You are correct to be suspicious, but don't be impressed by backflips. Those are just for show. Doing "real work" is the test. As is doing real work for a compelling price.

There's going to be an expanding market for laser-proof sunglasses.

That's a lot of qualifiers. And replace "humans" with "cameras" and I'm reminded that despite their well-intentioned efforts Volvo has failed there already.

It really isn't though. It's how you do something correctly. Drill into the details of just about any system and you'll see there's a lot of assumptions based on the layers above and below.

A good safety system requires multiple of these failures to occur together to become unacceptable in risk.

This is why we create regulations and inspectors.

I get pretty ticked when people shine laser lights in my direction regardless of their intensity, so I'm not too thrilled about the idea of invisible lasers hitting me square in the pupil without my knowledge.

I find it comical that people continue to go back to this rage well against "a certain company" for their vision-only approach when the truth is they have the best automatic driving system an individual can buy, rivaling Waymo and beating the Chinese brands.

Why are the commenters not pissed at the dozens of other car companies who have done absolutely nothing in this space? Answer: because it's not nearly as fun to be pissed at Kia or Mercedes or whoever. Clearly they are just enjoying the shared anger, regardless of whether it is justified.

1. Tesla is not competitive with Waymo, they're not even in the same class. Waymo is 10 years ahead at least. I understand you can't buy a Waymo, but still.

2. Other car companies are properly valued, Tesla is overinflated.

3. Other cars, even basic Hondas, have the same level of self driving as Teslas.

4. Other car companies don't lie to their customers about their capabilities or what they're buying.

> Other cars, even basic Hondas, have the same level of self driving as Teslas.

This is not true at all. Don't confuse lane assist with self driving. And yes I'm aware people are upset by the "Autopilot" product name they chose for lane assist.

Because other car companies don't have CEOs who've been super confident about predicting actual full self driving either "this year" or "next year" for the past decade. If Ford had been swearing up and down they'd have full self driving cracked any day now for ten years, and been charging people for the hardware along the way, everyone would be pissed at them too.

Surely you already know this, so why pretend otherwise?

You're way off if you think that Waymo and FSD are anywhere close.

There is certainly some truth that "some company" overpromised and underdelivered. They advertise "full self driving" but then hide in the fine-print that "oh jk, not really, but its still full self driving if anyone asks ;) ;) ;)"

I think the frustration stems from the obvious falsehoods in the advertising, and the doubling-down on the tech, despite the well-documented weaknesses of the implementation.

Have you driven in Tesla FSD recently? If anything it’s undersold. It’s an absolute miracle. I use it everyday.

Please be courteous to other drivers on the road, we all share it. Just make sure you’re the one in charge, not the software. This isn’t to put your argument down, but to offer the perspective of people involved in accidents. Loss of life is bad, but surviving accidents is also equally bad.

You might want to look up the price of lidar in 2026 before talking about affordability.

Dude, $26k Chinese cars come with lidar in the base configuration

Every car is more affordable when you don't have to pay a human being to operate it. The difference in labor costs dwarfs the difference in vehicle costs.

Most cars don't have a paid driver. Uber, taxis, and trucking is a tiny minority of drivers.

I guess your time isn't vlauable.

It's been a while since I looked it up but I understand the human is about 50% of taxi operating costs. That's not trivial of course but it's also not dwarfing vehicle costs.

> Treating harnesses as solved, or even inconsequential, is very short-sighted

Is it possible that burning extra tokens is the point, since they get paid more?

Given the fierce competition, I would imagine a better performing model generates more revenue than burning extra tokens

they have pretty fierce competition though, so i doubt this is intentional. my guess is they just have a million things to do and that isn't at the top of the list

That doesn't make sense with subscriptions.

It does, £15 Claude Pro licence is 2 hours with a small code base and Serena.

There are actions you can cheer on, like China's quick adoption of renewable energy. You can't make it happen yourself but you can bring peoples' attention to good things, encourage those within your circle of influence, and vote for representation that shares your views.

As for what "we" collectively can do... let's assume you are speaking of areas of research. We may need to focus on researching adaptation techniques for the areas that are going to be the hardest hit, or that have the fewest resources to cope. It's a sad topic but it may be needed. Assume the worst, hope for the best, and plan for what you can.

Re-read the first few sentences of his post.

> if there is a valid warrant or subpoena

It still shouldn't be secret. An ordinary valid warrant or subpoena wouldn't allow them to secretly search your house.

There could be a rubber band effect, where it takes time to get a feel for things like paying for childcare. The reaction is going to come from those who are observing what's happening to the "early adopters".