As soon as we have hard data from real world use and FSD is safer than the average human, it would be unethical to not solve the regulatory and legal issues and apply it on a larger scale to save human lives.

If a human driver causes a crash, the insurance pays. Why shouldn’t they if a computer caused the crash, which drives safer overall, if only by let’s say 10%.

FSD is still in development

Should be fine if the car reduces speed to account for the conditions. Just like a human driver does.

What makes you assume that a vision based system performs worse than the average human? Or that it can’t be 20 times safer?

I think the main reason to go vision-only is the software complexity of merging mixed sensor data. Radar or Lidar alone also have their limitations.

I wish it was a different company or that Musk would sell Tesla. But I think they are the closest to reaching full autonomy. Let’s see how it goes when FSD launches this year.

I am not a fan of Tesla/Elon but are you sure that no human driver would fall for this?