Why do you think that? Can you explain how this would happen, when the car appears to lack the physical hardware (e.g. LIDARs, computing power) to do so in anything but clear conditions on highways?
Moreover, why would Tesla be interested in doing so? They gain nothing, reduce a customer's desire to upgrade to the latest model, and put themselves into major extra liability if the system ever fucks up.
Remember, Elon doesn’t think like other industrialists. I fully believe that he views profit as little more than a tool to reach his other goals.
Also, having worked on autonomous vehicles, my opinion is that LIDAR is really overrated, and if compute power is an issue, that can be a straightforward modular upgrade.
After all, it's already got the hardware and hardpoints for installing hardware. Swapping out existing LIDAR arrays for newer arrays, or current processors for optimized self-driving processors, would be a piece of cake. Especially with GM's extremely large supply chain, capable of producing more cars in an hour than Tesla can produce in a year, and the corresponding parts for all of those cars.
Fair enough, although it does have better range than ultrasonic and it can see through rain/fog/snow better than cameras.
All car makers would love it if they could reduce the lifespan of their car. I'm just old enough to remember my parents getting calls because a car was about to turn 100,000 miles - they would fill the car with people to see that event - they had to put oil in before and after that 10 mile drive, and you could see the road through the floor boards. Today even the worst cars are expected to make it to 200,000 miles with just minimal maintenance, and still meet emissions - this is to the auto makers loss. However if anyone tries to go down the road of planned obsolescence they rightly believe that will catch up to them. Gm still hasn't complete shaken that reputation - you can see it when they put a GM name on a Japanese car and it is rated lower in reliability than the maker's version.
You're thinking like the Javascript Generation. People do impossible things all the time on so-called "outdated" gear. And a Tesla is far from outdated.
It could very well be a hardware problem that can be solved in software.
This keeps the vehicle resale value high, which constrains demand, which keeps their margins higher than all other auto manufacturers.
I'd rather wait 5-10 years for someone like Waymo to figure it out and then roll it out than see a car I really want today get crapped up with features that are incidental to its raison d'etre. Honestly this and the delays may be enough to make me cancel my res.
General purpose cars are used in too many situations for general purpose autonomous systems to operate in. Moreover, the addition of autonomous systems means that the human behind the wheel will be less vigilant about keeping themselves and other drivers safe. I very strongly believe that autonomous systems beyond L2 actually do not make the car safer, except in situations where the driver is impaired; they just make the car more convenient.
L4 has definite possibility for things like uber where pickup and dropoff are within the same city. But it seems increasingly unlikely that we'll see L5 within our lifetimes, at least from any ethical company who doesn't oversell what the system is capable of.
Tesla claims that they can do it with the sensors they have, but please do note that none of the other autonomous vehicle players -- many of whom appear to have much more sophisticated offerings than Tesla -- think it can be done.
I know I'm in the minority, but both of my cars that I drive are almost 20 years old (one's a 1999, the other a 2004). Prior to the 2004, I owned a truck from 1996 (ran great until I spun a journal bearing for no good reason).
I also once owned a 1979 Ford Bronco...