That said, I don't think Tesla are wrong. If Tesla can deploy MobilEye-level automatic visual mapping (see https://youtu.be/GQ15HWCw_Ic?t=1381) this can obviate the need for LIDAR-based localization and dramatically improve their perception systems (by having very good prior information about all static obstacles, such as lane dividers).
Dynamic obstacle detection will still be worse than it would be with a vision+LIDAR approach, but not that much worse. Having superhuman ability along two axes (map-based priors and alertness / reaction time) is likely sufficient to drive better than humans, even if several remaining axes (dynamic obstacle detection and prediction) are worse.
Additionally, Tesla is not (AFAIK) using any structure-from-motion (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT2KsN7yKo0) or stereo-vision (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SskSDjUG8ZY) techniques, but there's a chance that these could also improve perception, especially in tough cases where a single frame is not enough for good detection (e.g. white semi in sunlight).
LIDAR is not being used in the (compared to Tesla) small-scale AV systems of Waymo, Cruise, Aurora et. al because it's essential, but rather because it's convenient, and because the companies producing those systems want to give their AVs every advantage at any cost. I fully expect Tesla (and MobilEye) to do superhuman self driving without LIDAR, but it will take longer (i.e. not by EOY).
If Elon really thought "in theory, camera-only full self driving is possible, therefore I should invest resources in that approach" than he's dumber than I thought. He's done it because Lidar was not an option - and the claim that FSD is coming soon was an intentional lie.
So Personally I would feel safe in a camera only car driving during the day in good conditions and with good road markings or on a controlled road where humans are excluded. I would not feel safe in any other situation..
I still want a model3 it is so good in every other way but I wont be trusting the self driving.
What's your evidence of intent?
Similar might happen to vision-only self-driving. It might take a decade or two longer to develop compared to LIDAR-based approaches, and meanwhile LIDAR is only going to get cheaper.
Sure, but only about 0.000014% of that time occurred while cars existed. It's not like we evolved to control big metal objects hurtling down artificially made flat surfaces.
A computer doesn't get distracted by a text message. A computer doesn't get drunk. A computer doesn't day dream.
Cases where a crash happens and the person at fault says something like "I didn't see them!", it's usually because they didn't even look, a mistake a computer won't make.
What we can measure is fatalities
Human brains, which are general intelligences, exist, and are collections of atoms.
I'll happily, for $500,000/copy, upfront, promise to sell you artificial general intelligences. I swear I'll get them built in the next two years.
There is, after all, no first principle reason for why my promise isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Human brains are collections of atoms, so we should be able to, out of atoms, build artificial general intelligences.