Tesla has confirmed its latest bait-and-switch: Cybertruck owners will not get the Autosteer feature they paid for.
Instead, they will get a year of ‘Supervised Full Self-Driving’.
When Tesla started delivering the Cybertruck in late 2023, the software was incomplete, especially regarding its Advanced Driver Assist System (ADAS) features like ‘Supervised (FSD) Full Self-Driving’, which was included in the price of all early Cybertrucks.
It took Tesla almost a year to start releasing its FSD on the Cybertruck.
After Tesla stopped making new Cybertruck Foundation Series, which are fully loaded with all options, buyers started to have the option of buying the $8,000 FSD package or keeping only the Autopilot package, which is included in the price.
Autopilot’s two main features are Traffic Aware Cruise Control and Autosteer. The first is self-explanatory, while Autosteer is Tesla’s name for active lane keeping.
The vast majority of Tesla vehicle owners don’t buy the FSD package.
As of now, 16 months after Tesla started delivering the Cybertruck, the automaker has yet to deliver Autosteer on the electric pickup truck.
Today, Tesla started reaching out to Cybertruck owners to let them know that it won’t make Autosteer available for Cybertruck owners who haven’t bought FSD:
“As we improve our Autopilot technology, our feature sets will change. Accordingly, Autosteer will not be available for Cybertruck outside of Full Self-Driving (Supervised).“
Instead, Tesla offers a year of free FSD trial to Cybertruck owners.
More details in the article.
My favorite part is how they’re now saying both "full self-driving’ and “supervised”.
Archive link: https://archive.is/1w64R
Buy from a con-man, get conned. Whoop-de-doo-de-doo.
Tesla is the Fyre Festival of automotive manufacturers, except in this case Billy has managed to keep the kite in the air for an astonishingly long time.
Come on now, why the stupid hot takes like this?
Without Tesla electric vehicles would still be in the dark ages. Think whatever you want about Musk, but what he did for electric vehicles with Tesla cannot be understated or taken away. He revolutionised the entire industry and kickstarted the EV path we’re on.
what he did for electric vehicles with Tesla cannot be understated
I think you meant to say “cannot be overstated.” “Cannot be understated” means the opposite of the point you’re trying to make.
He definitely lit a fire under the asses of the traditional automakers, no doubt. But then he consistently threw away every advantage his company had, one after another.
Had they developed a normal-ass pickup truck they could’ve beaten the Lightning F-150 to market. But no, because Musk wanted to make a car as stupid and ill-advised as the DeLorean DMC-12 it resembles, design time took so long that by the time the thing hit the streets it wasn’t what truck owners wanted or what Tesla owners wanted. There was already an EV version of the best-selling pickup truck in the world. And he had, by that point, thoroughly torched his image among the people most likely to buy his cars.
Tesla definitely accelerated the development of EV models and infrastructure, but I personally think it’s easy to overstate Elon’s impact.
Elon Musk clearly has enourmous skillset at managing startups from their early stages though their explosive growth stages. He’s successfully done so both with Tesla and SpaceX. Unfortunately his management skills are clearly incompatible with running a large company that makes up a notable portion of a market. He should have stepped away from Tesla about a decade ago (possibly as much as 15 years ago). He should have stepped away from SpaceX about 5 years ago. He should be known for growing a promising disruptive startup into a true market player then immediately handing the reigns away and moving onto the next startup, but his ego is simply too big for that, and he doesn’t seem to have the introspection to see the damage he’s doing to the companies he built up
Hasn’t basically bought his way into pretty much everything but paypal?
You’re right re:overstated, thanks for the correction.
Tesla didn’t want to build a regular pickup truck. They wanted to build something different, essentially a concept car. That should be applauded imo as a car fanatic.
No one in the history of the world has been more influential for electric cars than Elon Musk. I don’t think that’s even slightly debatable.
Isn’t Supervised Full Self-Driving an oxymoron? How can it be both Supervised and Full Self-Driving?
It can’t be both. It’s not self-driving. That’s just what they call it to oversell it. I’m assuming they had to add the “Supervised” part for legal reasons.
They should get fined for being ambiguous and be forced to call it what it is.
It’s called what it is because of the laws that demand any self driving/automated driving be “supervised” and require regular checks that the driver is paying attention.
You’re essentially saying that Tesla should be made to do something that they’re already doing.
Supervised self driving would be fine. “Full self driving” means SAE level 4 or 5, which the Tesla autopilot isn’t, and they don’t need “supervised” in the name as they are specifically for a situations where there simply is no driver - like a robotaxi - so there can be no supervision.
Autopilot and FSD are completely different things.
FSD (Supervised) is not for situations where there is no driver - it’s for situations where the driver wants to just supervise while the car drives itself.
Where is this confusion around FSD and autopilot coming from all of a sudden?
FSD (Supervised) is not for situations where there is no driver - it’s for situations where the driver wants to just supervise while the car drives itself.
The “(Supervised) Full Self Driving” isn’t for situations where the car is Full Self Driving, because Tesla has no functionality that meets SAE level 3/4/5 requirements for Full Self Driving. If you must supervise the driving, then it’s not full self driving.
Not a confusing naming at all.
If you must supervise the driving, then it’s not full self driving
You’re just making your own rules up now lol. You also don’t seem to understand what “supervised” means, nor the laws around cars and drivers. Teslas FSD is in use on roads now. Fully driverless cars are not legally allowed yet - they all need to have a driver in the drivers seat supervising, even if they literally never have to do a single thing.
No it’s not.
It fully drives itself, but legally you need to “supervise” it. It’s called that because of the laws around driving a car.
It’s absolutely pitiful that they can’t figure out lane-keeping when a cars a fraction of the price have it.
It’s also a huge red flag that they are shipping “self driving” but can’t do lane keep assist.
Oh they know how to do it. They are just desperate to swindle existing owners since their vehicle sales have fallen off a cliff.
I don’t think they can, because they’re suffering so much from the rectal-cranial inversion that Musk started with his FSD.
Muskrat insists on using computer vision entirely, and building it in-house. Tesla (probably EM) as I recall also insulted MobilEye so they refuse to do business with them. Mind you, I think lane keeping is generally a computer vision problem.
FSD has lane-keeping in it. It’s not up for debate if they can do it or not, because they’ve been doing it for years.
Also I’m not sure what other technology you think they would use for lane-keeping other than cameras and “computer vision”? Things like Lidar don’t work for this because lidar can’t see lane markers. The only way to do it is with cameras.
Both. You can use both LiDAR and optical teaming, the technologies complement each other so you don’t fall for a Looney-Tunes ass painted wall, while the camera covers the one-dimensional recognition that LiDAR can’t.
[Tesla] removed radars from its vehicle lineup and even deactivated already installed radars in existing vehicles. This strategy has not yet been worth it since Tesla’s systems are still stuck at level 2 driver assist systems.
Lidar does not help with seeing lane markers. At all. Radar can’t see painted lines on a road.
That looney tunes wall “test” was ridiculous and Rober was rightly raked over the coals and lost a lot of respect over it. It was basically a marketing stunt by his friends LiDAR company, and was full of dishonesty such as poorly photoshopped phones and lies such as not even using the self driving while smashing into the wall. These glaring flaws have been covered extensively.
Honestly, while not a scientifically rigerous test, it does demonstrate through absurdity the real risks of computer vision only for driver assist features.
Real world examples including of course the Tesla that plowed into a white truck on a foggy day because it mistook the truck for absolutely nothing among too many others
If only they didn’t fake it to get their desired result, then maybe it could have been useful.
I agree that LiDAR and other technologies should be used in conjunction with regular cameras. I don’t know why anyone would be against that unless they have vested interests. For various reasons though I understand that it isn’t always possible - price being a big one.
They’ve “figured out” lane-keeping - they’re just keeping it reserved for FSD. It’s in FSD. They’re just now flipping to not offer it as a standalone feature, which don’t get me wrong is a shitty move.
Is that the same lane-keeping that Full-Self-Drives into concrete barriers? https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/08/tech/tesla-trial-wrongful-death-walter-huang
Autopilot != full self driving, firstly
Secondly, well done you found that the software in testing wasn’t perfect. Gold Star for you!
Class action goes brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
I’m sure there’s some bullshit fine print about binding arbitration. It’s so cool that corporations can just say “we waive your fundamental rights because we feel like it” and it’s just…legal. Greatest country on earth.
Companies can say whatever they want in their fine print but it’s not legally binding. If you want to do a class action over this, go for it.
