Except all you have to do is go try it and it becomes clear to any layperson that it's probably getting there but, and this is really crucial, it's not there yet.
Except all you have to do is go try it and it becomes clear to any layperson that it's probably getting there but, and this is really crucial, it's not there yet.
I think FSD definitely has utility, but not in the hands of laypeople. There are still far too many edge cases that it just doesn't handle well, and your average person can't be trusted to stay alert and attentive while using a feature so heavily marketed as not needing either of these things.
...and that turned out to be a little optimistic, but they really are "there" now IMHO in San Francisco. I rode in one for the first time last year. Subjectively, I felt safer moving through San Francisco traffic in the self-driving car than I do when I'm driving there myself or when I'm being driven by a human in a Lyft. It was attentive, cautious, and smooth, and I got there in a reasonable time with no fuss. And crucially, I see a notable lack of stories about it making dangerous decisions, despite the total passenger miles.
Why is Waymo there now and not Tesla? I think a combination of factors, including: (a) the head start, (b) the willingness to use LIDAR and RADAR to overcome limitations, (c) the focus on self-driving (they design and operate self-driving systems; they don't manufacture electric cars), (d) the service model (easier problem to focus on a mapped region with good weather and monitor everything vs. sell a car expected to work anywhere/anytime without (as much?) telemetry), (e) frankly, caring more about safety and less about hype. Of those differences, the "head start" one is shrinking relatively speaking, but the others will likely remain significant enough that I don't expect to trust Tesla's systems any time soon.
What data? The data Tesla chooses to share with you?
It wouldn't surprise me to find out this incident had FSD disengage moments before colliding with the pole, thus continuing 100% FSD safe driving.
2) This is only the data Tesla chooses to share, at times when Tesla chooses to share it.
They could have other auditors validate the data. They could release full datasets on regular schedules. They could do a lot of things, but they don't. They give little highlights of results without explaining methodologies. They pick seemingly random timeframes. They're not open with this information in the slightest.
Serious question - what data? And who is supplying that? Tesla? And what is the emotional human equivalent for the level of confidence that we should assume is "safe"? 1% error rate? 0.5%? 0.00001%?