[mlindner]

Companies are only going to do Level 5 self-driving unless they can own the vehicles.

You will never get a company to accept responsibility for crashes with hardware owned external to the company. I mean there's all sorts of things you could maliciously do to break hardware that you personally own. This is especially the case with something like Tesla where the people who absolutely hate Elon already go to extreme lengths to create news stories to attack him with.

There is just no advantage to the SAE level nonsense. It doesn't even make sense from a technical perspective as vehicles do not function based on "ODDs" (Operational Design Domain) that the SAE levels rely on for their definitions. The SAE levels were created by people who don't understand automated driving vehicles.

[jeremyjh]

It doesn't matter what you call it. FSD is a system that can mostly drive itself, but it has not been certified to drive autonomously, and it cannot safely do so. Humans cannot supervise such a system. Has Tesla resumed reporting disengagement data publicly or to ANY government agency? Why not?

> You will never get a company to accept responsibility for crashes with hardware owned external to the company.

This is a completely bullshit argument. For one thing, Mercedes-Benz has already done that. For another, they already have all kinds of liability regarding the proper functioning of the vehicles they manufacture that their customers own, and they manage it very comprehensively. If there is a failure due to a manufacturing defect, do you think they have no ability to determine or litigate the owner's maintenance or improper modifications that may have contributed?

The reason Tesla can't assume these liabilities is because the technology does not support them. It is not safe, and they have no shortage of Elmo stans who will use it anyway and suffer the consequences of their God Emperor's hubris.