It's not bad being in 3rd place against Google and Cruise/GM in a few years.
This type of thing can improve rapidly as they start doing real-world testing... which you cite yourself has merely begun (on real roads mind you, not testing in closed environments). 2200 miles is hardly anything to measure against. Which sounds like months of testing vs Waymo's years.
Not to mention they are developing full new vehicles as well, not just the driving AI software. Which might be highly valuable to a major car company who could acquire them at a significant multiple.
This type of pessimism based on a single metric is toxic and naive regarding how tech companies are built.
...Not to mention there was no claim in this article that they were at Waymo's level or anything but at a very early stage of development.
[1] https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/zoox#section-locked-...
The self-reported California metrics themselves cannot be relied upon since the companies (Cruise and Waymo included), could be making it up (and indeed have an incentive to inflate their numbers).
At the end of the day though, not all miles are equal. If one were so inclined you could just drive up an down a big highway with autonomy engaged only once merged. Obviously 100 miles of SF traffic is not the same as 100 miles of staying in your lane on cruise control.
https://thelastdriverlicenseholder.com/2018/02/01/disengagem...
They seemed pretty confident when they had a reporter ferried back and forth.
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/495c1aa7-2a3b-4dd8...
For comparison, in the 12 months ending in Nov 2017, Waymo drove 352000 autonomous miles in CA public roads, with a disengagement rate of 1/5600 miles.
This article is a joke...