Video of Tesla FSD almost hitting pedestrian receives DMCA takedown

Every new EV from Rivian to GM to BMW uses the “Combined Charging System.” Tesla, chooses to continue to use their own proprietary design in the U.S. despite having CCS technology available. (and the implementation completed already - European Tesla models ship CCS - required by law.)

Tesla will sell you $10K beta software that wants to steer into pedestrians, that most choose to pay for because after delivery, the price doubles (so act fast!) Most who fork that kind of cash are not able to access all parts of this beta software, this software license cannot sold/transferred to the next owner regardless of what the maroney sticker says, but don’t worry, FSD is being launched next month.

If thats excusable, surely then everyone’s ok with vendor lock in for DC Fast charging unless one wants to shell out $450 for a slower “old school” Chademo adapter, the fact one cannot buy replacement parts for their car, and cannot repair their own vehicle.

Tesla - America’s Beta Test Success Story.

In particular, road maintenance is already expensive and often left to rot. Still, current driving is relatively robust - even if a few signs are damaged or go missing, no major issues will occur. Road signs keep working even during storms, even if there is no power, even if something has hacked national electronic systems, even if the GPS is not accessible.

Replacing all this with brittle, finicky, expensive, easy to attack en masse digital systems is not a great idea.

What aircraft autopilot does is following a pre-planned route to the T, with any changes being input by humans. The aircraft autopilot doesn't do its own detection of obstacles, nor of router markings; it follows the flight plan and reacts to conditions of the aircraft. Even when executing automatic take-off and landing, the autopilot doesn't try to detect other vehicles or obstacles - just executes the plan, safe in knowledge that there are humans actively monitoring for safety. There is always at least two humans in the loop: the pilot in command who prepared and inputed the original flight plan and also inputs any route changes when needed (collision and weather avoidance), and an air traffic controller that continuously observes flight paths of several aircrafts and is responsible for ensuring safe separation between aircraft in his zone of responsibility. Beyond that, an ATController has equal influence on all aricraft in his zone of responsibility, and in case one does something unexpected, it can equally well redirect that one or any other one in vicinity. Lastly, due to much less dense traffic, the separation between aircraft is significantly larger than between cars [1] providing time for pilots to perform evasive maneuvers - and that's in 3d space, where there are effectively two axes to evade along.

Conversely with car FSD - the system is tasked both with following the route, and also with continuously updating the route according to markings, traffic, obstacles, and any contingencies encountered. This is a significant difference in quantity from the above - the law and the technology demands one human in the loop, and that human can only really influence his own car at most. Even worse, due to density of traffic, the separation between cars is quite often on the order of seconds of travel time, making hand-over to driver a much more rapid process.

I am moderately hopeful for FSD "getting there" eventually, but at the same time I'm wary of narrative making unwarranted parallels between FSD and aircraft autopilot.

[1] https://www.airservicesaustralia.com/about-us/our-services/h...

That might explain the car trying to re-route on the display, although I'm not even sure it does. To me it looks like the black line disappears into compression artefacts at just the right time.

Mostly I think we don't have enough evidence either way and speculating just expresses our desire for the technology to work or not.