> Tesla’s fully autonomous self driving is about as safe as a regular person. Many of it’s “accidents” as shown by the various investigations have shown that “drivers” in the plurality of cases had several(>5) seconds to react but failed to do so.
It's not fully autonomous if the drivers have to react. No idea if it's safer or not but the naming is terrible.
And that’s honestly a fair critique. I think Elon is definitely an optimist in his technological ambitions. The whole naming of the drive assistance features from Tesla is kind of convoluted and confusing. I think Autopilot, Fully-Self Driving, all of them could have been termed better. I think he sold a dream before it’s time. And I think the pivot away from using LiDAR was probably a mistake as well.
The maxim of make it work and then make it work better probably applies. He has repeatedly said that since humans only need 2 eyes to drive, AI should too - but that completely ignores the neurological differences between a camera outputting a flat 2d image and the complex make up of our eyes. There is a lot happening there behind the scenes, abstracted away by our brain, that he discounts.
Anyways, yeah, I agree. My only concern is people turning against self-driving because of implementation failures in the short term. Self-driving is going to save lives. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water and discount the work being done by people who aren’t Elon. If you seperate FSD from the politics, the business, the fandom, it is an amazing piece of technology. A computer is now driving as well as a person. Like that’s insane. In a different circumstance we would be applauding it in amazement. That team has done amazing work.
It's not fully autonomous if the drivers have to react. No idea if it's safer or not but the naming is terrible.