The variance on human driving ability is higher than we would accept from a machine, but I have two friends who don't have stereoscopic vision, and I trust both of them to drive me
I like their startup-ish approach which enables them to push software updates to all their cars and collect valuable data, but I feel most people do fundamentally not understand that their cars offer at best Level 2 autonomy.
On a side note, if and when LIDAR becomes cheap enough, Tesla may change their mind and look at integrating it in their cars.
But look, if you reference other articles, Audi can only do self-driving when: "In slow-moving traffic on divided highways at speeds of 37.3 mph and under only. " (TechCrunch).
Tesla can already do that. It simply require the driver to keep hands on the steering because it also allows for all the other options, and Tesla doesn't want you to let go of the wheel and run over a human.
Note that Audi isn not saying their car will do self-driving in the city, with pedestrians throwing themselves onto the road. NO, it will ONLY do it on highways, while in slow traffic. So Audi can only do self-driving when the car is barely in motion and the possibility of interference is close to zero.
That's like calling yourself a University Professor because you wear a checkered jacket with elbow patches.
Not everything regarding Tesla is about Elon.
Sentences such as
> all that's required to achieve that is for Elon to push some software updates and voila
make the task seem (A) trivial and (B) like the decision is completely up to Elon. This hugely discounts the fact that when/if Tesla roles out level 3 autonomy, that this was the result of a huge amount of work put in by a big team inside the company.
You also wouldn't hear "all that's required to achieve that is for Rupert (Stadler) to push some software updates and voila" about Audi, when both were probably equally responsible for putting the issue on the roadmap and equally not involved in the implementation.