You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You’re obviously not biased, completely neutral, fair, and balanced! /s“The best critics of anything are those with a deep knowledge of how the criticized things work. That made Jason Hughes a reputable source of information in the Tesla world.”
I think the article is informative in explaining the recent inappropriate FSD price increase.No offense but the article does not have a lot of value IMO. It's just an anti-Tesla hit piece. So autoevolution.com apparently found a guy who repairs Teslas and who thinks FSD is trash and wrote a piece sharing his personal opinion. That's not to say that there aren't maybe some valid points. I happen to agree that Tesla is wrong to increase the price of FSD to $15k. And there are hyperbulls on Twitter who think FSD should be raised even further to $25k! LOL. But most of us know that Tesla has failed to deliver on the promise of full autonomy. So an article just telling us how terrible Tesla is because FSD is not full autonomy, is not telling us anything new.
It doesn't explain anything. It's just saying it happened, and then getting a juicy soundbite and appealing to authority by quoting a respected Tesla hacker saying what you don't need to be a Tesla hacker to say. Then adding that if it were better it'd be dangerous anyway because it'd make people complacent, because it has made people complacent. (Never mind the huge distracted driving problem that is a complacency problem.)I think the article is informative in explaining the recent inappropriate FSD price increase.
It's about money. If Tesla didn't increase the price to $15,000, I doubt there would be a timely piece on the "cash grab."It doesn't explain anything.
...you don't need to be a Tesla hacker to say...
A different approach to the $15,000 FSD news:This is news?...
It's about money. If Tesla didn't increase the price to $15,000, I doubt there would be a timely piece on the "cash grab."
$15,000 didn't happen before. It happens now, so that is news.
It's similar to when Elon never said he's a free speech absolutist before, but once he said it, there are hit pieces released to prove the opposite.
Many owners jumped on the bandwagon and rejoiced when Tesla announced it would delete radar.
They believe Tesla has good taste in how to choose the correct hardware for the job, but the article says:
“nothing Tesla's produced to-date is capable of, no matter how much software they release, being a driverless robotaxi. The hardware is simply not capable of that level of safety.”
From the article. Definitely a misrepresentation of the facts.Hughes didn’t even mention that FSD has a pretty bizarre ownership model: it does not belong to the car it is associated with nor to the people paying for it. If an FSD buyer sells the car with the software, they do not get to keep it if they buy a new Tesla. The vehicle's new owner also does not get it: it simply vanishes. The only logical conclusion possible is that only Tesla owns the software. Anything you pay for it – a monthly subscription fee or $15,000 – is just a use license.