[mikepurvis]

Of course. But there obviously is a real issue with overhanging obstacles, since there have been multiple of these crashes now.

Do we really accept a known flaw just because it's still better than the alternative?

[cjbprime]

.. yes? I mean, it depends on what you mean by "accept", but yes we choose the option that has the least risk of killing people, even if it has "issues", because those issues are already encapsulated in the relative risk estimates.

Airline flying is safer than driving even though planes have known issues too.

Really struggling to find a logical point in here. Maybe some nuance I'm missing?

[mikepurvis]

Interesting that you would bring up airplanes. Because when the Max 8 is suspected to have a systemic problem which may repeatably cause crashes, the entire worldwide fleet of them gets grounded. No one makes the argument that a Max 8 with a faulty AOA sensor is still safer than driving your car so whatever.

[taneq]

> Do we really accept a known flaw just because it's still better than the alternative?

Would you really choose an overall-worse alternative because the better option has a single known flaw?

If you're that worried about Autopilot, just don't buy or use it. The rest of the car is still best in class.

Edit: Be less inflammatory.

[esyir]

Honestly? Yes. We take the best option available at current time, and simultaneously work on improvements.

[jakeogh]

So... human drivers.

[sangnoir]

Adding Lidar is an alternative - but Tesla/Musk keep ragging on it as their cars keep slamming into objects