction.
  Infrastructure systems like this have inertia and they're difficult to change, sure. But if it can go one way it can also go the other. >
  
  
  It was to portray what was possible to build into the system
  
  Except that isn't true either. If you require a 3D model to accomplish it (which they didn't even accomplish since they had to intervene and it crashed lmao) you would need LIDAR which no Teslas have and Musk is adamantly against using.
  They poorly replicated what other self driving companies already do with geofencing and LIDAR all while claiming they will never use either because that method sucks. >
  
  This is simply not true. Go watch AI day or a talk by some of their engineers. However, at the time it definitely didn't have this and Andrej Karpathy has said as much many times >
  
  Direct quote from Elon on autonomy day (feel free to look it up yourself)
  
  Anyone relying on LIDAR is doomed, doomed. Expensive sensors that are unnecessary. It’s like having a whole bunch of expensive appendices... you’ll see. >
  
  I'm not debating this fact, I'm saying they are using cameras to do the same thing. Pretty sure they are actually using their fleet to build HD maps in real time with cameras and neural nets. >
  
  You cannot do the same thing with cameras and radar. Which is why they drive into stationary objects all the time. Cameras don't have adequate depth perception and radar cannot distinguish if what it hits is a car, a sign, a fence, etc. With radar you have to ignore stationary objects so you don't slam on the brakes when it detects a sign in the highway (which they still have issues with anyway) so you end up ramming into parked cars that got ignored.
  Also inb4 the uneducated response of "we drive with two cameras... our eyes!" response. We drive with 2 "cameras" connected to a brain developed with millions of years of evolution that we do not fully understand. You cannot replicate your brains processing power with neural nets when you don't even know what processing needs to be replicated. There is a reason EVERY other self driving company is using LIDAR and why Tesla is so far behind them. Because what they are trying to do is literally not possible with our current technology.
  They either need to admit FSD is vaporware for the foreseeable future or start using LIDAR. >
  
  We do understand how brains generate depth information though. It's not stereoscopic - that gives you some mild 3D benefits close up (within about 25ft). Everything else is distance from motion, and heuristics based on aerial perspective, scale of known objects, shadows, and so on.
  You can use visual flow analysis plus ML to extract depth from a sequence of images quite happily. MS was doing it a while back. Is it perfect? No. Does it have to be? Only to within +/-5ft. >
  
  While it is possible with ML, monocular depth estimation can often fail in different scenes. It is good on average, but can have unacceptable errors in some scenes which makes it much worse for safety critical systems. Modern ML just isn't good at bounding errors and it's difficult to make them good in safety critical systems. We especially shouldn't be testing these systems in life or death matters right now.
  Why should we limit ourselves to what nature has inspired? Planes don't flap their wings like birds do. We have the ability to obtain a much easier bound on error with better sensors. >
  
  It was obviously staged; no children were hit and the car didn't catch fire. >
  
  All of that happened. X Æ A-Ⅻ just deleted our memories of it. >
  
  At least they didn’t have to push the car down a hill >
  
  Sounds like a Rolls Canardly. Rolls down hill, can hardly make it up the next. >
  
  You know what wasn’t engineered? Elon throwing a rock at the Tesla truck… >
  
  In retrospect, that was a really great metaphor for what was to come for Elon in the year 2020 and beyond. >
  
  Real human beings watched that performance and thought "Wow. Musk is a smart man. I should buy that thing he just smashed with a rock." >
  
  When I saw Transformers toys commercials (1990s) and then got the toys for Christmas, I felt the same way.  
  Lesson learned.  Commercial promotions always make it look too good. >
  
  Just look at that Hamburger on the ordering screen and what you get in your hand... >
  
  Can we jail some of these people? Seriously, fines are meaningless. Gen pop is the only way these people are ever going to face real consequences. >
  
  Oh wow. Another case of where the obvious conman broke the law but he'll get away with it because we're living in a system that only cares about the super rich. >
  
  So… Musk committed fraud. That’s not exactly shocking. Nor will it be shocking to watch him get away with it. >
  
  Strange this isn't trending on twitter right now... >
  
  As if it matters if it was staged or not? Why would we trust anything Musk says now anyway? Even if there were 500 people who personally worked on the project saying it all works perfectly, we know it doesn’t. We’ve seen all the failures. >
  
  Elon about to call the engineer a pedo in 3...2...1... >
  
  *Surprised Pikachu Face* >
  
  Tesla is going to be the wildest company of them all to fall. People are going to be stuck with cars that no longer have software to support them or parts to repair them. >
  
  A legacy car maker will buy it for the charges and use the battery tech to make a new EV car for their brand. I got money on Toyota, as it would give them something EV while they work on hydrogen >
  
  I actually wouldn't mind this move. The tech in Teslas is definitely cool and the biggest knock on them, other than false promises, is quality control. I would think a legacy car maker could really do some amazing things. Hell I think Tesla could do some amazing things if it wasn't treated like some guys play thing. >
  
  They also faked those robot videos and it’s very easy to tell with the box it’s holding changing between shots. Watch thunderf00t expose Musk on YouTube. Musk does this shit all the time. >
  
  is the grifter finally going to jail?
  ​
  no?
  ​
  well back to working as a prison guard for these inmates that stole $100 from a cash register for some hookers and blow >
  
  If only he spent that 44 Billion dollars on self driving improvements instead of an $8/m version of Myspace. >
  
  Staged - like a burger in a commercial? >
  
  It's almost as though this Musk fellow has been a scumbag snake-oil salesman this whole time. >
  
  can we stop subsidizing tesla now? >
  
  I'm just going to assume any video of a Tesla not making a beeline straight for the nearest child is going to be staged. >
  
  The concept of all autonomous cars is great. The road network would have to be upgraded for be smart car navigation , smart roads that give vehicles more information about the roads around them. But traffic lights would be a thing of the past. Fuel consumption can be reduced.  Traffic jams gone as information is shared between cars and alternative routes taken.
  Unfortunately this will never happen, most will never give up thier autonomy to a machine. >
  
  Tesla is starting to feel like Theranos. Misrepresenting claims under the guise of ‘everyone does it’, deliberately misleading info about self driving capabilities, pushing growth before it can even keep up with inventory, inventory that doesn’t hold up to the hype.. at this point I wouldn’t be surprised to hear if Tesla gets sued for misleading investors about growth and self driving capabilities. >
  
  What?? Next you'll tell me the dancing robot wasn't actually a robot. >
  
  If they stuck to using radar, ir, thermal, and cameras they'd be self driving by now. Doing just camera will never work. >
  
  As bad as it sucks is anyone surprised? >
  
  The merit of a test is in the worst of circumstances. >
  
  The Most Sued Man In History, An Elon Musk Story >
  
  7 years and the Twitter me Elons are still waiting for FSD like the mother ship that will lift them off this planet >
  
  Colour me fucking amazed >
  
  If a company is demoing tech and not putting it in your hands, it’s because it’s fake. I’m sure there is an exception or two to this rule but whatever. >
  
  Class action lawsuit please >
  
  You mean that video of a guy in the backseat of his driverless car on the freeway? No? >
  
  Prophet Muskrat a cheating grifter? Oh how the turn tables. >
  
  
  When asked if the 2016 video showed the performance of the Tesla Autopilot system available in a production car at the time, Elluswamy said, “It does not.”
  
  Holy misleading headline Batman. He didn’t say it was “staged”, just that anybody who thought it was reflective of production software at the time was an idiot. That video was very clearly demonstrating a prototype. >
  
  Bob the Broker: "Can you go lower?!"
  Tesla Stock: "YES WE CAN!" >
  
  Well, no shit. Every PR video that musk puts out is faked in some way. >
  
  Musk really is the guy from Glass Onion. It’s hilarious >
  
  Holy shit, tesla is screwed >
  
  I highly doubt it >
  
  Tesla needs to get rid of self driving as a feature and Tesla needs to get rid of Musk as a CEO.   
  Those two negative things are becoming what people think of when they think "Tesla". >
  
  Tesla? Lie about something?
  Say. It. Ain't. So. >
  
  Investor fraud and false advertising? Isn’t that what got Theranos? 
  Musk will end up in jail at this rate. >
  
  Gosh, so the bollocks was bollocks.  Whodathunk? >
  
  Only with clear roads, good weather, and with a follow car. So not really. >
  
  This is not a race, if this technology doesn't work people die.
  I've honestly been confused af when I saw the level 3 headline. Like if Tesla had the juice they should be flexing the self driving tech. They clearly don't have the juice and I hope Elon gets sued into the ground for what is clearly false and misleading statements to investors. >
  
  The scary thing is that I live by a train yard that serves as a hub for when trains deliver automobiles to our area. I can't tell you how many car transporters I see carrying NOTHING BUT Tesla models. That's all I ever see getting hauled out of there. So many people have been duped (including myself) into thinking Teslas are amazing cars. Thank goodness I never purchased one. >
  
  Back when they were first on the scene I'd only see them in affluent areas. When the production ramped up and they started selling cheaper models, I saw them everywhere. Feels like every other car on my morning commute is a Tesla. I just don't get it, especially with all of the other EVs that are now on the market. And I understand status symbols, but this one seems to be tainted as hell at this point. >
  
  Used Tesla prices have plummeted. People want out. >
  
  New Tesla prices just dropped by 20%, back to pre-pandemic levels. Of course used Tesla prices dropped. >
  
  Boycott Musk and Twitter and Tesla >
  
  With this price decrease I think i'm buying a performance model 3. too many upsides to not move to electric, and sadly nothing comes close to the intersection of performance, range, and efficiency of a tesla. Also they have such a large charging network. >
  
  
  reported on this in 2017
  
  ... doesn't make Tesla or Elon any less shitful. >
  
  I never said it did or didn't, I'm simply providing context and an opinion that it's likely not fraud. >
  
  Your attempt to provide context has failed. >
  
  This is not news in the slightest. 
  The article says directly that the video was released in 2016, and it was made clear in 2016 that it was an edited proof of concept.
  Literally 0 story here, definition of click bait.
  Edit nothing in this article is new or different, the story is that Tesla is not special.
  Edit 2: I am absolutely wrong, it was confirmed in a deposition  during 07/2022, and just released. >
  
  Nah you're wrong, the (legitimate) news here is that a Tesla engineer quite recently testified under oath giving details about how this video was staged.
  If it was "made clear in 2016 that is was an edited proof of concept" why was musk simultaneously promoting it as evidence of Tesla's self driving capabilities? Maybe there's some fine print somewhere saying otherwise, but why does the video itself say “The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself.”?
  Nice try >
  
  You are 100% correct, I’m wrong, completely misread the dates in this article. I found another that said his deposition was in 07/2022, I skipped over that entirely. >
  
  Tesla pulled one of the greatest grifts of the last decade. "BuT YoUrE PaYiNg FoR wHaT iT cOuLd Be"
  Decent enough cars, but let's not pretend FSD wasn't a complete hoodwink. >
  
  Decent 😂
  Their quality is shoddy.
  You’re paying for the name. That’s it. >
  
  So the F in FSD stands for fraud? >
  
  I like thinking it was the “Fake Staged Drive” in-house all along, and Elon thought it’d be funny to use the same acronym FSD publicly. >
  
  Oh say it ain't so, EM lies!   shock / not >
  
  Artificially inflating the value of something is the only thing Elon knows how to do.
  Ain't that right, Dogecoin? >
  
  And yet the FSD subscription continues to rise.. >
  
  I rode in the first Model S and the guy tried to show off the self driving and it went around a bend all nice and then almost blew through a stop sign and he had to slam on the brakes. >
  
  Oh my! A billionaire has lied to make money at the expense of middle class lives! We are shocked! We are appalled! We are still buying his shit... >
  
  The more innovative tech from the early 2000s turned onto vapor wares, the more I realized our tech never really grew better, just our tech and ability to make tech commercials.
  I am predicting we find out all those ai art is just an content farm in Vietnam or just a basics morpher with a stock image account. 😂 >
  
  Fake it till you make it, just like Theranos >
  
  Elon and Lizzy Holmes are cut from the same cloth.  Elon will end up where Holmes is headed sooner or later >
  
  How is this any different than Theranos or Nikola?   
  Elizabeth Holmes is in jail for blatantly lying about Theranos blood test prototype's capabilities, 
  Trevor Milton is guilty and awaiting sentencing for lying about his prototype truck's capabilities. 
  Elon Musk, whose lied more times than you can shake a stick at... Nothing...  I guess it pays to be the US governments primary method of launching satellites.  It pays to have setup factories specifically in Democratic stronghold states (California, Nevada, and New York) while massively benefiting from government subsidies for the construction of those factories, the launching of those starlink satellites, and the sale of those rocket launches, cars, solar panels, home and grid batteries.  
  Not to mention the trick of having other OEMs fund the company because of the ZEV credit system devised by California... Which makes sense for that specific state due to the unique smog issues due to overpopulation, the geography of the region, the lack of affordable multi family housing close to business districts, and terrible public transit planning.   But yeah, that ZEV system quickly spread to other states where it overwhelmingly benefitted Tesla, even though they were already being rewarded by multiple other EV subsidies.  Why reward a sale of a car for it's emissions reduction when you can reward it 3-4x for that one reduction?!
  But no jail for the guy who quickly became the richest man in the world by way of his constant lies, massive government financial support, and some interesting ponzi-esque schemes with collateralized loans on all the shares and options that he paid no income taxes on. (Tax loophole) >
  
  'The Tesla technology [...] “[does] not make the vehicle autonomous,” the company says on its website.' 
  Then maybe you shouldn't call it auto-pilot.