The problem with Tesla is that it was a rushed system built on the whim of a 50 year old nepo baby, and that real safety requires holistic sensor suites that include LIDAR and RADAR, as well as a fuck load of redundancy, in addition to cameras, which is the only thing Teslas have.
If the driver didn‘t do this, he killed someone, not the car. It‘s abundantly clear to anyone opting into the beta.
I think a litmus test of “perfect” is a fair test, but leaves a lot of value uncounted in the mean time.
I think perhaps ignoring essentially everything Elon musk says and does and judge based on what’s in front of you is what works for me in not getting baited into the “is the Tesla FSD sentient and can do my taxes” hype cycle, with its requisite jadedness.
Why not? Insurance companies will accept liability for my driving fuck-ups in exchange for a monthly payment. And doing so doesn't instantly bankrupt them or anything. Why shouldn't a self-driving car company do the same thing?
G*P didn't mention payments for accepting risk, he just said if they accepted liability.
Mercedes Drive Pilot was to be liability for accidents, under a list of conditions, by the end of 2022
https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a39481699/what-happens-if-...
Do we want to? No.
If you want to fix that, you need to do something about the rising narcissism and irresponsibility in society. If you just try to lecture people about safety-vs-freedom, then you will be losing your freedom.
You could make that argument about needing a license, or how you're not allowed to take a turn driving a plane.
Is the technology there yet? No.