Dr. Check It All

Physicist, nerd, software creator for 42 years. Passionate about programming, quirky ideas, and debunking myths. Fighting alternative facts one check at a time.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

https://t.co/R1RlMriwEk

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

@KRoelandschap @teslaeurope @Tesla @robotinreallife @robotaxi could it be that the front bumper camera actually is now used by FSD ? that would be the simplest explanation for this behaviour.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

Same here! 😂 Every time I even mention the upcoming FSD release, people instantly shut me down: “I’ll never sit in a self-driving car… if that’s even possible.” Meanwhile I've given up on talking to others, and i am now silently and patiently waiting for the real thing to OTA update into my car, hopefully sooner than expected.

I got HW4 for 2 years, FSD package for 3 years. I hope it will finally make my frequent 1000 km runs across France, Luxembourg & Germany more enjoyable and less stressful. Best part? Maybe just don’t tell the passengers the car is driving itself 😇 they won't believe anyways.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

@wholemars If the Cybercab will ever arrive in the EU, then I will try to get the first one :) I have such a nice use case for this thing, waiting for years now for self driving cars without chauffeur, and hope i will still be alive when it eventually happens 😇

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

I just got the 2026.2.6 update this morning!
(Physically in France, but the car is registered in Germany.) And i will test Grok in a few minutes.

🤔Quick question for the community: does anyone know if OTA rollout are determined by the car’s registration country or the current physical location? @teslaeurope may know ...

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

Grok about to install in my model y… finally in the EU. With navigation assistance !
Fyi @teslascope 😇

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

Here’s (imho) a powerful way to make FSD subscriptions become easy, fair and successful:

1.) Price FSD per mile, not per month: Some (business) users drive many thousands of miles per month, while others barely reach 1,000 miles. IMHO, per-mile pricing is fair across all use cases.

2.) Allow FSD payment via Supercharging: Add a few cents per kWh when charging. This works especially well for long-distance trips (business, holidays).
Full FSD package owners should (must) be exempt, of course.

3.) Introduce dynamic per-mile pricing: This could look something like this, for example:

– first 1,000 miles/month at 3 cents per mile
– heavy usage above that at 5 cents per mile

4.) Use a hybrid account model: Users have an FSD account and can:

- buy FSD miles on demand,
- auto-refresh account balance when needed,
- accumulate miles via Supercharging (per kWh),
- optionally receive some free miles per month, purely for customer satisfaction.

This allows very fine-tuned usage: less FSD for short grocery trips, more for long 1,000-mile drives.

5.) Differentiate supervised vs unsupervised FSD legally, not technically. The tech is the same, but liability differs:

- Supervised: user is responsible
- Unsupervised: Tesla is responsible (possibly via Tesla insurance ?)

6.) Bundle FSD with insurance for unsupervised use. Users pay for FSD via Tesla insurance. This could mean:

- Accidents on FSD -> Tesla is liable
- Accidents on manual driving -> user is liable

BTW: If FSD is statistically safer than humans (which it should be), insurance costs should decrease over time. Also users might eventually prefer unsupervised FSD because it could actually become cheaper than conventional insurance. Isn’t that a powerful incentive to get people on board?

Overall, I’m very positive about a usage-based FSD subscription, as long as it stays affordable and fair. A combined FSD + insurance model could ultimately be the strongest offer, depending on real-world insurance costs.

Otoh the prospect of massively increasing subscription prices over time is more of a turn-off than a motivator, imho.

Comments are appreciated, even from @elonmusk and co 🙂

In any case many thanks for reading.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

@Nick94w @JoeTegtmeyer @niccruzpatane And last but not least, we still have no access to FSD in the EU and we still can only hope to see it coming this year, just as we hoped for the past decade… just saying

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

That’s exactly the issue. This isn’t about being sold under misleading expectations! it’s about how long-term (EU) customers were handled.

We waited for years with almost nothing in return, not only because of regulation, but also because Tesla chose not to offer meaningful alternatives or compensation. Now full FSD purchases are gone, transfers are gone, and everything points towards subscriptions… with prices already expected to rise over time.

Long patience combined with an unclear future for full FSD buyers is what frustrates loyal customers. I’m pro-Elon, an investor, and I want Tesla to thrive! But this is a easily resolveable fairness problem, not a tech one.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

You do realise that cautious progress is a good thing, not something to criticise. From what I can see, this is exactly how such technology should be rolled out: gradual, not a big bang.

Look at the lead car and appreciate that it operates as designed. Look at the trailing car and appreciate that Tesla is choosing to be extra safe and extra sure the system works as intended.

A balanced, cautious perspective helps far more than obsessing over imperfections. Progress doesn’t have to be reckless to be impressive.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

@TESLAXSWEDEN @wholemars So Spot on, il love this!

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

My take is simple: Tesla is no longer on my watch list. And I doubt I’m alone. Correct me if I’m wrong. My points:

- I’m in Europe. I bought Full FSD about 3 years ago with my first Tesla (HW3), based on the promise “it will come when it’s ready”. It never came. I accepted that.
- Mid-2024 I upgraded to a Long Range with HW4 and transferred my software package. Still no FSD for me available. I accepted that too.
- Early 2025, when Juniper arrived, I considered buying a second Tesla and transferring FSD again, keeping the first as a replacement for our old VW diesel. But Tesla allows only one FSD transfer. Deal off the table. I stepped back.
- Now I’ll just drive my Tesla until end of life. If FSD ever arrives in the EU, fine. If not, I’ll see what VW or others offer in 5–10 years. Time is not my constraint.

@elonmusk This isn’t about money or technical capability. It’s about being heard and being flexible. Tesla’s business rules are rigid; you set them. I am flexible. I like what Tesla does technologically. I don’t like how customer-side decisions are handled.

Fix that, and you’ll get me back in line.
I can wait. You can’t. Simple.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

What if FSD costs were coupled directly to usage (for example per kWh)?

Basically: treat FSD usage the same way we already treat charging.

My thought: while Supercharging, you pay a few cents extra per kWh, and that unlocks a corresponding amount of FSD usage. No subscription. No big upfront cost. Just pay-as-you-go.

All that’s needed is a simple unit definition, e.g.
1 kWh = 1 FSD unit (or any ratio that makes sense).

You could build up an FSD-usage balance while charging, save it for later, or top it up anytime with a credit card when needed. @elonmusk ? Could this be a plan ?

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

@DrKnowItAll16 I would strongly recommend this youtube video where Tom Bötticher took a closer look on that and gives some interesting insights: https://t.co/nOSF5e6I3O
The video is in german, but i guess there is an auto translation available from youtube. enjoy :)

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

@RealRusty @Tesla @teslaeurope We still have an “old” Model Y from August 2024 (luckily with HW4), which gives us a nice mix of old and new. Being able to enable TAC and AP separately is especially valuable to us. If we couldn’t use TAC on its own, we’d use the software far less often. @tesla: put it back 🙏

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

Sorry to disagree. I have read the EU’s statement up and down, and it looks to me like:

The EU isn’t trying to dictate how X operates worldwide. They’re defining what applies on EU territory, which is completely normal. Every region has its own transparency rules.

And X doesn’t have sovereignty over EU law, just as the EU has none over X globally.

So the worry about a government “seizing oversight” doesn’t really match what’s actually being discussed.

In any case, I think we’ve both explained our views clearly enough. We simply look at this from different angles, and that’s fine. Let’s leave it there.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

I feel we might be going in circles here. I understand that you see any form of verification as a potential risk of government overreach. I don’t share that view, but I respect that this is your perception.

For me, as result of this talk, the key points are simply:

- Allow true verification voluntarily
- Allow communicating one’s status (paid / verified / anonymous)
- Ensure anonymity whenever someone wants it

If those conditions are met, I personally don’t see a threat to free speech. However, i appreciate the exchange, even if we look at this from very different angles.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

I think we’re actually closer than it seems.

But let’s get back to the beginning: The whole discussion started with something quite simple: a badge shouldn’t appear to signal real verification when the underlying verification is weak. That’s why I suggested separating the two ideas:

- One badge for “I paid for the service”,
- and another badge for “I’m actually verified and you can trust who I am”.

This, in my opinion, is about transparency rather than confusion. And just to be clear: I absolutely agree that free speech must remain possible anonymously, especially when someone wants to say things their government may not like. That option has to stay.

What I’m talking about is the voluntary choice to verify myself when I want to, and to signal with a badge that I’m trackable and accountable. That doesn’t limit freedom; if anything, it expands it in my view.

And of course, if I ever want to rant anonymously, I can still create an anonymous account when I need it. Although I quite happily rant officially. 😇

So for me and my perception, having both possibilities, anonymity and optional verified transparency, creates more freedom, not less. And thus, finally back to the roots:

what exactly is so bad about the idea of having the option to transparently and voluntarily verify that I am who I claim to be (with a blue badge and a green dot or whatever)?

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

Let me try to understand your point correctly:

Are you saying that free speech is only truly possible when I remain anonymous and can’t be held accountable for what I say?
Because if my identity is known, I might fear that a government (or anyone else) could watch me and eventually punish me when they dislike my opinions?

And if full freedom of expression only works when nobody is identifiable, wouldn’t the logical conclusion be to remove verification badges entirely and keep everyone anonymous?
Would that, in your view, create a safer environment?

I’m genuinely trying to understand your reasoning here.

[Dr. Check It All @AnotherHiggs]

@TxJollyRoger @wholemars Hmm, maybe I misunderstood something here…
Can you help me identify where exactly this is even remotely about free speech?
Where is the supposed “censorship” happening?

As far as I can see, the whole point is transparency, not silencing anyone.