[kjksf]

The big architectural (and business strategy) difference between Tesla and more or less everyone else (Waymo, Cruise, Apple...) is:

- doesn't rely on lidar

- doesn't rely on pre-mapping areas

- ships intermediary products vs. big bang approach of "100% self-driving or nothing"

- makes money on those intermediary products (vs. loosing money until the big bang)

- while everyone is using Deep Learning for solving the problem, I believe Tesla is betting on DL / AI harder than most

On those big points Comma is exactly like Tesla and unlike almost everyone else.

I'm not sure which caveats you meant.

[AlotOfReading]

I'm not sure what you mean by "big bang approach". There isn't a single company whose goal is 100% or nothing. Not cruise, nor waymo, nor anyone else. That's why they have things like remote assistance and incremental rollouts. Similarly, waymo and cruise are both making [small amounts of] money on their "intermediary" robotaxis right now.

[JoshCole]

http://www.paulgraham.com/aord.html is contextually relevant to the point you don't understand the meaning of. They are operating in an abstracted representation of the situation related to what Paul Graham talks about. In that abstracted representation you get some not so obvious corollaries: a deep relationship between confidence and the reasonableness of default alive versus default dead strategy.