freerobby

I still use Cursor and am still very happy with it.

I've found the grok-4.5+ variants to be quite suitable for powerhouse work, and I have a legacy plan with a Third Party model allowance, so I can throw the occasional harder planning tasks at e.g. Fable when needed.

I like that I can run any model from the major labs (or anything on Bedrock), instead of being fully tethered to a single vendor. I'll occasionally run the same task through several models/vendors to understand what's most cost effective to achieve a given outcome (and also to keep my grok calls -- which are very cheap through Cursor -- honest and within the limits of what it can do well).

I run most tasks through Cloud agents, with exceptions for Mac-native stuff (iOS builds, app store I/O etc).

You don't have to like Musk but words do mean things.

Agreed. Also pretty telling that Ashlee Vance refused to collaborate or share his recordings with Gibney.

This is what happened. Tesla security received tons of bug reports that required root access to identify, yet they got a vanishingly small number of root vulnerability reports. This policy fixes that misincentive.

Yeah I think their early success with Tesla Vision was faster than expected, it went to their heads, and they underestimated the iteration and fine tuning needed to solve the edge cases. It's difficult to predict how many reps it will take to solve an intricate problem. That's not to excuse their public timeline -- their guidance was naive and IMO irresponsible -- but I don't think it was in bad faith.

I haven't closely followed which rides have drivers where, and what is driven by Tesla vs what is regulatory -- but I thought some "drivers" were still in the passenger seat in Austin?

At any rate, I don't think they are revoking their prior promises. I expect them to deliver L4 autonomy to owners as previously promised. With that said, I'm glad they are ceasing that promise to new customers and focusing on what the car does today, given how wrong their timelines have been. I agree it's shitty if they don't deliver that, and that they should offer buybacks if they find themselves in that position.

Yeah, Tesla did themselves no favors with how they initially marketed FSD, and all the missed timelines amplified the brand cost of that. I'm glad to see them focus on what it can do today. Better to underpromise and overdeliver etc.

As an aside, it's wild how different the perspective is between the masses and the people who experience the bleeding edge here. "The future is here, it's just not evenly distributed," indeed.

The first one.

> Tesla has changed the meaning of “Full Self-Driving”, also known as “FSD”, to give up on its original promise of delivering unsupervised autonomy.

They have not given up on unsupervised autonomy. They are operating unsupervised autonomy in Austin TX as I type this!

People never learn. The haters always think this time will be different.

This is clickbait from a publication that's had it out for Tesla for nearly a decade.

Tesla is pivoting messaging toward what the car can do today. You can believe that FSD will deliver L4 autonomy to owners or not -- I'm not wading into that -- but this updated web site copy does not change the promises they've made prior owners, and Tesla has not walked back those promises.

The most obvious tell of this is the unsupervised program in operation right now in Austin.

No, they never had LIDAR.

Thanks.