General Elon Musk Fukkery Thread

[bnew]

 

[bnew]

Who Wants 30,000 Used Teslas?

Hertz decided to unload its fleet of the electric vehicles. For some drivers, it has been a disaster.

nymag.com

THE MONEY GAME 5:00 A.M.

Who Wants 30,000 Used Teslas?​

By Kevin T. Dugan, staff writer at Intelligencer, who covers money and business

Photo: Brendan McDermid/Reuters

At the start of the year, after Hertz announced it was selling off its fleet of Teslas — backtracking on a plan to buy up 100,000 of the electric vehicles — the news sounded good for Bijay Pandey, a 34-year-old self-employed data worker in Irving, Texas. “I have another vehicle, and I was trying to add one for my wife because gas prices were too high,” he said. When he found out that it came with a $4,000 tax credit — even better. “That’s what attracted me,” he added. So, the day after Valentine’s Day, he bought a red 2022 Long Range Model 3 with 70,000 miles on it. It ended up costing just about $25,000, not a bad deal for a car that can sell for about $47,000 new.

But almost immediately, there were problems. After getting a temporary title, he found the car wasn’t reading voltage correctly. Soon, a body shop found a quarter-size hole in the undercarriage he hadn’t seen before, which led to revelations of deeper issues inside. “The high-voltage battery pack is damaged and could cause extreme safety concerns,” a Tesla technician texted him. Because the hole was “exterior damage,” it wasn’t covered by the warranty, which meant a $13,078.58 repair bill. Hertz said that it would swap the car for Pandey, but for about two months he waited — making $500 payments on his auto loan — before getting a replacement. “I realized why they were trying to get rid of those Teslas,” he said. “If anything happens to a Tesla, then the bill is too high.”

Hertz is an early contender for Wall Street’s schlimazel of the decade, the big unlucky lemon that just can’t seem to get anything right. The run of high-profile disasters began more than four years ago when the rental-car company went into bankruptcy during the early weeks of the pandemic, weighed down by $19 billion in debt and facing a global pause on travel. It sold off its fleet of vehicles to pay back creditors, became one of the first meme stocks, and — thanks to a raging bull market — emerged from bankruptcy in record time.

But that win may have been unlucky in its own way — Hertz was left trying to build back up its fleet during a time when the cost of new vehicles was skyrocketing. In 2021, at the height of the Tesla hype boom, Hertz announced it would make 20 percent of its cars electric — it never got to quite that level, but it did end up buying about 30,000 Teslas. (It bought other EVs, too, but most of the fleet comes from Elon Musk’s company). Since it returned to the public market in 2021, Hertz has lost more than $12 billion in value, and its CEO Stephen Scherr — the former CFO of Goldman Sachs — stepped down.

Hertz’s latest challenge is trying to get out of its entanglement with Tesla. In retrospect, it just looks like a bad idea. Companies like Hertz make money when they rent out cars as often as possible, which means their vehicles will often have more miles than the average vehicle, and, in turn, have more problems that need expensive maintenance. A side deal renting the EVs to Uber drivers — who often have to drive hundreds of miles a day to make a profit — wore down the cars even more, which also weighed down their resale value. Last month, the company announced that it had sold about 10,000 EVs — about a third of the total fleet it intends to offload. At first blush, that looked like Hertz would be ahead of schedule. But the pace of sales is starting to slow. One salesman at a Hertz in Smithtown, New York, told me that sales have dropped from as much as 30 a week in January and February to about five a week in April. Online forums are full of people steering prospective buyers away from Hertz vehicles. One factor may be price. “Hertz does not provide haggling on price,” he said. “It is what it is.”

When Hertz first announced it was selling off most of its EVs, it blamed lower demand among the traveling public than it had expected. “They have an oversupply” of Teslas, said John Plimpton Babcock, an analyst at Bank of America who covers the car-rental company. That lower turnover meant less profit, he added.

It makes sense Hertz would try to sell off its fleet now. Purchases of brand-new EVs are stalling out after a decade or so of stratospheric growth. Auto loans have interest rates starting at about 5 percent and go skyward from there. A shortage of reliable charging stations, and worries about batteries losing power in cold weather, have all hurt public interest in owning — and perhaps even renting — an EV.

In response to questions about its Tesla sales, a Hertz spokeswoman forwarded comments from the company’s CEO, Gil West, that the company expects that the sell-off of the remaining 20,000 EV will be “complete by the end of the year.” The company also said that, as far as Pandey’s car was concerned, “we worked closely with him to deliver a Tesla that met his needs and preference.”

 

[Professor Emeritus]

And those were probably just six nights his girlfriend locked him out of the house after catching him sleeping with another employee.

 

[FabTrey]

So let me get this straight
1. Tesla is going to make Robotaxi’s that cost $27K a year to produce.

2. These Robotaxis will be sold for $30K netting Tesla $3K per vehicle

3. However, these vehicles can generate $30K in passive income each year.

4. So Tesla will choose to make $3K selling the vehicles instead of the $30K the vehicle will generate?

This is what the Boer is proposing right? You don’t see the holes in this logic?

Edit: forgot to add that he will make $200 a month selling FSD subscription.

i'm not sure if you are getting it or not.

Selling a $25k car that everybody wants can yield an optimistic $2.5k in income once, while deploying a robotaxi at $1 per mile can yield $25k in income annually. just think about that.

This means that one robotaxi is worth FIFTY $25k car sales on a present value basis, indicating that Tesla is more confident in the latter model.

These numbers are based on rough math, with a robotaxi operating 12 hours a day at 25 miles per hour, totaling 100k miles per year. i think that's too optimistic, but from what i've seen by all these researches, 100k is very doable. many of these research suggests that there are a trillion miles addressable at >$1 per mile.

After factoring in a 50% platform fee and 50% operating margin, Tesla takes home $25k in operating earnings. The net present value difference over 7 years at a 10% discount rate yields a 50x difference. This analysis underscores the significant value potential of the robotaxi model compared to traditional car sales.

i know yall hate ARK, but this is a beautiful bull case analysis on autonomous mobility

https://533155.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/533155/1_Download_Files_ARK-Invest/White_Papers/ARK_Invest_060822_Whitepaper_Autonomous_Mobility.pdf?_hsmi=215123555

Beautiful bull case scenario done by Cern Basher, a very reputable tesla bull.

x.com

x.com

 

[FabTrey]

Who Wants 30,000 Used Teslas?

Hertz decided to unload its fleet of the electric vehicles. For some drivers, it has been a disaster.

nymag.com

THE MONEY GAME 5:00 A.M.

Who Wants 30,000 Used Teslas?​

Photo: Brendan McDermid/Reuters

At the start of the year, after Hertz announced it was selling off its fleet of Teslas — backtracking on a plan to buy up 100,000 of the electric vehicles — the news sounded good for Bijay Pandey, a 34-year-old self-employed data worker in Irving, Texas. “I have another vehicle, and I was trying to add one for my wife because gas prices were too high,” he said. When he found out that it came with a $4,000 tax credit — even better. “That’s what attracted me,” he added. So, the day after Valentine’s Day, he bought a red 2022 Long Range Model 3 with 70,000 miles on it. It ended up costing just about $25,000, not a bad deal for a car that can sell for about $47,000 new....

But in the future world of robotaxi, everything changes including the value of a used Tesla.

even if you don't want your tesla to be a robotaxi, fleet car company will knock on your door and will pay more $ because your tesla can turn into robotaxi.
so the car once used to be a depreciating asset is a money printing machine.

 

[Robbie3000]

i'm not sure if you are getting it or not.

Selling a $25k car that everybody wants can yield an optimistic $2.5k in income once, while deploying a robotaxi at $1 per mile can yield $25k in income annually. just think about that.

This means that one robotaxi is worth FIFTY $25k car sales on a present value basis, indicating that Tesla is more confident in the latter model.

These numbers are based on rough math, with a robotaxi operating 12 hours a day at 25 miles per hour, totaling 100k miles per year. i think that's too optimistic, but from what i've seen by all these researches, 100k is very doable. many of these research suggests that there are a trillion miles addressable at >$1 per mile.

After factoring in a 50% platform fee and 50% operating margin, Tesla takes home $25k in operating earnings. The net present value difference over 7 years at a 10% discount rate yields a 50x difference. This analysis underscores the significant value potential of the robotaxi model compared to traditional car sales.

i know yall hate ARK, but this is a beautiful bull case analysis on autonomous mobility

https://533155.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/533155/1_Download_Files_ARK-Invest/White_Papers/ARK_Invest_060822_Whitepaper_Autonomous_Mobility.pdf?_hsmi=215123555

Beautiful bull case scenario done by Cern Basher, a very reputable tesla bull.

x.com

x.com

The math ain’t mathing. This is the kind of juelzing that happens when you don’t understand the bullshyt that is being sold to you.

My question remains, why sell a money printing machine instead of keeping it for himself?

 

[bnew]

Twitter is officially X.com now

So long, Twitter.com.

www.theverge.com

Twitter is officially X.com now​

The social network formerly known as Twitter has switched over to X.com.​

By Jay Peters and Thomas Ricker

May 17, 2024, 3:19 AM EDT

77 Comments

The Verge

The social network formerly known as Twitter has officially adopted X.com for all its core systems. That means typing twitter.com in your browser will now redirect to Elon Musk’s favored domain, or should. At the time of publication, we’re seeing a mix of results depending upon browser choice and whether you’re logged in or not.

A message also now appears at the bottom of the X login page that reads, “We are letting you know that we are changing our URL, but your privacy and data protection settings remain the same.”

The domain transition has been one of the more awkward aspects of Elon Musk’s move to rebrand the company. Although many aspects of X migrated to the new branding long ago — including its official account, its mobile apps, and its “X Premium” (fka Blue) subscriptions — the platform’s URLs have remained twitter.com ever since Musk officially initiated the switch to X.

The URLs started to change way back in August of last year, when some Verge staffers were able to copy x.com links from the share sheet inside X’s iOS app. The clumsy transition has been a gift to phishing attacks, said Brian Krebs last month.

Musk has a long history with the x.com URL, launching a business under the name in 1999 that eventually merged with what would become PayPal. For this modern-day version of the company, Musk envisions that it will become a WeChat-like “everything app.”

Maybe, but one thing’s for sure: it’s not Twitter anymore.

 

[Poetical Poltergeist]

Twitter is officially X.com now

So long, Twitter.com.

www.theverge.com

Twitter is officially X.com now​

The social network formerly known as Twitter has switched over to X.com.​

By Jay Peters and Thomas Ricker

May 17, 2024, 3:19 AM EDT

77 Comments

The Verge

The social network formerly known as Twitter has officially adopted X.com for all its core systems. That means typing twitter.com in your browser will now redirect to Elon Musk’s favored domain, or should. At the time of publication, we’re seeing a mix of results depending upon browser choice and whether you’re logged in or not.

A message also now appears at the bottom of the X login page that reads, “We are letting you know that we are changing our URL, but your privacy and data protection settings remain the same.”

The domain transition has been one of the more awkward aspects of Elon Musk’s move to rebrand the company. Although many aspects of X migrated to the new branding long ago — including its official account, its mobile apps, and its “X Premium” (fka Blue) subscriptions — the platform’s URLs have remained twitter.com ever since Musk officially initiated the switch to X.

The URLs started to change way back in August of last year, when some Verge staffers were able to copy x.com links from the share sheet inside X’s iOS app. The clumsy transition has been a gift to phishing attacks, said Brian Krebs last month.

Musk has a long history with the x.com URL, launching a business under the name in 1999 that eventually merged with what would become PayPal. For this modern-day version of the company, Musk envisions that it will become a WeChat-like “everything app.”

Maybe, but one thing’s for sure: it’s not Twitter anymore.

Is that why can't embed here? Stopped working.

 

[bnew]

Is that why can't embed here? Stopped working.

yeah the site media addon hasn't been updated since the last site upgrade so it doesn't support x.com embeds. I created a userscript that automatically swaps x.com to twitter.com.

since twitter officially changed it's links to x.com, I updated the userscript to work in html editor mode as well as bbcode editor mode. so anytime you paste a https://x.com or https://www.x.com url it'll automatically replace the domain with https://twitter.com. making the embeds work seamlessly since the site addons haven't been updated to support x.com.

// ==UserScript==
// @name         Replace X.com URLs with Twitter.com URLs
// @namespace    http://tampermonkey.net/
// @description  Replaces URLs containing "https://x.com" or "https://www.x.com" with "https://twitter.com".
// @author       Author Name
// @version      1.3
// @match        https://www.thecoli.com/threads/*
// @match        https://thecoli.com/threads/*
// @match        https://xenforo.com/community/forums/*
// @grant        none
// ==/UserScript==

(function() {
    'use strict';

    // Function to get the current cursor position in a text input field
    function getCursorPosition(input) {
        let position = 0;
        if ('selectionStart' in input) {
            position = input.selectionStart;
        } else if (document.selection) {
            input.focus();
            let selection = document.selection.createRange();
            selection.moveStart('character', -input.value.length);
            position = selection.text.length;
        }
        return position;
    }

    // Function to set the cursor position in a text input field
    function setCursorPosition(input, position) {
        if (input.setSelectionRange) {
            input.focus();
            input.setSelectionRange(position, position);
        } else if (input.createTextRange) {
            let range = input.createTextRange();
            range.collapse(true);
            range.moveEnd('character', position);
            range.moveStart('character', position);
            range.select();
        }
    }

    // Function to replace URLs in text input fields and editable areas
    function replaceURLs(event) {
        // Get all editable fields on the page
        let editableFields = document.querySelectorAll('[contenteditable="true"], .fr-element.fr-view.fr-element-scroll-visible, textarea.input');

        editableFields.forEach(function(field) {
            // Save the current cursor position
            let cursorPosition = getCursorPosition(field);

            // Replace URLs in the value or innerHTML of the field
            let value = field.value || field.innerHTML;
            let newValue = value.replace(/https:\/\/(www\.)?x\.com/g, 'https://twitter.com');

            if (value !== newValue) {
                if (field.tagName.toLowerCase() === 'textarea' || field.tagName.toLowerCase() === 'input') {
                    field.value = newValue;
                } else {
                    field.innerHTML = newValue;
                }

                // Restore the cursor position
                let newCursorPosition = getCursorPosition(field);
                if (newCursorPosition > cursorPosition) {
                    setCursorPosition(field, newCursorPosition - (value.length - newValue.length));
                } else {
                    setCursorPosition(field, newCursorPosition);
                }
            }

            // Check if the user pressed Enter
            if (event.type === 'keydown' && event.key === 'Enter') {
                // Save the current cursor position
                cursorPosition = getCursorPosition(field);

                // Replace URLs in the new line
                let lines = (field.value || field.innerHTML).split('\n');
                lines[cursorPosition.line] = lines[cursorPosition.line].replace(/https:\/\/(www\.)?x\.com/g, 'https://twitter.com');
                if (field.tagName.toLowerCase() === 'textarea' || field.tagName.toLowerCase() === 'input') {
                    field.value = lines.join('\n');
                } else {
                    field.innerHTML = lines.join('\n');
                }

                // Restore the cursor position
                let newCursorPosition = getCursorPosition(field);
                if (newCursorPosition > cursorPosition) {
                    setCursorPosition(field, newCursorPosition - (value.length - lines.join('\n').length));
                } else {
                    setCursorPosition(field, newCursorPosition);
                }
            }
        });
    }

    // Add event listeners for input and keydown events on the document
    document.addEventListener('input', replaceURLs);
    document.addEventListener('keydown', replaceURLs);
})();

Changelog:

**Version 1.0 to Version 1.3**

1. **Expanded Functionality**:
- The script now handles both text input fields and editable areas (with the `contenteditable="true"` attribute) on the web pages.
- The script now replaces URLs in the BBCode editor mode, in addition to the HTML editor mode.

2. **Improved Cursor Position Handling**:
- The script now correctly restores the cursor position after replacing URLs, even when the text length changes.
- The script now handles the case where the user presses the Enter key, replacing URLs in the new line and restoring the cursor position correctly.

3. **Expanded Matching Patterns**:
- The script now matches URLs with both the "x.com" and "www.x.com" patterns.

4. **Improved Readability and Maintainability**:
- The script has been reorganized and formatted for better readability and maintainability.
- The script now uses more descriptive variable and function names.

5. **Increased Robustness**:
- The script now handles edge cases more gracefully, ensuring a smoother user experience.

Overall, the changes from Version 1.0 to Version 1.3 have significantly improved the functionality, reliability, and user experience of the script.[/icode]

 

[bnew]

Woman Stuck in Tesla For 40 Minutes With 115 Degrees Temperature During Vehicle Update

Tesla driver stuck in car during software update. Warns others to avoid in-car updates and highlights the importance of knowing manual release features.

www.ibtimes.co.uk

Woman Stuck in Tesla For 40 Minutes With 115 Degrees Temperature During Vehicle Update​

Brianna Janel regained control of her vehicle after 40 minutes​

By Vinay Patel @VinayPatelBlogs

Published 05/17/24 AT 12:45 PM BST

Tesla update trapped driver in hot car! They weren't aware of manual door release. TIKTOK SCREENSHOT / BRIANNA JANEL

A Tesla owner encountered a stressful experience after being stuck in her Tesla when she tried to update the car's system in a Chick-fil-A parking lot.

Brianna Janel anticipated the software update to take only 24 minutes, but she found herself trapped inside her vehicle in Costa Mesa, California, for nearly 40 minutes. Janel reported sweltering temperatures inside the Tesla, reaching 103 degrees.

Understandably, she grew anxious about running out of air as the windows wouldn't roll down. Janel documented her ordeal in a TikTok video, which has since garnered nearly 30 million views.

Tesla offers manual door releases for situations with depleted power, but Janel opted to wait, fearing potential damage to her car. "Inside my car, it's 103 degrees, so I'm slightly freaking out. I hope I don't run out of air," Janel said.

"I can't open up the doors or the windows otherwise I could potentially damage my car, so I'm just stuck in here roasting like a frickin chicken dripping sweat," she added. The car's screen displayed a message informing Janel that driving and charging were suspended for the duration of the update.

@brianna__janel

Note to self don’t update your car when you’re in it. #teslatok #tesla

♬ original sound - brianna | 2025 BRIDE

"My Chick-fil-A order has been done for 30 minutes. I'm literally sitting outside," she said. In a follow-up video, Janel confirmed her eventual escape and the blessed relief of air conditioning. She revealed the car's internal temperature had peaked at a scorching 115 degrees.

"I literally made it out of my car," Janel exclaimed, sweat dripping down her face. "The AC has never felt so good, and I've never felt better. I feel like I just took a bath."

Janel admitted she could have used the manual release, but fear of damaging her car kept her from trying it. Having owned her Tesla for six years, she confessed this was her first time updating inside the vehicle.

Janel said she even attempted to activate the air conditioning remotely via the app but to no avail. She concluded with a clear warning: "Do not update it when you're sitting in the car. "Stick to updating it at 2 am like I used to do it."

Electronic Door Releases Not Exclusive to Tesla​

Tesla isn't the only one offering electronic interior door releases. Consumer Reports lists other vehicles with this feature, including the Ford Mustang Mach-E, Chevrolet Corvette, Audi E-Tron, Lexus NX, and the Lucid Air.

Consumer Reports also highlighted a cautionary tale: A 2006 Cadillac XLR driver became trapped for 14 hours due to a dead battery. While the electronic door release was disabled, the driver could have escaped using the manual release – if he had been aware of it. This incident highlighted the importance of driver awareness regarding manual override features, especially in modern cars with electronic systems.

Tesla has faced criticism lately on other fronts beyond software updates. For one, its Cybertruck launch has been mired in safety concerns. Leaked drone footage reveals a backlog of incomplete trucks at the Texas factory, further fueling anxieties sparked by an insider's claims of serious safety problems encountered during development.

Aside from this, reports indicate that Elon Musk's decision to prioritise a visit to China and postpone his trip to India has caused friction with the Indian government.

While Tesla maintains its position as a pioneer in electric vehicle technology, the recent incident involving Janel raises concerns that could tarnish the reputation of Elon Musk's company.

 

[bnew]

Tesla must face fraud suit for claiming its cars could fully drive themselves

Lawsuit targets 2016 claim that all Tesla cars "have full self-driving hardware."

arstechnica.com

Tesla must face fraud suit for claiming its cars could fully drive themselves​

Lawsuit targets 2016 claim that all Tesla cars "have full self-driving hardware."​

JON BRODKIN - 5/16/2024, 1:56 PM

Enlarge

Getty Images | SOPA Images

151

A federal judge ruled yesterday that Tesla must face a lawsuit alleging that it committed fraud by misrepresenting the self-driving capabilities of its vehicles.

California resident Thomas LoSavio's lawsuit points to claims made by Tesla and CEO Elon Musk starting in October 2016, a few months before LoSavio bought a 2017 Tesla Model S with "Enhanced Autopilot" and "Full Self-Driving Capability." US District Judge Rita Lin in the Northern District of California dismissed some of LoSavio's claims but ruled that the lawsuit can move forward on allegations of fraud:

The remaining claims, which arise out of Tesla's alleged fraud and related negligence, may go forward to the extent they are based on two alleged representations: (1) representations that Tesla vehicles have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability and, (2) representations that a Tesla car would be able to drive itself cross-country in the coming year. While the Rule 9(b) pleading requirements are less stringent here, where Tesla allegedly engaged in a systematic pattern of fraud over a long period of time, LoSavio alleges, plausibly and with sufficient detail, that he relied on these representations before buying his car.

Tesla previously won a significant ruling in the case when a different judge upheld the carmaker's arbitration agreement and ruled that four plaintiffs would have to go to arbitration. But LoSavio had opted out of the arbitration agreement and was given the option of filing an amended complaint.

LoSavio's amended complaint seeks class-action status on behalf of himself "and fellow consumers who purchased or leased a new Tesla vehicle with Tesla's ADAS [Advanced Driver Assistance System] technology but never received the self-driving car that Tesla promised them."

Cars not fully autonomous​

Lin didn't rule on the merits of the claims but found that they are adequately alleged. LoSavio points to a Tesla statement in October 2016 that all its cars going forward would have the "hardware needed for full self-driving capability," and a November 2016 email newsletter stating that "all Tesla vehicles produced in our factory now have full self-driving hardware."

The ruling said:

Those statements were allegedly false because the cars lacked the combination of sensors, including lidar, needed to achieve SAE Level 4 ("High Automation") and Level 5 ("Full Automation"), i.e., full autonomy. According to the SAC [Second Amended Complaint], Tesla's cars have thus stalled at SAE Level 2 ("Partial Driving Automation"), which requires "the human driver's constant supervision, responsibility, and control."

If Tesla meant to convey that its hardware was sufficient to reach high or full automation, the SAC plainly alleges sufficient falsity. Even if Tesla meant to convey that its hardware could reach Level 2 only, the SAC still sufficiently alleges that those representations reasonably misled LoSavio.

The complaint also "sufficiently alleges that Musk falsely represented the vehicle's future ability to self-drive cross-country and that LoSavio relied upon these representations pre-purchase," Lin concluded. Musk claimed at an October 2016 news conference that a Tesla car would be able to drive from Los Angeles to New York City "by the end of next year without the need for a single touch."

Statute of limitations not an obstacle, for now​

Lin ruled that the complaint can move forward even though the relevant statutes of limitations range from two to four years, and LoSavio sued over five years after buying the car. Under the delayed discovery rule, the limitations period begins when "the plaintiff has, or should have, inquiry notice of the cause of action."

In September 2023, the court granted Tesla's motion to dismiss claims from LoSavio because of the statute of limitations but allowed LoSavio to amend his complaint.

LoSavio alleges that for years after buying his car, he relied on "Tesla's repeated claims that the car's software was the source of delay, and that software fixes were perpetually forthcoming," yesterday's ruling said. But when Tesla declined to update his car's cameras in April 2022, "LoSavio allegedly discovered that he had been misled by Tesla's claim that his car had all the hardware needed for full automation."

Lin rejected Tesla's argument that LoSavio should have known earlier. "Although Tesla contends that it should have been obvious to LoSavio that his car needed lidar to self-drive and that his car did not have it, LoSavio plausibly alleges that he reasonably believed Tesla's claims that it could achieve self-driving with the car's existing hardware and that, if he diligently brought his car in for the required updates, the car would soon achieve the promised results," Lin wrote.

Tesla can still argue later in the litigation that LoSavio should have made this realization earlier. "Having adequately alleged diligence, the extent of his diligence and its reasonableness are questions of fact not suitable for disposition at this stage," the judge wrote.

Warranty claims dismissed​

Lin dismissed other fraud claims that centered on Tesla statements suggesting future developments in self-driving technology would be "forthcoming at an unspecified time." LoSavio failed to "plausibly allege that those statements were false or misleading when made."

"LoSavio does not plausibly allege that those representations promised fully autonomous self-driving by any particular timeline, let alone that Tesla knew that timeline to be unrealistic," the ruling said.

Lin also dismissed warranty claims because "LoSavio knew at purchase that the car was not fully self-driving." The warranty claims were dismissed with prejudice and without leave to amend because LoSavio has already amended the claims twice and failed to identify "how he could sufficiently bolster these allegations upon further amendment."

The judge found that under the current pleading, LoSavio does not have standing to seek injunctive relief because the complaint "does not allege that LoSavio has any interest in buying another Tesla." But Lin dismissed the claim without prejudice, allowing LoSavio to amend the claim. The ruling noted that LoSavio "attested that he would have such interest if he could regain his trust in the brand's statements and self-driving capabilities" and "alleges that injunctive relief is necessary to protect against future harm."

LoSavio has until June 5 to amend his complaint, and Tesla has until June 19 to respond.

 

[88m3]

they need to face federal charges not just lawsuits

it's beyond ridiculous at this point, and it was done intentionally

 

[nyknick]

Lin rejected Tesla's argument that LoSavio should have known earlier. "Although Tesla contends that it should have been obvious to LoSavio that his car needed lidar to self-drive and that his car did not have it, LoSavio plausibly alleges that he reasonably believed Tesla's claims that it could achieve self-driving with the car's existing hardware and that, if he diligently brought his car in for the required updates, the car would soon achieve the promised results," Lin wrote.

Waymo costs around 150k, not including the car itself. Good luck trying to scale that.

I doubt Google will have issues scaling things up and getting costs down. Also because they don't plan to sell robo taxis to individual customers, who in their right mind would even suggest that? They will either run their own service or sell/license their software out.

Baidu is running a Level 4 self-driving service in Wuhan right now. It's not as good as Waymo from what I've seen but it's still driverless and an actual taxi service. And their costs are around $28,000.

Also XPeng has their own version of ADAS like Tesla's FSD in China except it also has lidar and it runs better than Tesla in certain circumstances. So good luck with Tesla winning the AI race and becoming the leader in self-driving.

Let's face it. There's a reason why the needle isn't moving on Wall Street yet. They just can't see as far ahead as I can. They are like you, skeptical and cynical. they look at the earnings. slow sales. They fail to understand that Tesla is sitting on a gold mine.
And when the bull train starts running at full steam, they will be like, "Oh damn, what did I just miss?" that's when FOMO starts. instead of 10X they will be happy with 2X gained and collectively say 'i should've gotten in below $200'.

if you don't believe in Tesla's future with an AI then you should definitely short Tesla.

I can't really speak on anything Wall Street/stock price related. I can just speak on what I see from business/competition perspective and it's not looking good for Tesla.

I'm interested to see what happens if EU goes through with 30% tariffs on Chinese made cars since 45% of Chinese cars imported to Europe are Teslas. Tesla is already losing market share in China and if they can't export those cars to EU what excuse do they come up with then?

 

[FabTrey]

The math ain’t mathing. This is the kind of juelzing that happens when you don’t understand the bullshyt that is being sold to you.

My question remains, why sell a money printing machine instead of keeping it for himself?

Are you familiar with the concept of supply and demand?

in a perfect bull market scenario, once people realize they can make significant money by making their cars available for the robotaxi market, the demand will skyrocket. Everyone will want to own one. I'm willing to bet you'll want to own one too. Tesla won't be able to produce them fast enough. I'm sure they will also operate a fleet of their own.

 

[FabTrey]

I doubt Google will have issues scaling things up and getting costs down. Also because they don't plan to sell robo taxis to individual customers, who in their right mind would even suggest that? They will either run their own service or sell/license their software out.

Baidu is running a Level 4 self-driving service in Wuhan right now. It's not as good as Waymo from what I've seen but it's still driverless and an actual taxi service. And their costs are around $28,000.

Also XPeng has their own version of ADAS like Tesla's FSD in China except it also has lidar and it runs better than Tesla in certain circumstances. So good luck with Tesla winning the AI race and becoming the leader in self-driving.


I can't really speak on anything Wall Street/stock price related. I can just speak on what I see from business/competition perspective and it's not looking good for Tesla.

I'm interested to see what happens if EU goes through with 30% tariffs on Chinese made cars since 45% of Chinese cars imported to Europe are Teslas. Tesla is already losing market share in China and if they can't export those cars to EU what excuse do they come up with then?

Google scaling Waymo? How? they got 6 gigafactories too? And I don't know why you're surprised. Like your beloved Waymo, which is level 4, Baidu's been in the robotaxi game for a while now. It's already happening in China.

Baidu's cars are geofenced in a high-speed, low-latency connectivity area. As such, they are supremely confident in the routes, capable of handling any situation, or in the worst case, having someone take remote control. That's why no steering wheel is needed. Because of the geofencing, Baidu's vehicles can only function as taxis.

There are millions of Model 3s and Ys out there ready to be robotaxis. They're in high demand, whether you admit it or not. There's a reason why you're seeing Model Ys everywhere. Why wouldn't you sell these cars to people? Don't you want to make money? In the future, Tesla will sell 10-15 million Teslas per year. some predict 20mil per year by 2035. There will be more gigafactories, and they will be even more efficient in manufacturing. While Google is happy with a few thousand Waymos, Tesla will be busy making millions of Teslas capable of robotaxis. Google has a bigger fish to fry anyway. The beauty of tesla's model is that it's your car that is hustlin on the road making money for you. that's the beauty of FSD.

You are basically comparing Wemby, who's got all the moves and is ready to take over the world, vs. Edey, who is nice now but won't be relevant because he won't get much better. nice try tho.