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

Yes and in 2019 Musk's claims went even further, when he claimed it was stupid to buy anything but Tesla, because next year (2020) You would be able to make money on it as a RoboTaxi. As I recall it was $200,000.- you should be able to make on a Tesla per year!!! Why he sold them then is a bit strange?
He also claimed that instead of losing value, a Tesla would increase as much as five times in value in a year, because FSD was worth that much.

How this man hasn't been jailed for fraud years ago is beyond me, I could understand if USA was a corrupt country for the rich...
oh... Never mind.

205

I think he truly believed all that. He did not lie, he was wrong about the future. Or at least that would be his legal defense.

39
- Except he claimed Tesla had the technology working NOW in 2019. Which is a factually false statement not about beliefs.
  
  66
- There are plenty of bosses like him out there. Completely high on their own shit. He reads about technology in a sci-fi book, and thinks he can Steve Jobs into bullying workers into making it a reality. Completely deludes himself into thinking it’s real and sells it to investors with full confidence. He has no idea of the actual technical challenges and fully convinces himself his genius brain could figure it out if he wasn’t so “busy” all the time. Everything is perpetually just 6 months away.
  
  24
- Funny how rich people can get away with that. I could say I fully believe I’m going to win $50 million in the lottery next week, buy a bunch of shit I can’t pay for, and probably wind up jailed pretty shortly thereafter and nobody would bat an eye. Rich guy selling vaporware? No problem, he just believed his own hype train. Sorry, investors.
  
  19
- He's claimed before that he honestly believes it each year by watching the progress the past X months, but suddenly all progress stops as their method hits a plateau. So they keep changing methods.
  
  It's probably an honest mistake the first time or two, but he's done this every year since and has no credibility anymore.
  
  After being wrong by a year or two, he should have explained what was going in, and shut up about it, with a simple I don't know when it'll be ready but you should see forward progress each year.
  
  17
- I really believed that...
  
  Uh-huh... There is a long, LONG list of bullshit that he believed, and continues to believe. There comes a point where we either have to accept that he has the mental level of a 5 year old believing in Santa Claus, or that he is a narcissistic compulsive liar.
  
  7
Now watch as Musk faces "consequences(TM)".

Why, he might have to pay a fine of a full hour's worth of profits that resulted from his actions!?

15
He's a military contractor.

5
- Yes with Starlink which the military threatened they might nationalize if Musk sabotaged Ukraine access again.
  I honestly don't think Musk's value as a military contractor is very high, and probably (hopefully) not enough to protect him from criminal liability.
  
  12

But LoSavio had opted out of the arbitration agreement and was given the option of filing an amended complaint.

This is why it’s important to opt out of arbitration!

Also notice the potential for fuckery in the statute of limitations here:

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."

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."

Without that specific moment to point to, to reset the clock through delayed discovery, Tesla could just say “Yeah, we lied, but you bought the lie for 5 years, so now we’re in the clear!”

45

Fuck the Musk and his inflated ego.

24

The part of the claim here where they wouldn't upgrade the cameras is a part that I'm highly interested in.

I don't expect tesla to upgrade any hardware beyond what they believe is required which they claim hardware 3 is.

But the moment a hardware 3 car can't flip a switch and become level 3/4 SAE autonomous and a hardware 4, 5, 6 or whatever it is if/when solved is required, I think there's a massive lawsuit there unless Tesla somehow upgrades the cars.

Suddenly the car didn't come with the hardware required and can't function as described, especially back when it was announced.

Tesla will say, oh we'll get it working on HW3 next year... and try to kick the can to avoid liability, but I don't think that will work long.

Edit: and as per the ruling, it sounds like the new knowledge that the car can't on HW3 but can on others, would trigger new knowledge opening up past the statute of limitations

19

Finally?

18

Sorry Tesla but every captcha about bicycles and street lights was just too good an opportunity to be bad! LOL ... bicycle! 🚲 Nah! That's just 🛣️ road! Continue!

14

That's not how FSD works. It's a neural net trained on millions of hours of video content of good human driving. Nowhere in the code is even specified what a bicycle is.

-5
- You train neuronal networks with labeled data and those captchas are used to create the labels. Its not specified in the code what a bicycle is, but in the training data.
  
  10
- Is that why it runs stop signs?
  
  9

Hahahahah fuck Elon’s fraudster ass

13

Not for all the money in the world could you convince me to touch him, let alone what you propose.

5
- Eh, I'd give him a poke.
  
  2

This is the best summary I could come up with:

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.

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."

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."

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."

The original article contains 509 words, the summary contains 185 words. Saved 64%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

11

They're faking it until they make it!

10

bye bye elon

9

He is rich all there will be is a minimal fine

5

I bet if this goes to trial his lawyers are just going to argue that no reasonable person would believe these claims. That is just hyperbole there for it is not fraud.

8

Maybe, but you could easily argue that no reasonable CEO would make such claims. And any company that size should have levels of review and therefore liability if there were people who clearly knew it was false.

5
- Totally, though the hyperbole defense is real and much easier to argue. They will just say that Musk is part hype man for Tesla. Rhetorical hyperbole has been confirmed by the supreme Court to be a first amendment protected activity. You may feel this is dumb, but was also how John Oliver was able to repeatedly tell Bob Murray to eat shit.
  
  2

Permanently Deleted

4

Interesting. https://youtu.be/rPt9hAC24MI?feature=shared

3

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/rPt9hAC24MI?feature=shared

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

2

Ironically this comes at a time when FSD is getting so good that the car does indeed practically drive itself. It's still level 2 but the amount of driver interventions reguired to reach your destination has dropped to near zero. I don't think we're very far at all from an actual robotaxi and the ability to use your personal vehicle as such.

-23

Meanwhile Mercedes has already reached level 3.

13
- The link you didn't open has a video comparing Tesla and Mercedes driving the exact same route on autopilot.
  
  -4
Still ignoring the fact that this technology was advertised to arrive by 2017. It’s seven years overdue.

That’s false advertising.

8
- It’s seven years overdue so far.
  
  FIFY.
  
  7
- I don't know what this has to do with what I said. It's long overdue, yes. It was false advertising, yes. It's incredibly good nowdays, yes. Several things can be true at the same time.
  
  -5
As I explained somebody else the other day, software development follows a 90/10 rule in that 90% of the work that needs doing is in the last 10% of the result and these guys have been stuck for years at the "almost there" stage.

It's perfectly possible to hack your way for the first easy 90% of the result but that software development "method" won't get you up to the 99.999% levels of reliability (or whatever number of nines the regulations demand) needed for a FSD system to be certified as autonomous.

So no amount of people showing full self drive working without problems sometimes or even most of the time (or as you say, "practically") will show that Testla has the capability of doing the last 10% (which, remember, is most of the work), whilst them having been stuck at pretty much the current level for years is a good indication that they're probably stuck down a dead-end that will never lead to something that can achieve the necessary reliability to be certified as an autonomous system.

Also, in my professional opinion as a very senior software engineer, looking from the outside and judging by many software and UI design choices in their vehicles, they're unlikelly to actually be competent enough to pull it off and seem to be following a Tech Startup model (and I can tell you from experience in that Industry and others, that Startups are usually amateur hour, every hour of the day, every day of the week, every week of the year compared to all of the rest) hence me mentioning above the possibility that they've might have "hacked" (i.e. mainly gone at it by trial and error) their way up the first 90%.

7
Can't wait to take a real life Johnnycab.

Exactly the same price as a normal taxi (if not higher, because there's no competition left), but now all the money goes to needy Silicon Valley trillionaires, rather than some greedy low life taxi driver who just wants to waste that money on food and rent, rather than lovely sustaining growth.

5
- That taxi might just aswell belong to a a private individual who instead of leaving their car at the company parking lot for the whole day sent it doing ridesharing.
  
  -1
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

drive itself

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

1