Carlos Martins retweeted
Delighted for everyone who gets to feel that. I paid $10,100 for FSD in July 2021 and my car has never had a single version of it. Day 1,946 on HW3 in Australia. @Tesla @TeslaAUNZ @elonmusk #FSD
Carlos Martins retweeted
Murder isn’t consensual either so why aren’t you banning films and TV shows that show it?
Replying to @Reefyfish
We’re talking about what’s depicted in porn. Strangulation isn’t always consensual and when done to someone who has not asked or agreed it is terrifying and dangerous.
For the record I have no issue at all with what consenting adults do behind closed doors!
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
The new UK law bans possession/publication of explicit realistic pornographic depictions of strangulation/suffocation even when involving consenting adult performers. Private consensual acts between adults remain legal.
gov.uk/government/pub…
freespeechcoalition.com/uk-choking-con…
bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…
Carlos Martins retweeted
Long post worth the read. I have a close friend who flies private jets. He flew Lear 60 for over 15 years and now flies a Gulfstream. This is a copy and paste of his response to me asking him if I thought Ice was the issue.
“We always fly in ridiculous cold temperatures.”
“Usually you get the bad ice when the temperatures are like 0 to negative 20. Believe it or not, there's a point where it gets too cold for ice. At negative 40, you pretty much can't get ice. Besides that, the airplane is equipped with hot wings and hot tail.”
“I flew the Lear 60 for like 15 years. It's a no joke airplane and probably the most dangerous airplane I've ever flown. It has a super critical wing. The airflow has to be perfect. When it gets into rough air and turbulence, it will easily stall. It has stalled on me at 41,000 feet just because we got into some turbulence. (On the way to Palm Beach as a matter of fact. ) we recovered and got her flying again around 30,000 ft. Scary
But here's the problem. This airplane has a terrible coffin corner. (At high altitudes) what that means is, you fly in a really narrow window where if you lose 20 knots, it stalls. And if you gain 20 knots, it goes into overspeed. The air goes supersonic over the wing and it goes into a high speed stall, or worse, a Mach tuck.
So if you stall, the normal recovery is to push the yoke forward to lower the nose and gain air speed again. At low altitude, you can push really hard and recover quickly. But in the 60... if you push hard, it will gain air speed and go into a high speed stall, it doesn't take much. It's very sensitive. The 60 has super short wings that don't make much lift. So then you high speed stall, and the computer is yelling at you... OVERSPEED! So then you pull back and enter a low speed stall. And you go back and forth trying to keep it in the air speed window.
This whole thing is pretty scary. And you should recover basically by using your finger tips using super small corrections. You can't over do it. If you try to muscle the recovery, she gets mad and will become unrecoverable. If she enters a mach tuck. You're done.”
“I taught the Lear 60 to other pilots and mentored them. I told them... this airplane has a soul and it's trying to kill you. Do not ever try to top the weather. Don't go over a thunderstorm. Go around it. If it means a half hour longer, then do it. Going over the thunderstorm will go into turbulence that you might not recover from.
These pilots went right over a thunderstorm. I think it stalled which caused them to drop down into the thunderstorm and ended up in mach tuck. They picked up so much speed that it ripped off the horizontal stabilizer. At that point... chuck Yeager can't fix it.
These same pilots did something similar a couple months ago. ATC got mad at them. They poked the bear one too many times.
This is not a beginner airplane. The Gulfstream would never do this. It has HUGE margins of error and won't stall like that. But then again... it's got HUGE wings. It's a pussy cat.
The Gulfstream is like driving a 4 wheeler. The Lear 60 is like riding a uni cycle.”
Carlos Martins retweeted
My car once looked like a car that drives itself. Tesla said it had the hardware to do it.
The biggest HW3 Claim update yet is almost ready.
FSD is now approved in 10 EU countries. Approved for HW3: zero.
On its Q3 call, Tesla skipped the HW3 shareholder question.
We're not skipping anything.
Bought your HW3 Tesla in the Netherlands?
Upload your purchase contract now. Every contract makes the case stronger.
hw3claim.nl
Carlos Martins retweeted
Another thing. Often AV service area maps advertised are kind of fake- they don’t actually go to everywhere in the polygon the provider publishes. Robotaxi Houston is probably by far the most egregious ‘fake’ AV service area I’ve seen
I get they were doing it so they could get the starship shape but again this is another poor experience point
Carlos Martins retweeted
This is what Elon said in January 2025:
"Weʼre making good progress in Optimus. We expect to have thousands of of Optimus robots working in Tesla factories by the end of this year [2025], doing this more. And we expect to scale Optimus up faster than any product."
This is what Elon said yesterday:
"People don’t understand new technology that well, or volume production of complex new hardware that well, it sort of seems like, well, can’t you just make a whole bunch of these things immediately and send them out"
Amazing, that it's Elon who lectures the listeners on production while it was him ridiculously overestimating Tesla's ability to bring Optimus to production.
"I do expect these issues to be solved around the end of next year. [2027]"
Every sceptical voice is immediately shot down with "ooh, what do you know about manufacturing. Haha, smarter-than-Elon syndrome" or some other nonsense.
Meanwhile, Elon makes one awful prediction after the other. It's ridiculous.
We really do live in a Dilbert comic.
Carlos Martins retweeted
É com ENORME prazer que anuncio o lançamento em beta do novo site do meu Comparador de CEME para carregamento de veículos elétricos
ceme-beta.ocarroeletrico.com…
mobile friendly, suporte das Ilhas, muito + fácil de manter atualizado, e passa a ter DB com histórico e promoções futuras
Carlos Martins retweeted
EA IN A NUTSHELL:
KILLED MASS EFFECT.
KILLED DRAGON AGE.
KILLED DEAD SPACE.
KILLED MEDAL OF HONOR.
KILLED NEED FOR SPEED.
KILLED BURNOUT.
KILLED TITANFALL.
KILLED MIRROR’S EDGE.
KILLED ANTHEM.
KILLED SPORE.
KILLED SSX.
KILLED ARMY OF TWO.
KILLED SIMCITY.
KILLED COMMAND & CONQUER.
Carlos Martins retweeted
"Currently, Tesla's (unsupervised) track record is one collision accident every 15,000 miles on average."
Yikes - for reference - the average HUMAN driver in the United States gets into a car accident approximately once every 500,000 miles, or files an insurance collision claim roughly once every 18 years.
目前已知证据对特斯拉 $TSLA FSD并不乐观。
虽然管理层提到已经在6-7个城市无监督运营,但是,38万英里里程几乎都是Austin一座城市贡献的。
短短38万里程,根据NHTSA截至2026年8月的报告显示,已经上报了23起碰撞事故。其中13起造成财产损失,2起造成人身伤害,其中1人需要前往医院就医。
而且啊,这些事故中,有6起明确被判定是特斯拉Robotaxi的责任。目前特斯拉的战绩是平均每1.5万英里里程就会发生一次碰撞事故。
Carlos Martins retweeted
Snímek složený z 578 jednotlivých 8sekundových expozic pořídil 📷Brendan Larsen 9. září 2026 mezi 20:18 a 22:13 místního času nedaleko novozélandské sopky Mt. Taranaki. Na snímku je 14450 stop po přibližně 1400 jednotlivých družicích.
Carlos Martins retweeted
“As it will be sentient.”
Oh, okay, so it isn’t ever actually shipping. Thanks for clarifying.
Replying to @Scobleizer
True.
You will be able to ask the Roadster to perform any of the tricks shown autonomously, as it will be sentient.
Also, we will have a wild looping track (crazier even than Hot Wheels) at our Texas HQ where you can test out your Roadster.
Carlos Martins retweeted
People seem confused about why Tesla is getting so much backlash over its new "flying Roadster." For those of us who were once genuinely enthusiastic about Tesla, this isn't about hating innovation. It's about a long history of broken promises, misleading expectations, and increasingly absurd marketing.
Tesla unveiled the second-generation Roadster in 2017, took customer deposits, and promised deliveries in 2020. Six years past that deadline, it still hasn't delivered the car. Instead, it's demonstrating an even more outrageous version with features that will likely never make it into production. The original 2nd gen Roadster would still be an amazing car today. Why not just deliver what was promised?
Then there's Full Self-Driving. Tesla marketed the idea that Model 3 owners could turn their cars into income-generating robotaxis. That never materialized. Even if the technology eventually gets there, the opportunity has already passed for many early buyers. Timing matters. Delivering something a decade late isn't fulfilling the promise you sold to customers.
And then there's Solar Roof. Unveiled in 2016 as a revolutionary approach to residential solar, it struggled with costs, installation challenges, and adoption far below expectations. After nearly a decade, Tesla discontinued it entirely in August 2026. Another grand vision abandoned, leaving existing customers with a discontinued product to maintain.
Then came the Cybertruck, marketed as a nearly indestructible, revolutionary truck. Instead, we got a vehicle with questionable build quality, numerous recalls, expensive repairs, disappointing results in several real-world off-road tests, and specifications that fell short of the original promises. It literally looks like a dumpster, but aesthetics aside, the collapsing demand speaks volumes about the reality of what Tesla delivered. Another heavily hyped product that fell dramatically short of expectations.
This is how consumer trust erodes. Not through one disappointment, but through years of accumulating them. And this is part of the reason why many people who were once enthusiastic about Tesla have become critical and cynical about it.
But there's something even more fundamental here: Tesla has completely departed from the grounded, practical vision that made so many of us enthusiastic about the company in the first place.
Electric cars were ambitious, but the idea was grounded in reality. People could charge at home, infrastructure could gradually expand, technology could improve, and millions of ordinary people could eventually benefit. There was a realistic path toward mass adoption.
What the hell does a flying Roadster powered by compressed-air thrusters have to do with any of that?
It's an expensive, impractical engineering stunt with enormous packaging, safety, and regulatory challenges, and no credible near-term path toward mass-market usefulness. Modern electric cars already achieve ridiculous acceleration without this nonsense. What practical problem does it solve? Who actually needs it? When will ordinary consumers benefit?
And watching Tesla fans compare this experimental prototype in a Roadster-shaped shell to actual production vehicles people can buy today is ridiculous.
What's especially infuriating is the cult-like mentality surrounding all of this. You can't point out the history of failed promises, question the practicality, or demand realistic timelines without being accused of being a "hater" or having "Elon derangement syndrome."
Tesla deserves recognition for helping make electric cars a reality, but that success doesn't give it a blank check to keep marketing increasingly fantastical promises while failing to deliver on previous commitments.
This isn't hatred. It's disappointment from people who once believed in the company, watched it accomplish extraordinary things, and have since watched it increasingly substitute practical innovation with spectacle and promises.
Elon fanboys are also ignoring a bigger pattern that goes beyond Tesla.
What made many of us enthusiastic about Elon and Tesla and in the first place was a grounded vision of technological progress that could genuinely improve millions of lives. Electric cars were ambitious, but practical, achievable, and useful to ordinary people. Now we're supposed to get excited about flying cars with compressed-air thrusters that have no credible path to mass adoption and solve no meaningful problem for the average consumer.
It's the same kind of thinking behind marketing the colonization of Mars as some urgent necessity for humanity's survival. There's nothing wrong with space exploration, but Earth isn't about to become uninhabitable because of the Sun. We're talking about geological timescales, while humanity faces enormous problems RIGHT NOW: poverty, hunger, access to education, corruption, abuse of power, wars, and a lack of government accountability. We have plenty of very real problems to solve before worrying about humanity's survival on another planet.
And then there's DOGE. I was genuinely excited about the original idea of making government more efficient, reducing waste, and increasing accountability. Instead, we got questionable savings figures, inexperienced people making sweeping decisions, serious concerns over access to sensitive personal information, and an initiative that ultimately fizzled out without delivering its grand promises. Another enormous narrative that fell apart when confronted with reality.
That's what makes all of this so frustrating. It's not that we stopped believing in technological progress. It's that we've watched someone who once pursued grounded, transformative ideas increasingly embrace fantastical promises, political spectacle, and questionable narratives disconnected from practical reality.
And somehow, pointing out this history of disappointment gets you labeled a "hater" or accused of having "Elon derangement syndrome."
The problem isn't dreaming big. It's repeatedly selling people those dreams, failing to deliver, and then expecting everyone to applaud the next, even more ridiculous promise without asking what happened to the last one.
The world doesn't need more spectacular promises. It needs practical solutions to real problems, honest expectations, and accountability for what was promised. That's what made Tesla exciting in the first place, and that's what so many of us feel has been betrayed.
Carlos Martins retweeted
While everyone is still thinking about rocket thrusters on road vehicles… does anyone remember Bosch demonstrating a cold gas thruster that would kick in if it sensed the bike was losing grip during a turn?
Carlos Martins retweeted
So when elon talks about FSD he can leave off the word Supervised. But when it crashes we have to put that word back in the name?
OK 👍
A couple of things, as an industry observer and a Tesla owner/FSD user:
1) The use of "a self-driving Tesla" in this post is misleading in the first place. The feature is Full Self Driving (Supervised) but it does not make the car "self-driving". Better to have used "a Tesla with the FSD (Supervised) driver assistance technology activated...." So legacy media still needs a lot of education;
2) From a technology point of view to prevent driver from falling asleep and still using the system should not be hard (Tesla's new ACE feature is one in that direction), whether active or passive safety features;
3) I will only agree with the last comment in the video: "all drivers, not this driver, they must remain alert even while using self-driving features," (but again, I don't like the word "self-driving.") I remind myself of this every time I use FSD. The human driver is always responsible at all times.
But question: the braking lights seem to be on before impact?
Carlos Martins retweeted
Guy who said we would have coast to coast self driving cars in 2019 and 1 million robotaxis in 2020 says advertisers aren't allowed to overstate claims anymore. 😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣 LOL 😆 😂 🤣 😅 😄
Roadster event livestream nitter.cf/i/broadcasts/1yKAPwNgg…
0:00
Tesla
Roadster

































