Tesla and SpaceX Reputations Plummet in Major Poll

[BannedByTMC]

You think he is just making stuff up for funzies?

It's been proven to be the case that he has at best massively exaggerated the claimed savings. Some would call that lying. Of course you won't read those sources, just as you won't see this post.

Sponsored

 

[REM]

Dude, the condom thing was patently obviously false to even a casual observer - anyone paying a second of attention could know it was impossible to be true

Are you serious?

Impossible? So there's no possible way the people that lord over us have slush funds to line their own pockets, and use "condoms for [foreign country] for the ledger"?

If you want to make statements like that, then bring receipts.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

This is a factual statement. They released the first public version of FSD, and all new cars rolling off the line were capable of running it.

What about that don't you understand?

Which part was a "lie"?

So wrong in so many ways. First the promise that all cars made from 2016 forward could run it wasn’t true - some had to get new computers first. The actual release of the first thing even called FSD did not occur until more than FOUR years later, in October 2020. Yet he had said in 2017 that the 2016 and subsequent cars could run real FSD at some point when the software was developed - without supervision, reading a book, which was how MUSK defined FSD at the time in so many words - not the beta versions of advanced AP that some, but definitely not all of the cars did eventually run, poorly. The “FSD” version released for my ‘19 MX version was worse than a drunk teenager and in no way was FSD. Fun, but drunk. It certainly wasn’t FSD as he defined it publicly, and you do not get a mulligan for the false claim that it was FSD and therefore the cars ran it and he’s off the hook. Not even close. It is MOST DEFINITELY NOT a factual statement. Read again how Musk defined FSD. We have never had a product that comes close to FSD as Musk defined it.

Every Tesla made from October 2016 to April 2019 had HW2 - also known as the AP hardware. None of them has ever run any version of FSD except a very few that got upgrades to the new CPU. Due to camera and other sensor limitations, they lost support almost immediately, and none have been upgraded (hardware or software) in years at this point. None of them run current “FSD” as Tesla currently defines it, much less the version that Musk said they would eventually run.

No cars built before HW4 will EVER be able to do the FSD that Musk and Tesla promised IN WRITING as I showed above. Not one pre-HW4 vehicle - and perhaps not some or any HW4 cars. I am less sure of that and the jury is out, but the fact is that not one of the cars he initially said could run FSD can run even today’s version of FSD, much less the true unsupervised version he referenced at the first 2016 introductions where he made the claim recorded on video, in his Plan 2, and reiterated in writing on Tesla’s “blog” (actually press release) webpage, that every 2016 HW2 car produced going forward could do so, at least eventually. That was and is false, and always will be false.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

Are you serious?

Impossible? So there's no possible way the people that lord over us have slush funds to line their own pockets, and use "condoms for [foreign country] for the ledger"?

If you want to make statements like that, then bring receipts.

The receipts were brought and displayed. You are in full denial, obfuscating, diverting. Where are YOUR receipts that the money was spent for something else nefarious? I happen to agree it is likely, but there is zero proof of that, and it ISN’T what Musk alleged anyway. So you try to divert attention by saying, yes but, it was bad anyway, for other suspected reasons. Yet it was ALSO a LIE - the subject at hand here. Your diversion is an admission that he did in fact lie. Do you not even know the real source of the mistake he made? How it came to be? Read a little.

 

[ThatGuyBo]

You want me to provide evidence for a claim that someone else is making? Interesting.

Here is a .gov website you can consider:
https://craiggoldman.house.gov/DOGE

You are claiming he is wrong. Prove it, it shouldn't be hard.

Where does it provide sources for what was in question? It doesn't. It's not on that page. No mention of that spending approval or the condoms.

Again, provide a source for the specific claim we are discussing. Stop avoiding, redirecting, and strawmanning. If you cannot provide one, own it.

Also, to be clear, that page you linked fails to actually source the spending via congressional approval, everything DOGE has looked into is available via a .gov link with actual documentation such as congress.gov. The links from your link are mostly to Fox News and other outlets that cite DOGE, lacking any sources to review what is being stated.

Again, provide evidence..

These would be where you could find the information I am asking you to present.

https://www.oversight.gov/reports/federal
https://www.congress.gov/help/appropriations-and-budget
https://www.congress.gov/appropriations

It's not incompetence, it's outright deceit. That money is earmarked for "condoms" on paper, but will definitely go to skunkworks projects where more people around the world get to enjoy the same evil doings of our government officials.

It's all a very sick, wicked system.

You are making the claim. Provide proof. You still haven't
That paper would be publicly available on Congress.gov or linked on DOGE.gov (they do provide government approval links).

first video with a timestamp:



I think what's happening here is that you guys listen to every word except the ones of him remembering to qualify his statements using "I think", "maybe", "perhaps", "we hope". "our guess".

Do you not understand the difference between a lofty goal, and what constitutes as a contractual promise? Did Elon get up on a stage and say "Hey guys, I promise you will have more features 6 months from now, and if you don't I'll give you your money back?"

Everything he relays has been a timeline based off the current sentiment from the program developers.

2nd video with a timestamp:

Is an expectation a promise? Or is it a guess based on the current data they have available?

3rd video with timestamp:


I'm going to stop there, even though you have a couple more videos with timestamps. I think we get the point.

Absolutely zero promises were made in any of those videos. If this is the strongest thing we have, then I have to say we

You aren't representing the quote honestly.

So, are you claiming the statements about HW3 being capable of feature complete FSD (level 5 autonomy) were not definitive statements? Because your quotes don't include any of what you are claiming we are misunderstanding.

Here's the full list of quotes.

Autonomy Day:

3:13:36 by the middle of next year we'll have over a million Tesla cars on the road with full self-driving Hardware feature


3:13:42 complete at a reliably level that we would consider that no one needs to pay


3:13:48 attention meaning you could go to sleep in your from our standpoint if you fast for a year should look maybe a year


3:13:55 maybe a year in three months but next year for sure we will have over


3:14:03 a million Robo taxis on the road the


3:14:10 fleet wakes up with an over-the-air update that's all it takes


3:14:20 you say what what is the net present value of a rover taxi probably on the


3:14:25 order of a couple hundred thousand dollars so buying a Model 3 is good deal

3:31:42 Colin Lang and UB s just so we


3:31:48 understand the definitions we need to refer to feature complete self-driving it sounds like you're talking level five


3:31:54 no geofence is that what's expected by the end of year just so and then the


3:31:59 regulatory process I mean have you talked to regulators about this this seems quite an aggressive timeline


3:32:04 from what other people have put out there I mean are they you know what are the hurdles that are needed and what is


3:32:10 the timeline to get approval and do you need things like in California know they're tracking miles that you know


3:32:16 what's an operator behind that do you need those things but what is that process going to look like yeah we talk to regulators around the world all the


3:32:22 time as we introduce you know additional features like a navigator an auto pilot


3:32:29 we you know this requires like in regulatory approval on a jurisdiction


3:32:36 basis so but I think fundamentally regulators my experience are convinced


3:32:42 by data so if you have a massive amount of data that shows that autonomy is safe


3:32:50 they listen to it they may take a they may take time to digest the information


3:32:55 that process may take about a bit of time but they have always come to the


3:33:01 right conclusion from what I've seen

Annual Shareholder’s meeting:

the autonomy investor day that I think was well-received that the Tesla full


35:33 self-driving computer is literally 20 times faster Victoire 21 times faster than the nvidia system that are places


35:41 and we expect to be feature complete with autonomy by the end of this year so


35:49 you know that you'll still need to supervise the autonomy but it should be


35:54 able to go from your garage to your parking space at work without intervention so then what then will will


36:03 obviously put on billions of miles of testing and then I think probably some


36:10 time next year I you'll be able to have the car be autonomous without


36:15 supervision and then sometime thereafter we'll be able to convince investigators


36:21 that this the autonomy is safe enough that the car could actually go around


36:27 with no one in it so and it's really the


36:32 critical elements for that are having billions of miles of testing ultimately


36:38 tens of billions of miles so having a huge fleet having a very powerful AI


36:44 inference engine and that's the Tesla full self-driving computer and and


36:50 having the sensors in the car that that are necessary for the car to drive like


36:57 being cameras in all directions right our ultrasonics a good I am you GPS that


37:05 kind of thing so I think we've laid the groundwork here for a fleet that


37:14 essentially every car made since October 16 is capable of full autonomy in our


37:21 view with a replacement the computer alone so you just need to switch out the computer a lot of people were puzzled as


37:29 to how can I say that we would have liked you know a million robo taxis by the end


37:35 of next year and it's if you sum up the vehicles made since October 16 and we're


37:43 essentially switched out the computers for the ones that were made after the


37:48 full self-driving computer a few months ago the we will have a million cars that


37:54 are capable of self-driving will still need regulatory approval but the


38:00 capability will be there and this this massively increases the value of the car


38:06 so in fact I think it's basically financially insane to buy anything


38:13 except an electric car that is that is upgradeable to autonomy it's just nuts

Model Y Unveil:

32:44 obviously autopilot since you know all that and uh as I've said publicly we


32:51 expect to be feature complete with uh with self-driving sometime later this year and then as as we prove out the


32:58 safety with uh billions of miles and kilometers uh uh we will uh


33:04 from our standpoint feel it's like safe enough to not pay attention and then get the regulatory approval sometime thereafter but the cool thing is feature


33:12 complete like it'll be able to do basically anything um uh biting this year just with soft


33:18 just with software upgrades which is pretty cool so

First Model 3 Handovers:

2:47 every model every Tesla being produced


2:50 right now the model 3 the Model S Model


2:53 X has has all of the hardware necessary


2:55 for full autonomy and I think a lot of


2:58 us to learn realize that it's got eight


3:00 cameras it's got a


3:02 twelve ultrasonics onarts it's got the


3:04 forward radar and it's got over ten tear


3:08 offs of computing capability that's good

You asked where Elon made the claim. I provided it.
You misrepresented the quotes.

6 years later, still not anywhere near where he claimed.
HW3 is not enough, as acknowledged by Musk in the most recent earnings call.

6 years is too long for it to be a slight misrepresentation. They were not even close to Level 5.

6 years.

You continue to not back up your claims, move the goalpost, and lie/misrepresent sources provided and statements made.

 

[REM]

The “FSD” version released for my ‘19 MX version was worse than a drunk teenager and in no way was FSD. Fun, but drunk.

Ah, so there it is! you get to make up your own definition of what FSD is and then declare yourself a righteous winner of the debate ????

This is getting beyond stupid. I'm not going to bother anymore. You are hell bent on your own version of reality, and I can't do anything for you.


But, I'm still waiting for someone to respond back to the timestamped videos above where I pointed out the exact language that was used.

And surprise, surprise... no promissory language was used. at all.

 

[REM]

You asked where Elon made the claim. I provided it.

you keep clipping half-thoughts out of context. I corrected you above, where I highlighted the keywords in yellow, large font.

At this point you are playing stupid and refuse to acknowledge the actual language and context surrounding the subject.

maybe this screenshot will help you:

Let me know if I can make it any more clear.

That language isn't a promise.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

sorry, I'm not taking your cherry picked quotes. Give me a source that I can view myself. ?‍ Did you see the response from someone else above where they provided timestamps for videos? Yeah, do something like that. But don't be like him, and find sections where you think a promise is made, and I have to go back and highlight qualified statements like "I think", "maybe", "we hope". Those things are not promises.

The paperwork you sign is a promise. (p.s. that paperwork explains terms and conditions, and it includes language like "some of the features shown are not in full release and have no guarantees).

? this the critical piece you guys keep refusing to acknowledge.

What you did in that huge wall of text above is give chatGPT this prompt:

"Elon is a liar. give me some quotes of instances where he lied". And then you copied and pasted it here lmao. So incredibly lazy.

So, are you going to actually provide context for the above, where ALL OF US CAN READ FOR OURSELVES or not? Because I'm absolutely not taking your word for it.

(you're not. you're just going to complain that I'm not taking your copy/pasta job above for the gospel)

First, there was no chatGPT or other AI involvement in in my response. I did not even google for Elon Musk lies - I went from memory, and googled only for date confirmation on my remembered Musk misstatements. I have a good memory and have been around Tesla for longer than you or most others on this forum. So that claim’s a lie - from you. I cherry picked NOTHING - I told you the source and PROVIDED THE EXACT WORD-FOR-WORD quote with dates. Yet you deny it is real and claim you’d be able to refute it. So please do so.

The first quote IS RIGHT THERE in Tesla Master Plan Part Deux, July 20 2016, written by Musk personally. It is a direct quote, yet you reject it. Dude, it is word-for-word what he wrote - he put it in writing - it wasn’t his standard extemporaneous sloppiness. ANYONE can read the original source, which I provided for you. There were NONE of the qualifiers you claim must exist and for which you called out another responder.

There were also NO qualifiers in the Tesla blog/press releases that claimed the cars being built RIGHT THEN, not in the future, would RIGHT THEN open your garage door, emerge from the building, and meet you at the curb with your destination already in, as it found in your calendar. That was described as an EXISTING feature for every vehicle then being delivered. But it wasn’t true - that did not exist, and has never existed for the cars then being delivered. It was a lie when written and it had NO qualifications. Not one.

I bring receipts and you deny they are receipts. They are not cherry picked, are verifiable, and are well-cited. You just spin, spin, spin and are looking much worse for the wear. How do you defend yourself? Claim cherry picking (even cherry-picking is still truth, even if selective - but mine wasn’t), and then claim I gave too many (well-cited) examples so I must use Ai. Ridiculous. Game over. You lose.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

Ah, so there it is! you get to make up your own definition of what FSD is and then declare yourself a righteous winner of the debate ????

This is getting beyond stupid. I'm not going to bother anymore. You are hell bent on your own version of reality, and I can't do anything for you.


But, I'm still waiting for someone to respond back to the timestamped videos above where I pointed out the exact language that was used.

And surprise, surprise... no promissory language was used. at all.

I did not define FSD - Elon Musk did. In writing. I provided no videos. I provided written documentation. Actual truth. The cars of that era cannot do what Musk said they could. Cannot and never will.

 

[ThatGuyBo]

you keep clipping half-thoughts out of context. I corrected you above, where I highlighted the keywords in yellow, large font.

At this point you are playing stupid and refuse to acknowledge the actual language and context surrounding the subject.

maybe this screenshot will help you:

Let me know if I can make it any more clear.

That language isn't a promise.

You haven't corrected anything, you aren't even capable of representing those quotes correctly in your own head. Again, that maybe refers to the robotaxi claim.

This is exactly what you asked for and you ignored it. No maybe, no perhaps. A definitive claim. Same as the first quote that you misrepresented.

2:47 every model every Tesla being produced


2:50 right now the model 3 the Model S Model


2:53 X has has all of the hardware necessary


2:55 for full autonomy

What lies, deflections, and misrepresentations will you present this time?

Also, still waiting for you to back up your claim?
For someone who asks for evidence a lot, you did a pretty poor job providing it on your first attempt.

 

[REM]

Again, that maybe refers to the robotaxi claim.

You are literally too hard headed to reason with. ?

 

[ThatGuyBo]

Are you serious?

Impossible? So there's no possible way the people that lord over us have slush funds to line their own pockets, and use "condoms for [foreign country] for the ledger"?

If you want to make statements like that, then bring receipts.

Where's your receipts?
Still waiting?

No generic link to a page that links Fox News article.
USAID spending is all public and detailed. Link it. C'mon.


Here, I did the work for you because you clearly cannot.

Here's Trump stating it:
https://rollcall.com/factbase/trump...-laken-riley-bill-signing-january-29-2025/#12

Here's Trump doubling it and claiming they were going to Hamas:
https://rollcall.com/factbase/trump...ers-sovereign-wealth-fund-february-3-2025/#34

Here's Elon admitting he and Doge were wrong:


Here's what it actually refers to:
https://web.archive.org/web/2025012...ites/default/files/2024-09/C-and-C-FY2023.pdf

Is this false? Prove it.
No deflections, no fallacies.
Address these claims with facts and actual sources.

edit:

because reading is difficult for some people, so I’ll make it easy.

It wasn’t $50mil. It wasn’t to Gaza or Hamas. It wasn’t for just “condoms”.
read the references that you cry about not getting.

 

[REM]

I bring receipts and you deny they are receipts. They are not cherry picked, are verifiable, and are well-cited.

Copy/pasta from some unknown source in which you refuse to provide is not a receipt.

 

[ThatGuyBo]

Copy/pasta from some unknown source in which you refuse to provide is not a receipt.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160722130647/https://www.tesla.com/blog/master-plan-part-deux

 

[REM]

Here's Elon admitting he and Doge were wrong:

19:02
example of the fraud uh that you have
19:05
cited was $50 million of condoms was
19:08
sent to Gaza but after fact check this
19:12
it apparently Gaza in Mozambique and the
19:15
program was to protect them against HIV
19:18
so can you correct the statements it
19:20
wasn't sent to Hamas actually it was
19:22
sent to Moz which makes sense why
19:24
condoms was sent there and how can make
19:26
we make sure that all the statements
19:28
that you said were uh correct so we can
19:31
trust what you're say well first of all
19:32
uh some of the things that I say will be
19:34
incorrect and and should be corrected so
19:37
nobody's going to bat a thousand I mean
19:39
any you know we will make mistakes but
19:41
we'll act quickly to correct any
19:42
mistakes um so uh you know if if the I'm
19:47
not sure we should be sending $50
19:48
million with the condoms to anywhere uh
19:50
frankly I'm not sure that's something
19:52
Americans would be really excited about
19:54
um and that that is really an enormous
19:56
number of condoms you think about it um
19:58
but uh you know if if it went to Mozambique
20:01
instead of Gaza I'm like okay that's not
20:02
as bad but still you know why are we
20:04
doing


You guys are calling a small mistake: naming-the-wrong-country an actual lie?!

YOU GUYS ARE UTTERLY F***** DELUSIONAL. ??????????????

I've said my peace here. I'm fine with the comment section reflecting exactly what it needs to.

Sponsored