Breaking Down Tesla’s Autopilot vs. Wall “Wile E. Coyote” Video

March 20, 2025

By Not a Tesla App Staff

Mark Rober

Mark Rober, of glitter bomb package fame, recently released a video titled Can You Fool A Self-Driving Car? (posted below). Of course, the vehicle featured in the video was none other than a Tesla - but there’s a lot wrong with this video that we’d like to discuss.

We did some digging and let the last couple of days play out before making our case. Mark Rober’s Wile E. Coyote video is fatally flawed.

The Premise

Mark Rober wanted to prove whether or not it was possible to fool a self-driving vehicle, using various test scenarios. These included a wall painted to look like a road, low-lying fog, mannequins, hurricane-force rain, and bright beams.

All of these individual “tests” had their own issues - not least because Mark didn’t adhere to any sort of testing methodology, but because he was looking for a result - and edited his tests until he was sure of it.

Interestingly, many folks on X were quick to spot that Mark had been previously sponsored by Google to use a Pixel phone - but was using an iPhone to record within the vehicle - which he had edited to look like a Pixel phone for some reason. This, alongside other poor edits and cuts, led many, including us, to believe that Mark’s testing was edited and flawed.

Flaw 1: Autopilot, Not FSD

Let’s take a look at the first flaw. Mark tested Autopilot - not FSD. Autopilot is a driving aid for lane centering and speed control - and is not the least bit autonomous. It cannot take evasive maneuvers outside the lane it is in, but it can use the full stable of Tesla’s extensive features, including Automatic Emergency Braking, Forward Collision Warnings, Blind Spot Collision Warnings, and Lane Departure Avoidance.

On the other hand, FSD is allowed and capable of departing the lane to avoid a collision. That means that even if Autopilot tried to stop and was unable to, it would still impact whatever obstacle was in front of it - unlike FSD.

As we continue with the FSD argument - remember that Autopilot is running on a 5-year-old software stack that hasn’t seen updates. Sadly, this is the reality of Tesla not updating the Autopilot stack for quite some time. It seems likely that they’ll eventually bring a trimmed-down version of FSD to replace Autopilot, but that hasn’t happened yet.

Mark later admitted that he used Autopilot rather than FSD because “You cannot engage FSD without putting in a destination,” which is also incorrect. It is possible to engage FSD without a destination, but FSD chooses its own route. Where it goes isn’t within your control until you select a destination, but it tends to navigate through roads in a generally forward direction.

The whole situation, from not having FSD on the vehicle to not knowing you can activate FSD without a destination, suggests Mark is rather unfamiliar with FSD and likely has limited exposure to the feature.

Let’s keep in mind that FSD costs $99 for a single month, so there’s no excuse for him not using it in this video.

Flaw 2: Cancelling AP and Pushing Pedals

Many people on X also followed up with reports that Mark was pushing the pedals or pulling on the steering wheel. When you tap on the brake pedal or pull or jerk the steering wheel too much, Autopilot will disengage. For some reason, during each of his “tests,” Mark closely held the steering wheel of the vehicle.

This comes off as rather odd - at the extremely short distances he was enabling AP at, there wouldn’t be enough time for a wheel nag or takeover warning required. In addition, we can visibly see him pulling the steering wheel before “impact” in multiple tests.

Over on X, techAU breaks it down excellently on a per-test basis. Mark did not engage AP in several tests, and he potentially used the accelerator pedal during the first test - which means that Automatic Emergency Braking is overridden. In another test, Mark admitted to using the pedals.

Flaw 3: Luminar Sponsored

This video was potentially sponsored by a LiDAR manufacturer - Luminar. Although Mark says that this isn’t the case. Interestingly, Luminar makes LiDAR rigs for Tesla - who uses them to test ground truth accuracy for FSD. Just as interesting, Luminar’s Earnings Call was also coming up at the time of the video’s posting.

Luminar had linked the video at the top of their homepage but has since taken it down. While Mark did not admit to being sponsored by Luminar, there appear to be more distinct conflicts of interest, as Mark’s charity foundation has received donations from Luminar’s CEO.

Given the positivity of the results for Luminar, it seems that the video had been well-designed and well-timed to take advantage of the current wave of negativity against Tesla, while also driving up Luminar’s stock.

Flaw 4: Vision-based Depth Estimation

The next flaw to address is the fact that humans and machines can judge depth using vision. On X, user Abdou ran the “invisible wall” through a monocular depth estimation model (DepthAnythingV2) - one that uses a single image with a single angle. This fairly simplified model can estimate the distance and depth of items inside an image - and it was able to differentiate the fake wall from its surroundings easily.

Tesla’s FSD uses a far more advanced multi-angle, multi-image tool that stitches together and creates a 3D model of the environment around it and then analyzes the result for decision-making and prediction. Tesla’s more refined and complex model would be far more able to easily detect such an obstacle - and these innovations are far more recent than the 5-year-old Autopilot stack.

While detecting distances is more difficult in a single image, once you have multiple images, such as in a video feed, you can more easily decipher between objects and determine distances by tracking the size of each pixel as the object approaches. Essentially, if all pixels are growing at a constant rate, then that means it’s a flat object — like a wall.

Case in Point: Chinese FSD Testers

To make the case stronger - some Chinese FSD testers took to the streets and put up a semi-transparent sheet - which the vehicle refused to drive through or drive near. It would immediately attempt to maneuver away each time the test was engaged - and refused to advance with a pedestrian standing in the road.

Would FSD hit a transparent film wall?
This test showed it just avoids it.

Added English subtitles.

Credit: Douyin 第一智驾 pic.twitter.com/IU8IyuRG01
— Aaron Li (@boolusilan) March 18, 2025

Thanks to Douyin and Aaron Li for putting this together, as it makes an excellent basic example of how FSD would handle such a situation in real life.

Flaw 5: The Follow-Up Video and Interview

Following the community backlash, Mark released a video on X, hoping to resolve the community’s concerns. However, this also backfired. It turned out Mark’s second video was of an entirely different take than the one in the original video - this was at a different speed, angle, and time of initiation.

Mark then followed up with an interview with Philip DeFranco (below), where he said that there were multiple takes and that he used Autopilot because he didn’t know that FSD could be engaged without a destination. He also answered here that Luminar supposedly did not pay him for the video - even with their big showing as the “leader in LiDAR technology” throughout the video.

Putting It All Together

Overall, Mark’s video was rather duplicitous - he recorded multiple takes to get what he needed, prevented Tesla’s software from functioning properly by intervening, and used an outdated feature set that isn’t FSD - like his video is titled.

Upcoming Videos

Several other video creators are already working to replicate what Mark “tried” to test in this video.

To get a complete picture, we need to see unedited takes, even if they’re included at the end of the video. The full vehicle specifications should also be disclosed. Additionally, the test should be conducted using Tesla’s latest hardware and software—specifically, an HW4 vehicle running FSD v13.2.8.

In Mark’s video, Autopilot was engaged just seconds before impact. However, for a proper evaluation, FSD should be activated much earlier, allowing it time to react and, if capable, stop before hitting the wall.

A wave of new videos is likely on the way—stay tuned, and we’ll be sure to cover the best ones.

Tesla Robotaxi Sends Out More Invites: Next Phases of Robotaxi

June 27, 2025

By Karan Singh

@TerrapinTerpene

Following the successful launch of Robotaxi on Sunday, June 22nd, Tesla has begun moving to the next phase of its Robotaxi rollout. They have finally begun sending out a second, larger wave of invites, expanding the early access program to more members of the Tesla community across the United States.

This has moved them past the initial 20 or so users that were offered access on Sunday. That also means Tesla is on the hunt for something crucial: more real-world data.

More Riders ASAP

The initial launch was a tightly controlled event, with access granted to a small and curated group of influencers. While this approach was ideal for generating initial buzz for the launch and collecting feedback from high-quality testers, it also presented logistical challenges.

With only a handful of authorized riders and vehicles, the demand for rides would inevitably dry up as influencers begin their journeys back home. Without a public release, that would leave Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet idle, unable to gather additional data.

To rapidly improve on Robotaxi’s FSD, Tesla needs its vehicles to be constantly navigating real-world scenarios, encountering edge cases, and logging miles. The second round of invites is needed to keep Robotaxis learning and on the road.

Austin Users Next?

This new wave of invites isn’t an open door for members of the public quite yet. By continuing to send invites to trusted community members, Tesla is executing a slow and deliberate rollout by inviting members who know and love Tesla. This allows them to scale the program gradually, increasing the number of users and the diversity of ride requests without overwhelming the relatively small initial fleet of about 10 cars.

Future phases will likely involve opening access to Tesla owners within Austin, which would open up a regular flow of rides. Once that’s done, Robotaxi will likely open up to the public.

Sign of Confidence

The expansion of the early access program is a sign that Tesla is happy and confident with the rollout so far. While Tesla can gather plenty of data around Austin from Tesla owners using FSD, they also need to continue testing features that are exclusive to the Robotaxi, such as the Robotaxi app, support, and remotely control the vehicles when needed.

We expect a full launch to potentially still be months out, but this methodical expansion will likely see more users gradually gain access to the Robotaxi network in the coming weeks.

Tesla Executive Omead Afshar Departs as Tesla's Focus Also Changes

June 27, 2025

By Karan Singh

Not a Tesla App

Omead Afshar, who was previously Elon Musk’s “Fixer” and the Head of Operations for North America and Europe, has left the company, according to reports from Forbes and Bloomberg.

While some sources have claimed he was fired, others say he voluntarily left, but his exit isn’t exactly an isolated event.

Afshar’s departure is the second high-level exit this month, following Optimus' lead, Milan Kovac. When viewed together, alongside Elon's full-time return to Tesla, these changes may offer some insight into the pressures the Tesla executive team is facing during a transitional period.

Transition from what, you may ask? Well, from the world’s largest EV company to an AI and robotics-first company. This transition has been looming for years, and with Elon’s vision of a future powered by autonomous vehicles and humanoid robots. It’s the path that Tesla is determined to forge, ahead of anyone else, and despite the immense challenges of real-world AI.

Two Competing Narratives

Two primary theories have emerged to explain the timing of Afshar’s exit, and each paints quite a different picture.

The first, supported by the reporting from Forbes, frames him as a casualty of Tesla’s current sales issues. With sales having declined for five consecutive months in Europe and dropping in the US, the second quarter of 2025 has been rough for Tesla. In conjunction with recent factory shutdowns, a lot is happening behind the scenes, with Robotaxi taking the limelight and the missing Affordable Model in the backseat. Afshar’s departure could be the result of a move to show accountability for the performance drop of the core business he managed.

The second narrative is one of “mission accomplished.” Just days before his abrupt exit, Afshar posted a celebratory message on X about the successful launch of the Robotaxi Network.

Absolutely historic day for Tesla.

This has been years of hard work and focus by so many people within the company.

Thank you, Elon, for pushing us all! https://t.co/2FPKU77ZOo
— Omead Afshar (@omead) June 23, 2025

He followed up with a second celebratory-styled message the day after - it was a project he was deeply involved in as the do-it-all executive for Elon. This has led to speculation that his departure was planned, and potentially tied to compensation vesting with the launch of the Robotaxi Network, allowing him to leave on a high note after seeing the kick-off of one of Tesla’s most critical projects. This follows other recent departures of Tesla’s executive team, many of whom have gone to full-time retirement following years of hard work.

The Bigger Picture: What Is Tesla, really?

While both theories are plausible, the truth may be that Afshar’s departure is the symptom of a much larger challenge. Tesla is balancing two very different corporate identities.

On one hand, it's a manufacturing and sales powerhouse, responsible for the world’s best-selling electric vehicles, a business facing intense competition and brand perception challenges that even Elon has acknowledged.

On the other hand, Tesla is the only company shipping real-world AI for consumers, and betting its future on robotics and AI with massive investments in capacity for both future businesses.

The recent executive churn suggests that this balancing act is creating some strain, especially for Tesla’s senior executives. The departure of Milan Kovac signaled pressure on the future side of the business, where progress has been slow but consistent. Now, the exit of Afshar, who ran the “legacy” automotive side of the business, shows there’s pressure there, as the automotive business navigates a period of flattening growth and intense global competition.

So, we ask again - What is Tesla, really? Is it an AI and Robotics company? Kind of, but not really. Is it an EV company? Once again, kind of.

In our eyes, it is no longer just an EV company, but it’s at a critical point where it is transitioning to an AI and robotics company.

Tesla’s messaging to the outside world is similarly conflicted. On the one hand, the launch of the refreshed Model Y, a massive boost for the business, went seemingly unnoticed by Elon, who only posted a single update on the Model Y after its launch. On the other hand, we’ve seen consistent and non-stop posts about Robotaxi, which is likely years away from generating a significant portion of Tesla’s profits.

A Company in Transition

Ultimately, Omead Afshar’s departure is more than a single personnel change; it’s a reflection of Tesla navigating a crucial and challenging transition. The evidence of an abrupt halt, with internal sources reporting his account has been removed from internal company directories, suggests that there’s more to this than meets the eye.

Whether he was fired for declining sales or chose to leave after the successful launch of the Robotaxi Network, the outcome is the same. A key leader, tasked with managing the core business of the present, is gone at the very moment when the company is changing its path towards AI and robotics.

Being both a car company in a tough market and an AI company on the verge of a breakthrough is a monumental challenge, and the path forward is likely to see even more changes.