The Washington Post has no credibility with me.
The Washington Post has no credibility with me.
All this article is... is a bunch of youtube videos and demonstration videos of common FSD errors. Given the video evidence, it seems reasonable to assume that FSD isn't working yet, despite claims made 7 years ago by Tesla and its marketing groups.
The goal should not be to avoid all errors but to minimize them without regression. Perfect is the enemy of good, so expecting perfection is irrational.
Lying is also an enemy, and we're well into the "Tesla has been lying" about their $5000, $10,000, and $12,000 software.
The science behind rockets is literally decades old at this point. The U.S. designed reusable rockets back in the 1980s and never built them due to budget cuts.
Experts said they weren't sure if the cost of developing reusable rockets would be financially sustainable, given that SpaceX started while the U.S. still had a functional space shuttle program.
And...absent the NASA R&D contracts, SpaceX would not currently be sustainable on the basis of commercial launch activity.
This list IIRC was posted by someone on HN which details some of the claims Musk has made in the past which suggest he isn't the most honest of people.
Abridged history of Elon's self-driving predictions:
2015: "We’re going to end up with complete autonomy, and I think we will have complete autonomy in approximately two years."
2016: "I really consider autonomous driving a solved problem, I think we are less than two years away from complete autonomy, safer than humans, but regulations should take at least another year."
2018: "I think probably by end of next year (2019) self-driving will encompass essentially all modes of driving and be at least 100% to 200% safer than a person."
2019: "We need to be at 99.9999..% We need to be extremely reliable. When do we think it is safe for FSD, probably towards the end of this year then its up to the regulators when they will decide to approve that."
2019: "I feel very confident predicting autonomous robotaxis for Tesla next year."
2020: "I am extremely confident of achieving full autonomy and releasing it to the Tesla customer base next year. But I think at least some jurisdictions are going to allow full self-driving next year."
2021: "Tesla Full Self-Driving will work at a safety level well above that of the average driver this year, of that I am confident. Can’t speak for regulators though."
Musk meanwhile is the subject of a cult of personality and head of a public corporation… he doesn’t have that option. Does he just not feel it?
That said, again, I wish people would stop using his claims from years past as some kind of evidence that they will never make it work. What kind of logic is that?
> So I should make up my mind about what the person I asked thinks about something instead of simply asking them?
It's technology, you can make up your own mind about it, independent of what you think of Musk. If this is how you reason about the world, it's a very shallow way. "I think Apple will fail because Steve Jobs is an asshole that stole money from Wozniak", "Windows will fail because Bill Gates is a bully blah blah".
No it was a living human being that I asked the question to, not a piece of technology.
They're really not. It's happening in public. But even regulators are having to fight to pry every scrap of information about how it's happening out of Tesla's hands, and it is a constant fight to get even the tiniest fragments of data from them.
Musk claims disengagements are decreasing. I'm sure he'll be sure to have Tesla release that data, then, given Tesla's "corporate commitment to transparency". Any day now. Right after Trump releases his tax returns, no doubt.
I'd be willing to bet Elon huffs enough of his own farts that he too genuinely believes this, but I can definitely see the "real-life Tony Stark!!!111" fanboy cohort lapping that right up. The Venn diagram between Elon Musk fans and borderline-ancap laissez-faire extremists is practically a circle.