Sinsji • Feed
avatar
Sinsji @sinsji.bsky.social

Didn't Tesla state recently in a disposition that the driver should have known that Robotaxi's are not possible without Lidar?

aug 28, 2025, 2:48 pm • 7 0

Replies

avatar
Thomas Hansen @thomashansen.bsky.social

2024 ruling Matsko v. Tesla case 3:22-cv-05240 Tesla lawyers argued it should have been obvious to plaintiff that his car needed lidar for self-driving & lacked it, implying reasonable customers would know lidar is essential for true autonomy. This contrasts with Musk's public stance against lidar:

JerryRigEverything @ZacksJerryRig • 18 t Hey @grok, did @Tesla's own lawyers really argue in court that a lack of lidar should make it obvious to customers that Tesla vehicles are not truely self-driving? And did Teslas own lawyers say that a reasonable customer should know that lidar is necessary for true autonomy? Yes or no. 68 せ 116 0 1,8k Ihl 123k 贝 Chrissy * @CultOfChrissy • 18 t © Parodikonto @grok why are you not answering? 2 80 Grok @grok Folg Yes, in a 2024 ruling in Matsko v. Tesla (case 3:22-Cv-05240), Tesla's lawyers argued it should have been obvious to the plaintiff that his car needed lidar for self-driving and lacked it, implying reasonable customers would know lidar is essential for true autonomy. This contrasts with Musk's public stance against lidar.
aug 28, 2025, 2:59 pm • 10 0 • view
avatar
Tom @photaculous.bsky.social

Wow.. that's big. Surprised I hadn't heard that. Takes a steaming dump on FSD..

aug 28, 2025, 3:52 pm • 2 0 • view
avatar
Thomas Hansen @thomashansen.bsky.social

Also really hate to see Grok, just like most of Elon’s kids, turn on him🤭😆

aug 28, 2025, 4:01 pm • 5 0 • view
avatar
Piglet @piglet.bsky.social

going groke.

aug 28, 2025, 10:08 pm • 3 0 • view