Greetings to all investors—over the past few days confidence in Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology has been shaken by another series of incidents, the most striking of which involved a car repeatedly attempting to drive straight into a lake. This incident clearly demonstrates that a system built purely on camera vision still fails to recognize basic terrain features, such as boat ramps leading into water, making it in its current form an unreliable tool not only for passenger cars but also for commercial use. These fatal errors in interpreting the surroundings are the main reason why FSD, in its present form, is for me absolutely unacceptable and has no place in the Tesla Semi truck, where any similar instability could lead to tragic accidents with enormous damage.

Zatímco $TSLA Tesla sticks to its controversial “Vision Only” approach without using radars or LiDARs, its direct competitors in autonomous trucking are taking a radically different and safer route. They employ an advanced combination of sensors including long-range LiDAR, radars, and cameras, which allows their systems to detect objects at distances exceeding a thousand feet and to operate safely even in challenging lighting conditions that cause problems for Tesla. Unlike Tesla, which uses its customers as beta testers on public roads, the competition emphasizes transparent testing and system redundancy—an approach far more acceptable to institutional investors seeking stability and safety than Musk’s unpredictable development and his empty promises that Tesla will be autonomous “next year” for several years running.

The response from Elon Musk and Tesla to these safety failures has been consistently dismissive, with company leadership often remaining silent or blaming driver inattention instead of admitting the technological limits of their software. This “dead bug” strategy culminated in 2026 with a fundamental change to the FSD business model and terms, when Tesla effectively ended the option to buy the software outright and moved exclusively to a subscription model. This move is a legal workaround intended to shed liability for unfulfilled promises of full autonomy, because with a monthly subscription the user pays only for the current, albeit imperfect, service—thereby legally eliminating Tesla’s obligation to deliver true driverless capability in the future. To me, this shift is just further evidence that Tesla is effectively admitting an inability to deliver the promised technology in the foreseeable future and prefers a legal dodge that shields it from class-action lawsuits by dissatisfied owners who previously paid large sums for the software in the hope of an “asset” that would appreciate over time.