> Humans are proof that's its possible to safely drive a car with pure vision.

Humans also have eyes with a lot more than 1.2 megapixels of equivalent resolution and vastly more dynamic range, attached to a brain with damn near infinite more compute power than any computer.

Driving with headphones is illegal in 17 states. Can Tesla's Autopilot hear a horn or siren?

I mean what would you expect it to do with that data? When a person hears a siren it's a signal to check their mirrors for emergency vehicles. Auto pilot doesn't need to check mirrors, it always has a 360 view of its surroundings.

Of all the potential criticisms of fsd this is an odd one.

> Pretty sure no human has ever propulsively landed a rocket on earth using nothing but vision.

Neither has SpaceX. On the other hand, humans have been using their plain jane eyeballs to land helicopters for years.

I don't think humans are a good benchmark for what we should expect from FSD.

Not in the short term for sure. I've been pretty impressed with the FSD beta videos circulating youtube though. It's better than you would expect for a non-geofenced, vision based self driving system.

Better than I would have expected? I guess we didn't watch the same videos. I expected to see the system repeatedly trying to kill people and that's exactly what I saw in those videos.

I guess we haven't seen the same videos. I've watched many hours of FSD beta footage and if anything its excessively cautious.

Not saying it never makes dangerous mistakes, but the mistakes I've seen it make seem solvable. For example it has trouble with unprotected left turns when there are trees or fences obscuring the view. That to me is understandable and could probably be fixed with an update to the vision stack, maybe train the object detector on cars partially obscured by trees.

From what I saw, it drives worse than an intoxicated teenager on the first week of their learner's permit.