Background During Tesla's Q4 2024 earnings call, CEO Elon Musk announced plans to launch what is called unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) service in Austin, Texas. The service will operate as a paid ride-hailing option, with vehicles operating autonomously without human drivers inside the car.
Resolution Criteria This market will resolve YES if Tesla launches a paid ride-hailing service in Austin, Texas in June 2025 where vehicles operate without human supervision inside the car. The market will resolve NO if:
The launch is delayed beyond June 2025
The service requires human supervision/safety drivers in the car
The service is canceled or not launched at all
The definition of no human driver is clear. The Sawyer merritt and Tesla statements are what they are promising in June. If they launch a paid service without the supervised driver then that counts.
Yes the service must be:
A commercial, paid service
Unsupervised/ no safety driver
It is still YES even if they have the ability to take remote control.
Waymo can take remote control but they are considered by the media as a robotaxi service.
Apollo Go in China, Cruise are considered robotaxi services.
The standard is no human driver in the car and a paid service.
Others can debate their definitions but other questions can be created.
Update 2025-04-30 (PST): - Public access requirement: the service must be bookable by ordinary (non-Tesla employee) customers. If only Tesla employees can book it, the market resolves NO. (AI summary of creator comment)
Update 2025-05-15 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Remote monitoring does not count as supervision. The determination of 'unsupervised' focuses on the absence of a human driver in the car.
Update 2025-05-17 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Access for non-Tesla employees can be limited by invitation.
Paid rides must still be provided to these invited non-employees for the service to qualify.
Update 2025-05-17 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Remote driving or human remote supervision is not a disqualifying factor for the service to be considered unsupervised.
The standard for unsupervised is the absence of a human driver inside the vehicle.
This corrects a previous AI-generated summary from 2025-05-15 which incorrectly stated that human remote supervision would be a disqualifying factor.
Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A safety monitor in the passenger seat is not considered a safety driver. The presence of a safety monitor in the car would not, on its own, cause the market to resolve to NO.
Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A safety monitor will be considered a safety driver (leading to a NO resolution) if there is proof they have a second set of physical controls, such as brakes or a steering wheel.
Verbal commands or safe words used by a monitor are not considered driving and will not cause the market to resolve to NO.
Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - The term 'human supervision' as used in the criteria is clarified to mean the presence of a safety driver.
The primary standard for a YES resolution remains that the service is paid and operates without a human driver in the car.
Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A brief, promotional launch (a so-called "dog and pony show") is sufficient for a YES resolution, even if the service is canceled shortly after launching. The service is not required to operate for any minimum duration.
Update 2025-06-20 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): A single paid ride to a non-employee is sufficient for a YES resolution. During this ride, the safety monitor must remain in the passenger seat and not intervene in a way that would classify them as a safety driver (per previous clarifications).
Update 2025-06-28 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - A person in the vehicle who can only trigger an emergency stop will not be considered a safety driver for the purposes of this market's resolution.
The presence of a person with only an emergency stop button will not, by itself, cause the market to resolve to NO.
1,000People are also trading
@SimonWestlake The UI kind of hides the regular interface for this but in general, yes, you can update a review.
I forwarded this request to the admins who may have a way for you to do this easily. Maybe.
@Eliza it actually re-prompted me without having to press a button. Did they also change it so that changing the resolution cancels previous ratings for that question?
@ian if I click the Update Review button, I can indeed update my rating of Brian's resolution. However, at the bottom there is a "Tip Eliza" link. Probably the mod who actually resolved it. Maybe you should explain why two different names.
@WrongoPhD I think the Canadian Election market still takes the cake, but this looking like a close second
@MachiNi It used to be straightforward in the UI but that was probably a bug. Now it doesn't seem straightforward in the UI. If you know how to make API requests, it's POST to /leave-review with "marketId" and "rating" (a number from 1 to 5)....but I forwarded this request to the admin team and perhaps they will come up with an easier solution.
@maozedong31415 Yep - another twist in a total mess of a market. There’s a reasonable case to be made that this should just resolve N/A.
@JPD Brian closed trading while he discusses this with the mods on Discord. I agree it should be N/A.
@28:46 The Tesla employee in the passenger seat intervenes by pushing a button on the dashboard to immediately stop the Robotaxi potentially preventing a collision.
“In a video from a ride in Austin, a Robotaxi is preparing to pull over to its destination on the right side of the road, with its turn signal active. Ahead, a UPS truck comes to a stop. As the Model Y begins turning into the spot, the UPS truck, seemingly without signaling, starts to reverse. At this point, the Safety Monitor stepped in and pressed the In Lane Stop button on the main display, bringing the Robotaxi to an immediate halt.”
@ZandaZhu all functions of the Tesla are effectively electronically controlled “by wire”… the physical controls such as the brakes are digitized and communicated by software to the physical hardware. I mention the gear shifter because it can only be accessed through the screen, and any inputs on the screen are the same in terms of controlling the car as if they were done using physical controls.
The car stopped because the person supervising it stopped it. In a Tesla, pushing a button on the dashboard screen is the same as using a physical control.
@yeeta plain as day that there are safety drivers in the car who have been briefed to only intervene if death is imminent. All a propaganda style effort to pretend these things are ready to be on the road.