@Tslachan Not at the expense of impeding FSD progress. I say that as a HW3 owner (albeit LT investor). IMHO, unless there's a path to UFSD, best that they accelerate FSD hardware replacements. Isn't that first principles thinking?
@BoBbyPleWniaK The market clearly is in no mood for more BS around FSD - near term scaling signal is weak and TBH execution looks deliberately slow. Elon would be all in on RT if UFSD was that mature - we'll at least see more unsupervised Y's.
@H_Zolomon@JOBhakdi I do hope so but also note that they've only just started hiring and development on the operational side and working rather "sequentially" - IMHO, this is a tell about their confidence about the tech elements.
@nymbusjp Their actions aren't aligning with their recent "RT scaling" - they are very late with hirings and other developments on the operational side.
@CARN0N@Tesla Unfortunately, the hubristic heads did not take RHD markets into account at design time.... and to think they prioritised this over the 25K vehicle.
@JOBhakdi I think Elon’s comments were ambiguous. The larger pattern since 2024 has been heavy emphasis on near-term timelines while downplaying the real remaining hurdles.
@mikepat711 Sure. Timing is hard and TSLA has a history of violent moves but it also conveniently shuts down any conversation about opportunity cost. Do note that even the biggest believer reduced his ownership over the past 5 years when he needed capital. Capital allocation isn’t betrayal.
@GrindeOptions Table stakes and frankly meaningless without clear, scalable unsupervised FSD progress. The picture would be vastly different if TSLA shot for 25K vehicle over Cybertruck (would have also de-risked hardware elements on Cybercab ramp) - a lesson in hubris