The latest noise by Musk about Tesla's FSD is purely to raise money and take away the focus that he can't produce cars profitably. Nothing else
Tesla is the only one actually attempting to empower individuals with FSD tech. Everyone else has given up and/or wants to monopolize it for private fleets. Everyone claims to be shooting for the same FSD capability. Different strategies is, of course, wrongly conflated with "fraud."
I tend to think Tesla is behind Waymo. It's hard to say beyond that. But for actual mass deployment of serious hardware, no one is ahead of Tesla.
Charlatan in 2019: The previous version by nVidia was such garbage (processing 1.5 fps, really?). Teslas built right now has all the hardware required for FSD.
Charlatan, a few minutes later: We are working on the next version of FSD hardware (that'd most definitely render 2019 obsolete)
There is Musk, the sometimes engineer, then there is Musk, the charlatan. An Engineer would never claim 'the latest hardware will be the greatest ever'
What I find so fascinating about this discussion is how Tesla is necessarily the most transparent player yet everyone else (with the same stated FSD goals) is given a pass due to secrecy. I suppose that means secrecy works.
Again you got ahead of yourself with the Tesla hype.
Also, Elon always promised hardware upgrade if needed.
We're talking about the holy grail of AI in the automotive industry, not a SaaS side project.
This isn't assigning the Summer Vision Project in 1966.
Everyone knew that this was going to be a monumental problem, and the only person in the room who was claiming they already had all the tools to solve the problem (a problem that no one else is even willing to say they fully understood how to approach yet) is also the guy with a record for lying through his teeth so much there's a term for it.
I'm excited to see real attempts at FSD. Not from the company that gets most of it's hype from AP1, which used the same sensor suit GM was putting in cars years ago for off-label applications so they could go around waving "autopilot", which resulted in easily preventable deaths.
There's a guy in a village next to me that is "attempting to empower individuals" with energy medicine (healing people with the touch of his hands). Everyone else, including medicine researchers, has given up on this.
Maybe people who've paid for the Tesla FSD package will receive what I imagine when I hear "full self driving". Or maybe, like No Man's Sky backers, they'll get something they're less happy with.
Tesla claim they have all the hardware for FSD, but FSD is still science fiction. It literally doesn't exist. Waymo is closest but they use Lidar, which Tesla's aren't equipped with.
Maybe Tesla will work it out and make a great self driving car on cheap hardware. I'll believe it when I see it
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-waymo-selfdriving-focus/w...
Tesla’s most recent FSD video took place around Palo Alto. The same area where its 2016 video was filmed.
With a Tesla, they can deliver incremental value, without having to be able to handle every possible scenario.
Also aren’t Cruise and Waymo in same boat touting progress to raise money?
Also they've been operating in demanding conditions compared to Waymo.
eg NYC rush hour https://twitter.com/DrCamiloOrtiz/status/1114328048915099649
Lane change in heavy traffic https://twitter.com/hamids/status/1120472369762590722
while when reporters "Followed a Waymo Self-driving Car for Miles' the Waymos seemed to have some issues https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spw176TZ7-8
This is the point that Waymo reached in 2012 if I remember correctly.
It is also worth pointing out that Tesla's ability to run software on its fleet of hundreds of thousands of cars gives them a huge advantage regarding data collection. If their cars are truly as safe as they claim (a huge if and one we have no real public proof of yet), the lack of having this report on disengagements in California is not going to be a stumbling block in getting regulatory approval.
EDIT: Since I am being downvoted, I looked up the regulation [1]. Teslas likely don't to qualify as "autonomous vehicles" according to definition b. Although that is a pretty bad definition in my opinion. Also I am not praising Tesla here, just pointing out that their ability to avoid this regulation is not an indication of the quality of their self-driving tech.
[1] - https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/d48f347b-8815-458e...
the lack of having this report on disengagements in California is not going to be a stumbling block in getting regulatory approval.
Actually, if Tesla hopes to legally sell self-driving cars in CA, that is going to be a huge stumbling block.
Tesla has sold over 50k Model 3s in California in 2018[1]. Regulators would be ridiculous if they put more value in the data from 111 Waymo vehicles compared to the data from tens of thousand of Tesla vehicles.
And once again, I am not saying Tesla is leading here or has superior technology. But people like you are letting their bias against Musk and Tesla cloud their judgement on this issue.
[1] - https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/California-s-su...
And this is super important when raising the $2B Tesla is seeking.
[1] Except that situation with cars is much worse than with laptops, as you can continue using a laptop while it's charging.
What is funny is when they try to convince people that a Tesla actually is a luxury car, which it quite obviously isn't. Model S lacks some meaningful amenities that a Hyunday at half the price has, build quality would make a Yugo gag, and if it does break down or gets in an accident you might be waiting months for it to be fixed. But I guess it's nice to convince yourself that there were some reasons you've paid $60K for for something less practical than a Yaris...
Nope. Great EV. Vastly overpriced golf cart as a car.