Man, why are Tesla fanboys like this... I said /existing/. I do believe Tesla will pull it off, and it's a noble goal, just their track record for safety with this tech has been far from ideal, so far. Honestly, it looks like they're going to get away with it, which makes this all a moot point..

But, let's lay out some facts.

First of all, as far as I can tell, Waymo has not had any crashes at fault! It has had some safety issues, but its crash rate is substantially lower than FSD per mile. Even if it has had crashes where it was at fault, we're talking 1 or 2 at-fault crashes over 40 million + miles!

Meanwhile, Tesla's latest and greatest plows into lamp posts in non-adverse conditions. Fantastic.

Second of all, unlike Tesla, Waymo accepts responsibility and liability for crashes caused by its software. This is actually really crucial, since right now Tesla is pushing that onto the drivers, while selling it as a perfectly safe beta piece of software that is "Full Self Driving". Oxymorons all over the place.

> Is self driving something that should not be pursued?

I never said self driving shouldn't be pursued. What I'm saying is that Tesla's FSD implementation should not be used on public roads, as it currently stands.

> Is there a way to achieve it without real world use cases (requiring attentive drivers of course)?

Waymo created test tracks and then logged many hundreds of thousands of miles with cars with human drivers actively monitoring the system. This isn't perfect, of course, but they had a substantially better safety rate than Tesla

In summary: the issue isn't if Tesla can do it or not (I'm leaning towards "yes"), or if it's worth doing (it is). The issue is /how/ they're doing it and /who/ they're exposing that risk to.