Tesla keeps promising things are fixed in the next update, then the next update, and so on. I don't think Tealas have the proper sensors to avoid collisions and their algorithms don't think like an attentive driver does.

I've been questioning it since the day Mushk said "We don't need fancy pants LiDAR, regular cameras are all you need!"

As if a safety critical system shouldn't have backups or alternative sensors for verifying shit

Yes growing. They were birthed years ago, and Elon has done his best to nurture them so they grow big and strong

This will be the reason Tesla falls behind the rest of the automotive industry, wasting money on vanity projects instead of developing better vehicles.

The 3, Y, and the huge number of Chinese EVs being sold around the world have shown there is a huge market for affordable, practical electric vehicles, and what are they developing? A vehicle that won't be able to fulfill it's intended role for a decade almost everywhere.

Aren't level 4 systems still illegal in the US anyway? I remember Volkswagen holding off on a minibus due to this limitation when they managed to create a working proof of concept 8ish years ago

Also this seems to very much be them suffering from the 90/10 problem that some many software projects suffer from: you can do 90% of the work with 10% of the effort but that also means it takes 90% of the work to do the other 10%.

Earlier people from the outside perceived Tesla as being ahead of everybody else on this because they just started before just about everybody else, were riding the easy part of the curve were you're constant delivering improvements because you're just tackling the easy bits, and they were probably even doing a rush job and taking shortcuts to maintain that apperarence of being ahead of the rest because that maintained an appeareance of Tesla as a Tech Stock rather than an Auto Industry Stock, hence with market valuations 10x or 20x higher than they would others which meant sky-high Tesla Stock Prices justified by how "technologically ahead" they were in a "key future technology" - the company was just executing a typical conman strategy of looking like they were making it in the hope that their early-mover status and the increasing investor funding that strategy pulls in would allow them to actually make it before everybody else or at least with a larger installed base, similarly to how Theranos was doing only unlike that company Tesla did just the right balance of deceit and reality to just be on the right side of the Laws for Fraud.

Tech companies absolutelly can get away with doing this during the early and easy parts of the project because for non-experts it looks like they're doing fast progress - which is why Startups nowadays (which is an Era of way more bullshitty and even fraud in the Industry than, say, pre-2000) commonly do things exactly like this - but then they reach the hard part, progress speed naturaly goes down a lot (the project transitions from the 90%-results/10%-work speed to the 10/90% one) plus all the the early shortcuts (a.k.a. Technical Debt) come due to be paid for: "out of control car careening down the hill" meet "concrete wall".

Finally, I wouldn't at all be surprised if they're stuck down a dead-end for the technology which is the wrong way to reach level 4 and have to go back and redo much if not most of that work they did as a rush job to keep impressing investors and ill-informed customers with how "ahead of the pack" the were. Under the leadership of Musk I suspect that they will never be able to reach level 4.

They're only ahead of everyone else because they were prepared to release a product that was untested and quite possibly unsafe, whereas the other car manufacturers realized that would be detrimental to their business, both in terms of reputation, and the inevitable lawsuits. Tesla just does whatever though.

This times 50x with SpaceX. There's ample justification to nationalize it at this point with Musk's erratic behavior.

Tesla has never, ever, had anything remotely resembling a lead in autonomous vehicles. The actual AV industry doesn't consider them part of it.

Shhhh! I accidentally opened this thread while my phone was connected and EVERYTHING IS FINE RECALCULATING ROUTE.

I recently rode in a Tesla on FSD for over 26 hours of freeway travel. It was flawless the entire time.

On city streets? 90% was about right. It once took too sharp of a turn at a double right turn and spooked the driver next to us (although it didn't cross into their lane, just got close), and another time decided to only change lanes halfway into the left turn lane.

I agree that it needs to be near 100% on city streets before it's ready for launch because that 10% difference is HUGE when it comes to safety. If their "level 5" taxi isn't using some vastly improved software, it needs to be kept off the street.

Same. I love my FSD and I've watched it go from 80% a few years ago to around 95% now.

There was an story a while back where it was discovered that Tesla focuses their efforts on the routes taken by creators (and other influencial people), to intentionally make self driving look better than it is.

I have it and it is legitimately a great driver aid. But you need to understand its limitations to use it safely. It's a really awkward place to live in, because I get an immense amount of value out of it, but I would not just throw my mother in the car and trust her to use it safely.

I suppose the ones where people die are never uploadet.
But other than that, feel free to judge on anecdotal data.