It's technically possibly but unbelievably dangerous, given the necessity of relying for millisecond response times over unreliable wireless connections. That $800M would disappear in a puff of litigation if anything went wrong.

But of course we know Zoox is actually driving on SF roads according to public documents, and the fact you can watch them drive if you are in SF and know where to look. Demos are demos, but this one happened with Zoox software at 100% autonomy.

It is impossible considering the network lag and unreliability when transmitting all the 3D data to a remote location. It doesn't make any sense at all. The remote operation can only help vehicles make decisions, while the vehicle still needs to drive by itself.

The remote driving driver could in theory ghost the journalist car for low latency. Just saying.

Coincidently Ericson and KTH (which Zoox has cooperated with) has done remote driving over cellphone links over multiple miles. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cvSM7pbqZEM

I'm not saying it's what happend. I mean Darpa challange was not fake so Stanford has delivered in the area. But it's possible to solve the lag issue.

no, I am not saying it's impossible. So, are we actually claiming that this company lied to the reporter and manually drove the car through the streets of SF, while remote controlling it? it is POSSIBLE. But do we have any EVIDENCE this happened? Because the story of Theranos is not the story of lack of evidence that it was a fraud. It was virtually apparent from the early days that it was a fraud with plenty of evidence that was ignored. Is there a shred of evidence that this is a fraud?