Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by genocidicbunny 1707 days ago
My admittedly layman understanding of 47 USC §1001 is that no actual harm needs to be demonstrated for it to be an instance of fraud:

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—

(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;

(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or

(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;

So if Tesla is knowingly taking pre-orders for FSD without being certain on when they could deliver it _and_ they don't make it clear that they don't know when or if FSD could be delivered, that would likely qualify as fraud.

1 comments

And considering that it isn’t clear that a legally viable FSD implementation will ever be possible on the hardware Tesla sold, it’s a pretty ballsy move for anyone but a time traveler.

And given the length of time it’s been going, at some point someone is going to call time and it’s going to be a big mess for Tesla. Unless they actually deliver it.

No pressure!