Skip to content

Tesla bait-and-switch: Cybertruck owners won't get Autosteer feature they paid for

Technology
24 13 0
  • Bait and switch is a specific type type of fraud.

    Yes but bait and switch has less negative connotations and implies some cleverness on the part of the fraduster. Nothing even remotely clever was done here, Tesla made a deal and then flat out broke it Trump Style.

  • 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

    Lmao they put lane-keeping assist behind a marketing-wank paywall for their already expensive EVs - something manufacturers like Subaru and Hyundai has made standard across their entire line for years now

    What a sad joke this company has become, another example of failed leadership valuing yes-men and sycophancy

  • Yes but bait and switch has less negative connotations and implies some cleverness on the part of the fraduster. Nothing even remotely clever was done here, Tesla made a deal and then flat out broke it Trump Style.

    Bait and switch is literally promosing something and fhen replacing it with something else, which is what happened here. It doesn't imply any cleverness and has eextremely negative connotations.

  • Bait and switch is literally promosing something and fhen replacing it with something else, which is what happened here. It doesn't imply any cleverness and has eextremely negative connotations.

    Cultural difference perhaps? I've always known it to be more specific, still roughly that but usually the replacement item is visually very similar and the victim accepts it after previously being shown a similar but non-shitty version. Like those black friday TVs you get in the US that look just like the brand name ones people expect them to be but are actually shittier electronics shoved into the same casings. The switch is meant to happen before purchase.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Lmao they put lane-keeping assist behind a marketing-wank paywall for their already expensive EVs - something manufacturers like Subaru and Hyundai has made standard across their entire line for years now

    What a sad joke this company has become, another example of failed leadership valuing yes-men and sycophancy

    I rode in a 2019 Subaru Ascent (like a big Outback) a few years ago, the lane keep assist was great even back then, not to mention the blind spot monitoring and all that. and it was all included. wtf is Tesla even doing with all that time and money??

  • I rode in a 2019 Subaru Ascent (like a big Outback) a few years ago, the lane keep assist was great even back then, not to mention the blind spot monitoring and all that. and it was all included. wtf is Tesla even doing with all that time and money??

    I love mine. Combined with adaptive cruise, it’s amazing for slowly rolling traffic, longer journeys, and stop-and-go traffic. I’m under no impression the car is ‘driving’ but having a machine take over the mental load is great and frees up that capacity for other driving tasks and/or awareness of the road.

    Tesla calling that technology “Auto” anything without it being genuinely 100% autonomous should have landed someone a fat fine or jail time

  • Isn't Supervised Full Self-Driving an oxymoron? How can it be both Supervised and Full Self-Driving?

    The actual answer: It should be Level 4 autonomy. It is capable of full self driving, but only in certain conditions.

    Do note that Tesla autopilot is actually only SAE level 2, so it's just a straight up lie 🙂

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Isn't Supervised Full Self-Driving an oxymoron? How can it be both Supervised and Full Self-Driving?

    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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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.

  • 55 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zoneC
    !upliftingnews@lemmy.world
  • Things at Tesla are worse than they appear

    Technology technology
    34
    1
    419 Stimmen
    34 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    halcyon@discuss.tchncs.deH
    [image: a4f3b70f-db20-4c1d-b737-611548cf3104.jpeg]
  • The Enshitification of Youtube’s Full Album Playlists

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    108 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    dual_sport_dork@lemmy.worldD
    Especially when the poster does not disclose that it's AI. The perpetual Youtube rabbit hole occasionally lands on one of these for me when I leave it unsupervised, and usually you can tell from the "cover" art. But only if you're looking at it. Because if you just leave it going in the background eventually you start to realize, "Wow, this guy really tripped over the fine line between a groove and rut." Then you click on it and look: Curses! Foiled again. And golly gee, I'm sure glad Youtube took away the option to oughtright block channels. I'm sure that's a total coincidence. W/e. I'm a have-it-on-my-hard-drive kind of bird. Yt-dlp is your friend. Just use it to nab whatever it is you actually want and let your own media player decide how to shuffle and present it. This works great for big name commercial music as well, whereupon the record labels are inevitably dumb enough to post songs and albums in their entirety right there you Youtube. Who even needs piracy sites at that rate? Yoink!
  • CrowdStrike Announces Layoffs Affecting 500 Employees

    Technology technology
    8
    1
    243 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    S
    This is where the magic of near meaningless corpo-babble comes in. The layoffs are part of a plan to aspirationally acheive the goal of $10b revenue by EoY 2025. What they are actually doing is a significant restructuring of the company, refocusing by outside hiring some amount of new people to lead or be a part of departments or positions that haven't existed before, or are being refocused to other priorities... ... But this process also involves laying off 500 of the 'least productive' or 'least mission critical' employees. So, technically, they can, and are, arguing that their new organizational paradigm will be so succesful that it actually will result in increased revenue, not just lower expenses. Generally corpos call this something like 'right-sizing' or 'refocusing' or something like that. ... But of course... anyone with any actual experience with working at a place that does this... will tell you roughly this is what happens: Turns out all those 'grunts' you let go of, well they actually do a lot more work in a bunch of weird, esoteric, bandaid solutions to keep everything going, than upper management was aware of... because middle management doesn't acknowledge or often even understand that that work was being done, because they are generally self-aggrandizing narcissist petty tyrants who spend more time in meetings fluffing themselves up than actually doing any useful management. Then, also, you are now bringing on new, outside people who look great on paper, to lead new or modified apartments... but they of course also do not have any institutional knowledge, as they are new. So now, you have a whole bunch of undocumented work that was being done, processes which were being followed... which is no longer being done, which is not documented.... and the new guys, even if they have the best intentions, now have to spend a quarter or two or three figuring out just exactly how much pre-existing middle management has been bullshitting about, figuring out just how much things do not actually function as they ssid it did... So now your efficiency improving restructuring is actually a chaotic mess. ... Now, this 'right sizing' is not always apocalyptically extremely bad, but it is also essentially never totally free from hiccups... and it increases stress, workload, and tensions between basically everyone at the company, to some extent. Here's Forbes explanation of this phenomenon, if you prefer an explanation of right sizing in corpospeak: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/rightsizing/
  • WhatsApp provides no cryptographic management for group messages

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    17 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    S
    Just be sure to add only the people you want to be there. I've heard some people add others and it's a bit messy
  • 31 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    J
    Apparently, it was required to be allowed in that state: Reading a bit more, during the sentencing phase in that state people making victim impact statements can choose their format for expression, and it's entirely allowed to make statements about what other people would say. So the judge didn't actually have grounds to deny it. No jury during that phase, so it's just the judge listening to free form requests in both directions. It's gross, but the rules very much allow the sister to make a statement about what she believes her brother would have wanted to say, in whatever format she wanted. From: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/18471175 influence the sentence From what I've seen, to be fair, judges' decisions have varied wildly regardless, sadly, and sentences should be more standardized. I wonder what it would've been otherwise.
  • Apple Watch Shipments’ Continuous Decline

    Technology technology
    10
    1
    22 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    A
    i mean as a core feature of a watch/smartwatch in general. garmin is going above and beyond compared to the competition in that area, and that's great. But that doesn't mean every other smartwatch manufacturer arbitrarily locking traditional watch features behind paywalls. and yeah apple does fitness themed commercials for apple watch because it does help with fitness a ton out of the box. just not specifically guided workouts.
  • 12 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    F
    The new Pebble watches look interesting. Relatively basic, but long battery life (they promise) and open-source operating system.