Still completely reckless in my opinion to deploy any autonomous system without LIDAR or some other long range, night time capable sensor. Even if it's not reckless their competitors will offer low light and night time autonomous driving which will be a major advantage.
I do not get why your comment is so controversial - you are absolutely right. Conventional cameras alone are not trustworthy for self-driving, and this is part of the reason every respectable company venturing into self-driving is incorporation technologies like LIDAR. I find it sketchy that Tesla markets "future full-self-driving" when they are unlikely to have the hardware to make that a safe experience.
Their ability to deliver is a function of the costs of their basic technology supplies (batteries for the Roadster were expensive, less so for the S, X, and energy storage, and now even less so for the 3). This is very similar to the cost decline curve of solar, wind, and storage in the utility energy space (project developers provide bids based on where prices will be in 3-5 years).
Tesla can do this because technology and batteries rapidly decreases in cost every year. Need new autopilot compute hardware? It should be cheaper by the time they need to perform the swap to realize the capability. Need LIDAR? They'll find a way to install it, and the costs should be fairly reasonable per vehicle instead of thousands, or tens of thousands, if they went all in when it was expensive.
This is not unlike a technology startup, where technical debt you're going to pay off in the future is an acceptable tradeoff, so you push off the decision and/or work until the last possible moment (but no further).