Any "self driving" from Tesla carries large amount of risk because it uses _only_ cameras. Visual anomalies happen and without radar/lidar as a second source of truth, the vehicles will always sketch me out. Some say "separate the art from the artist" but at the end of the day, Elon's stubbornness to only use cameras is the reason many people are apprehensive to shell out money for the vehicle and especially the any autonomous driving capabilities.

Even if future vehicles DID have lidar, every vehicle up to now does not and therefore will never be truly self-driving. Customers already paid for it with the promise that vehicle hardware is capable. So either they will have to be refunded, or retro fitted with new sensors - at the expense of Tesla I assume. Still no idea how they are valued so much.

▲

taylodl 17 hours ago | parent [-]

My benchmark for full self-driving is simple: if the manufacturer assumes full legal responsibility and liability for the vehicle’s actions, then it qualifies as autonomous. Otherwise, it’s just driver assistance and isn't capable of being an autonomous taxi.

▲

jerlam 17 hours ago | parent [-]

This begs the question whether the safety monitors in the Robotaxis are also there to take blame for any of the vehicles' accidents.

	▲	taylodl 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I had never even thought of that! I had just assumed that Tesla would be responsible, but you know what they say about "assume!" Holy Cow! Now you've got me thinking there's another reason to not utilize a Robotaxi, buried in the terms and conditions that nobody reads could be a statement where you take full responsibility for everything the Robotaxi does. Yikes!