Even if you discount the examples with no lane markings or low visibility (both of which are quite common in the Boston area, so a system not designed to handle it is ultimately flawed), it almost running into three separate trucks cannot even remotely be chalked up to stupidity. Even in the example where it turns into the semi, that truck is clearly visible. In the last example, with the FedEx truck, the display pretty clearly shows it knows the truck/cars are there, and it still flubbed.

I look forward to the new name for the system. 'Totally Self Driving now can drive over 14% of the time, a 4% improvement from Full Self Driving. Look out soon for the next release, Completely Self Driving.'

The USB-IF normalized that sort of naming sillyness, I fully expect it to spread.

Full Self-Driving 3.1 Release 2 SuperSpeed Beta 16 With Extra Cheese

I Can't Believe Its Not Self Driving (™)

Don't other manufacturers limit their level 2 systems to mapped and known-good highways? And, for example, my Ford will turn off blue cruise and lanekeeping if it detects it can not handle the environment.

My Subaru will not enable lane-keep below highway speeds. Adaptive cruise control can be done at any speed (greater than zero... it turns itself off if traffic is stopped), though.

>Stupidity is doing the same thing over and over again.

Does that mean insanity is doing stupid things but expecting different results?