Your sarcastic retort is not consistent with anything anyone is arguing. Nobody has said FSD is ready to be relied upon, least of all Tesla, who still calls it a "beta". This isn't what I said. This isn't what zaroth said. Nobody said it. So why did you say it?
I realise this isn't a simple argument, but let me try again:
DRIVE PILOT is ~100% capable of limited self-driving on ~0.01% of roads (a curated set of slow highways in California, unless rainy, foggy or dark).
FSD Beta is ~90% capable of full self-driving on ~99% of roads.
Different ambitions at different levels of completion. The comparisons you've been trying to make are, I'm sorry to say, fanboy-esque. "N64 Mario would definitely beat 16-bit Sonic in a game of tennis."
I’m sarcastic as it’s hard to assume people argue here in either good faith or have any idea about the problem.
Being capable of 90% self driving means it’s not self driving, period. And going to ~100% is extremely, extremely difficult. Anyone comparing those numbers to show Tesla’s superiority (or even being in the same league) just doesn’t understand anything about safety critical systems.
What’s better - Airbus 320, which has limited range, or a hypothetical plane, that can fly around the world, and to Mars, but just 90% of the time?
And arguments here are especially funny, as Tesla has been openly lying about their abilities and progress for almost 7 years now.
And talking about ambitions - design intent defines your ambitions and capabilities of self driving systems on the SAE scale. Tesla openly claims to CA DMV, that they’re developing level 2 driver assist system, not a self driving system.
What Tesla has deployed and continues to develop is absolutely an L2 DAS in its current incarnation.
One day, if they are successful, you will see them rollout L3 operation. I would expect this to happen on highways first, and then off-highway. It would be a truly crowning achievement of software engineering and AI, a moonshot realized. I hope they get there.
I think their approach is sound and has proven merit. In the worst case they will have an L2 system that makes commutes more relaxing, and saves lives both inside and outside the vehicle.
But they are uniquely positioned with the massive amount of operational data they collect to solve this problem in a generic / worldwide fashion, and their iterative approach has put them years ahead of the competition.
Their solution is truly scalable, in that it doesn’t require geofencing nor extensive and constant local mapping of the world state in order for the vehicle to safely navigate through it.
Now, Elon openly and readily admits that the same optimism that leads him to try to tackle these moonshots in the first place is what also leads him to over-estimate how quickly they will surmount the challenges they face.
But, he has an extraordinary amount of capital, and an equal level of determination to reach his goals, and frankly no one else on the planet has a better track record for problem solving at this level.
I realise this isn't a simple argument, but let me try again:
DRIVE PILOT is ~100% capable of limited self-driving on ~0.01% of roads (a curated set of slow highways in California, unless rainy, foggy or dark).
FSD Beta is ~90% capable of full self-driving on ~99% of roads.
Different ambitions at different levels of completion. The comparisons you've been trying to make are, I'm sorry to say, fanboy-esque. "N64 Mario would definitely beat 16-bit Sonic in a game of tennis."