It's a geological amount of time to a real-time system, which anything related to controlling a car absolutely will be. "Multiple seconds of unpredictable latency are OK" is an attitude that doesn't get you far when interacting with the physical world, and that's why there is an entire discipline dedicated to dealing with it that has to use special chips (e.g. the ARM R series), special OSes (e.g. VxWorks), and special tools (special IDEs, oscilloscopes, special cameras) to rise to the occasion.
If they let a "latency doesn't matter" system near any of these data streams, that's the scandal.
The logging service that writes it down isn't really critical to the operation of the car. Even the notification has a geological amount of time before it has to notify the driver when compared to many other systems that operate on a near self driving car. I wouldn't be surprised if less critical components shared a non realtime timeslot between the actual realtime tasks.
Or hardware failure, possibly injecting faults into the system. See Page 14: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/ApolloLMRadarTND6849.pdf
s/will be/should be/ -- defects in design notwithstanding. Note that the latency involved with the sensing equipment (skin conductivity? pressure sensor?) could be large enough to be significant.
Of course, I don't actually know what the logs look like, but I'd rather err on the side of assuming that the designers of a real-time system for monitoring something related to driver safety took into account the idea that, when the car is involved a severe crash, they should have as much accurate data recorded as possible rather than leaving it sitting around for ages in un-flushed caches.
The car should be conservative about the threshold it uses for the sensors in determining if there are hands (because it would rather err on the side of telling someone to put their hands back on, than err on the side of thinking someone has their hands on when they don't), but engineers analyzing the logs after a crash wouldn't have to use that same threshold when trying to determine if the driver was in control of the car at the time of the crash.
Plus, it's a pretty common complaint in Tesla forums.
On the other hand, this is effectively an admission by Tesla that there are serious problems with the autopilot system. It should never guide the car into a barrier, no matter where the driver's hands are.
You are vastly overestimating things here.
Critical functionality in a car would rarely if ever involve non-deterministic delays. Furthermore, the OS itself (if there even is one) would be a real-time OS.
But even if we assume such delays are present in a Tesla steering wheel monitoring task, absolutely none of the delays you listed would approach anything near a second...
It might not be safety-design-critical to have a record of the hand-presence sensor with high resolution, merely high enough resolution for safe operation of the vehicle.
Flushing these records to storage is an independent function for the sake of service/support/maintenance and is likely not a regulatory requirement. Though regulatory agencies are bound to be interested in the data.
That may be why they were removed, there's an inherent conflict of interest when only Tesla engineers are able to decipher Tesla's crash data.
Call me a sceptic, but saying that with absolute certainty is troubling. As an engineer, knowing how a lot of software and hardware systems are actually implemented, 6 seconds is such a minuscule time frame. Data about hand position could be in a write cache somewhere waiting to be flushed, inside monitoring service, inside OS, inside RAID controller, inside storage controller, or even de-prioritized by a busy IO scheduler. Then at a moment of a crash that the data might never make it to the storage for recovery.
I'm not saying that it is, but if the hand monitoring service is glitching out, it will take a lot of time to resolve the issues completely, mostly because just looking at the data as a remote observer (without camera installed in a car) it would just look like the hands were not on the wheel.
Also it doesn't help that for Tesla it seems to be a nice way out of this kind of crashes – they can just say that driver's hands were not on the wheel and that's that. Who even has the data and can decode it? How can we make sure the data was not tampered with?
This needs to be investigated properly and not just by Tesla, they are a biased party.