If you read through my reply and the specific statements that Elon or Tesla has made, with the exception of HW2.5 and early HW3 (in which they provided monetary compensation in terms of enhanced trade in and upgrade options), statements beyond that are pretty clear to be future and forward thinking. I specifically quoted them above.

>You should be paid by him with the time you use at protecting him from his own crap.

I'm simply articulating the facts of what have actually been said and done without the emotional interpretation. Terms like "lie" and "false marketing" and "illegal" have specific meaning.

I don't want to rehash all of the actual quotes they've made, I did that in a prior reply. Those statements stand on their own and I'm not defending them in any way, only to say that with exception of the 2.5/early 3HW, they did not read as "promises or guarantees" or even definitive timelines in any way.

There is an active case to determine "claims accusing the electric vehicle maker of misleading them about the capabilities of its full self-driving technology", that as of this morning the US appeals court (a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court) did not qualify for class action status. So legally the courts would be the right venue to make that determination.

He has a long enough track record of actually delivering. Elon is not a new entity with an unknown track record. He's been active in running and growing companies for 31 years. He's been involved with Tesla for 22 years.

You're attributing statements as lies which I feel is too strong a term as it implies intent, which as far as I can tell, doesn't exist.

>He made the promise in 2019! HW3 will almost certainly never have unsupervised FSD

In the same vein of calling something a "lie", you anchor to another strong term "promise", which is also not applicable in this case.

What Elon actually said is that HW3 "had everything needed for Full Self-Driving"

In 2016, Tesla officially announced that all vehicles then in production had “the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver.”

Elon followed up that "All Tesla cars being produced right now have everything necessary for full self-driving. All you need to do is improve the software."

Both of those statements are true and HW3 is active with FSD today.

He went on record stating:

"Anyone who purchased full self-driving will get FSD computer upgrade for free. This is the only change between Autopilot HW2.5 & HW3. Going forward “HW3” will just be called FSD Computer, which is accurate. No change to vehicle sensors or wire harness needed. This is v important. "

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1111762533520531456

He also honored this. Customers that purchased HW3 and the FSD package were provided upgrades when needed to support the modern 14.x FSD releases.

You're correct that they stated that HW3 would provide unsupervised self driving, when it was technically and legally possible and did publicly reverse course on that.

"Unfortunately, Hardware 3, I wish it were otherwise, but Hardware 3 simply does not have the capability to achieve unsupervised FSD. We did think at one point it would have that, but relative to Hardware 4 it has only 1/8th of the memory bandwidth of Hardware 4. And memory bandwidth is one of the key elements needed for unsupervised FSD."

This isn't a "lie" to plan for something and have those plans fall through, the intent was to deliver and it didn't happen.

He followed up that HW3 owners who bought FSD would get options like a discounted trade-in toward HW4/AI4 cars or a computer + camera retrofit (which would require special facilities). HW3 cars continue to receive supervised FSD updates (including a “Lite” version of later software), but unsupervised FSD is off the table without new hardware.

So providing monetary compensation in terms of trade in options or retrofits in support of transitioning them to unsupervised when available.

If we've already established that he makes ambitious goals and sometimes delivers late or pivots as needed due to technical or legal limitations, I'm not sure what you're on about.

Your tone suggests he is selling snake oil and never delivering, which just isn't the case. His companies have been years ahead of the competition in space and electric vehicle tech and self driving.

>But he also promised FSD rideshare in 2016, which arguably makes it even worse of a broken promise.

Saying something in 2016 does not make it a promise to deliver in 2016.

What he actually said:

"I think we are less than two years away from complete autonomy, safer than humans, but regulations should take at least another year."

He also described autonomous driving as "basically a solved problem."

Both those statements are true.. Tesla's are (and have been for years) safer than human drivers with FSD enabled, and those like me that are 99% FSD consider it full autonomous for all practical purposes. Yes I can't sleep in the car, but I get in, verbally say where I want to go and don't touch the controls.. it backs out, drives me, parks and I get out. Every day, thousands and thousands of FSD miles a month on a car I bought in 2023.

>Ten years later not only is it still a broken promise, they're actively working to ship a product that isn't what they promised.

To the contrary, again, what he actually said was:

"As the technology matures, all Tesla vehicles will have the hardware necessary to be fully self-driving with fail-operational capability, meaning that any given system in the car could break and your car will still drive itself safely. When true self-driving is approved by regulators, it will mean that you will be able to summon your Tesla from pretty much anywhere. Once it picks you up, you will be able to sleep, read or do anything else en route to your destination. You will also be able to add your car to the Tesla shared fleet just by tapping a button on the Tesla phone app and have it generate income for you while you’re at work or on vacation, significantly offsetting and at times potentially exceeding the monthly loan or lease cost. In cities where demand exceeds the supply of customer-owned cars, Tesla will operate its own fleet…"

These are all factual statements.. given we've already established aggressive timelines that don't match reality, it really is just beating a dead horse.

Deriving statements like

"The basic news is that all Tesla vehicles exiting the factory have the hardware necessary for Level 5 autonomy… Every car we make… are shipping now with Level 5, meaning hardware capable of full self-driving, or driverless, capability. "

and

"Our goal is, and I feel pretty good about this goal, that we’ll be able to do a demonstration drive of full autonomy all the way from LA to New York, from home in LA to let’s say dropping you off in Times Square in New York, and then having the car go park itself, by the end of next year. Without the need for a single touch, including the charger.”"

Most of that has already happened:

In 2025

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-fsd-successfully-completes-f...

And again in 2026

https://www.thedrive.com/news/a-tesla-actually-drove-itself-...

The Banish (drop you off and park) is not publicly available yet (regulations/operational) and wireless charging is just now being rolled out.. but again, the substance of his statement is true and will evolve over time to be fully realized.

So if you're arguing he has "pathological optimism" of overstating delivery times, I agree fully.

But suggesting he is lying or intentionally breaking promises within his control, I don't agree.

While I can appreciate, and he has joked publicly about having "pathological optimism," that he is more aggressive with timelines than the reality of the alignment between technology, practicality (cost, etc.), and regulations, most of what you have listed continues to be progressively released.

Is he careful with his speech in terms of distinguishing a "big audacious goal" from a shipping reality in the near term? Absolutely not.

So going through some of your list..

>automatic charging snake (you left off hot swappable batteries btw)

So prototypes were made and demoed, but ultimately they landed with wireless charging pads.. they are already starting to deploy this for real world testing.

https://www.teslaoracle.com/2026/08/19/tesla-tsla-gears-up-f...

>your car picking you up and dropping you off

I'll preface this that I'm nearing 99% FSD on my Tesla, and most of that 1% was the early miles when I first got it.

Robotaxis exist and hundreds of them in multiple cities are autonomously driving passengers every day. They continue to scale those numbers monthly.

They also have 14 billion FSD miles and growing.

I use summon every day to have my Tesla unpark itself and pick me up at the front door of my office. Short of me holding down a "come to me" button on my phone, it performs this action fully autonomous.

Banish (the opposite that sends the car away) exists but is not publicly available due to safety, operational and regulatory reasons (for example where does the car go if it can't find a parking spot?)

Currently this tech is limited to line of sight (~200 Feet) but the speed and distance continues to increase over time with updates.. again as the tech and regulations come together. Eventually, as we see with Robotaxi, the ability to drive you to work, drop you off, go back home and park and return when you're off work is not science fiction. The end to end solution exists today, the technology and laws/regulation need to come together.

If your complaint is that cars purchased in 2016 can't do this, sure I'll concede.. but modem HW4 is more than capable and the tech and laws are continuing to adapt.

>renting out

A far future vision sold as near term, for sure.. but it's not a matter of if but when as tech and regulations close the gap. Robotaxis are essentially doing this today.

These are not "empty promises" more so than long term visions (that do manifest) sold as short term shippable options.

They've since scales the rollout to include Pro.

While arguing against using the tool as designed.

https://claude.com/blog/using-claude-md-files

"CLAUDE.md files solve this by giving Claude persistent context about your project. A well-configured CLAUDE.md transforms how Claude works with your specific project. The file serves multiple purposes: providing architectural context, establishing workflows, and connecting Claude to your development tools. Each addition should solve a real problem you have encountered, not theoretical concerns about what Claude might need."

Guess I'll take my negative 4 votes for suggesting that reuters may be a better primary source. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"Tesla lines up $30 billion credit lines as capex, AI push accelerate"

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...

Electrek's full time job is to dunk on anything Elon Musk touches.

You can find the event video here:

https://x.com/SawyerMerritt/status/2095687786309341612

They've also opened up for this interested to buying and managing a privately owned fleet:

https://www.tesla.com/robotaxi/interest

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49559775

Points: 2

# Comments: 2

They indiacte their development staff are using it, and they access it via API, then then go on to say all the nefarious things they "could" be doing, stopping before stating they actually are.

Specifically the TOS violation was:

>customers are barred from using the service to “build a competing product or service"

So if you are building a competitive product, that alone is a TOS violation from their perspective.

Which is fine and their prerogative, but we shouldn't cast a dark cloud suggesting other violations were happening without stated evidence.

OpenAI publicly stated they can't "trust that xAI will use it within terms" not even that they've violated, not that there has been a violation from the Cursor team.

https://www.teslarati.com/openai-cites-distrust-of-spacex-in...

>OpenAI said the decision came down to trust, not technology. “We cannot be confident that SpaceX will use our technology within our terms of service"

That thread you linked suggested they were using it with cursor as part of their development process, not for distilling.

>"Hi team, I believe many of you have already discovered that anthropic models are not responding on cursor. According to cursor this is a new policy anthropic is enforcing for all its major competitors."

Showing everything is not viable under those competing goals. So they have settled on:

Show the post when someone has a direct link, but require login to see the discussion Show a limited number of recent posts on a profile, and require login for more

Raising that limit from 6 to 10 would not solve the real complaint: “I cannot see communication from my city.”

They already identify government official accounts. One simple option is to extend the visible timeline for those accounts only—six months or a year of posts—while still keeping discussions behind a login.

For example you can view the main post and included links in incognito not logged in, just not the "discussion"

https://x.com/ManCityCouncil/status/2091903421917892994?s=20

This still exists and I get it every day. It is the floor for my feed. I have to refresh or close the app and reopen to fetch more.

They're slowly adding some of that functionality in, but obviously relies on third party adoption for anything more than UI automated control:

https://www.androidauthority.com/gemini-automation-control-o...

https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/products/gemini-app/an...

Duck Duck Go is really what's wrong with modern dating culture.