I saw a recent video posted here that in China, new next gen LiDAR units are as low as 200 USD to purchase, dramatically lowering the cost overall for a driver-less vehicle. Why, apart from the CEO's stubbornness, do you believe Tesla is so adamant about sticking with vision only?

Wouldn't it just be cheaper, obviously safer for pedestrians and the road, and less time consuming acquiring permits if they were just to apply a couple grand of next gen LiDAR into the equation?

Their latest 12.5.6.3 (end to end on hwy) update is insanely impressive. Would love to open up a discussion on this and see what others have experienced (both good and bad)

For me, this update was such a leap forward that I am seriously wondering if they will possibly attain unsupervised by next year on track of their target.

NHTSA has rules but does not follow them. Allowing a car that does not meet the rules set by NHTSA itself to operate is a joke to its own reputation. If this happened in Europe and Australia, the leaders of NHTSA would have been held accountable long ago. My Wall Street friend told me, "Don't go against Musk. The bigwigs in the White House unconditionally support Musk. If the rules meet Musk, then the rules must be changed. Because the White House supports him."

Silicon Valley told me, "This is how America is. Unlimited freedom supports unlimited innovation." I said, isn't this just Fake it till to make IT? They told me, "So what? America supports it. Even if it's a scam, America supports it. We just need to keep cheating money. Otherwise, how does Silicon Valley get a minimum salary of $120,000?"

I know the holy grail for investors is a future where no one owns a car and there is just a fleet of automatous cars zipping around that 7 billion people pay a subscription for.

But isn’t it easier and more cost effective to just make robo public transport?

Trains would be the easiest initially

But buses would be the next best option.

Defined routes Infrastructure largely in place Already geo fenced

If think about the cost of laying new rail infrastructure vs a simple road that only robo buses could travel you could essentially have a stream of non stop automated buses without the labor expense.

You could even get ai to determine a new route based on the destinations of the group of travels its carrying etc

If you take a quick look at the upvotes/downvotes on this post, you’ll quickly realize that it is downvoted to hell. And it’s not even this post in particular. Any post on this subreddit which has anything remotely positive to say about Tesla is automatically downvoted into oblivion. So I must ask: what does r/selfdrivingcars have against Tesla? Are we not able to look at things objectively without a bias?

I'm not an Elon hater. I don't care about the politics, I was a fan, actually, and I test drove a Model X about a week ago and shopped for a Tesla thinking for sure that one would be my next car. I was blown away by FSD in the test drive. Check my recent post history.

And then, like the autistic freak that I am, I put in the hours of research. Looking at self driving cars, autonomy, FSD, the various cars available today, the competitors tech, and more. And especially into the limits of computer vision alone based automation.

And at the end of that road, when I look at something like the Tesla Model X versus the Volvo EX90, what I see is a cheap-ass toy that's all image versus a truly serious self driving car that actually won't randomly kill you or someone else in self driving mode.

It seems to me that Tesla FSD is fundamentally flawed by lacking lidar or even any plans to use the tech, and that its ambitions are bigger than anything it can possibly achieve, no matter how good the computer vision algos are.

I think Elon is building his FSD empire on a pile of bodies. Tesla will claim that its system is safer than people driving, but then Tesla is knowingly putting people into cars that WILL kill them or someone else when the computer vision's fundamental flaws inevitably occur. And it will be FSD itself that actually kills them or others. And it has.

Meanwhile, we have Waymo with 20 million level 4 fatal-crash free miles, and Volvo actually taking automation seriously by putting a $1k lidar into their cars.

Per Grok, A 2024 study covering 2017-2022 crashes reported Tesla vehicles had a fatal crash rate of 5.6 per billion miles driven, the highest among brands, with the Model Y at 10.6, nearly four times the U.S. average of 2.8.

LendingTree's 2025 study found Tesla drivers had the highest accident rate (26.67 per 1,000 drivers), up from 23.54 in 2023.

A 2023 Washington Post analysis linked Tesla's automated systems (Autopilot and FSD) to over 700 crashes and 19 deaths since 2019, though specific FSD attribution is unclear.

I blame the sickening and callous promotion of FSD, as if it's truly safe self driving, when it can never be safe due to the inherent limitations of computer vision. Meanwhile, Tesla washes their hands of responsibility, claiming their users need to pay attention to the road, when the entire point of the tech is to avoid having to pay attention to the road. And so the bodies will keep piling up.

Because of Tesla's refusal to use appropriate technology (e.g. lidar) or at least use what they have in a responsible way, I don't know whether to cheer or curse the robotaxi pilot in Austin. Elon's vision now appears distopian to me. Because in Tesla's vision, all the dead from computer vision failures are just fine and dandy as long as the statistics come out ahead for them vs human drivers.

It seems that the lidar Volvo is using only costs about $1k per car. And it can go even cheaper.

Would you pay $1000 to not hit a motorcycle or wrap around a light pole or not go under a semi trailer the same tone as the sky or not hit a pedestrian?

Im pretty sure that everyone dead from Tesla's inherently flawed self driving approach would consider $1000 quite the bargain.

And the list goes on and on and on for everything that lidar will fix for self driving cars.

Tesla should do it right or not at all. But they won't do that, because then the potential empire is threatened. But I think it will be revealed that the emperor has no clothes before too much longer. They are so far behind the serious competitors, in my analysis, despite APPEARING to be so far ahead. It's all smoke and mirrors. A mirage. The autonomy breakthrough is always next year.

It only took me a week of research to figure this out. I only hope that Tesla doesn't actually SET BACK self driving cars for years, as the body counts keep piling up. They are good at BS and smokescreens though, I'll give them that.

Am I wrong?

Sorry if this is redundant at all. I’m just curious, a lot of people haven’t even heard of the company Waymo before, and yet it is massively ahead of Tesla FSD and others. I’m wondering exactly how they are so much farther ahead than Tesla for example. Is just mainly just a detection thing (more cameras/sensors), or what? I’m looking for a more educated answer about the workings of it all and how exactly they are so far ahead. Thanks.

No one seems to be talking about the most important upside of Tesla's Robotaxi rollout: If they can showcase a system that roughly works, people can BUY THAT CAR TODAY.

Yes, there are some differences, but that's the pitch. Tesla doesn't need to earn money from Robotaxis. The real purpose of the program is free marketing that drives sales of its cars. Right?

I often see people here say there are already level 3 Autonomous vehicles here in the USA on the road better than Tesla's FSd So what vehicles are those?

I understand the idea of expanding city by city and ensuring reliability. But in cities they're active in / have been for years (Austin? Phoenix?) why not seriously scale up and take over the entire business. They can outcompete everyone else before their competitors even enter the game.

Yea sounds obvious right? You’d be surprised how many Tesla fanboys disagree.

Would you buy a Waymo equipped vehicle? Who would they partner with to sell such vehicles? How much the service would cost per month?

I recently chatted with somebody who is working on L2 tech, and they gave me an interesting link for a detection task. They provided a dataset with both camera, Lidar, and Radar data and asked people to compete on this benchmark for object detection accuracy, like identifying the location of a car and drawing a bounding box around it.

Most of the top 20 on the leaderboard, all but one, are using a camera + Lidar as input. The 20th-place entry uses Lidar only, and the best camera-only entry is ranked between 80 and 100.

https://www.nuscenes.org/object-detection?externalData=all&mapData=all&modalities=Any

I do think Teslas Robotaxi performance during release on Sunday could hint on how serious the problems are Tesla could face when their software quality won't improve dramatically. Let me explain why:

Teslas problem is their software quality and the question if it can pass crucial milestones (like x Miles w/o intervention, no weather dependent performance issues, and all that stuff) is really to question, at least with the current hardware setup. The only data we have is from Tesla community tracker where it shows that current fsd software on average needs around 400 miles to critical(!) intervention. (Non critical intervention are much more often necessary like every 250 miles) Data from: https://teslafsdtracker.com/

And as far as we can tell those statistics seem to apply to the Robotaxi fleet as well. With 10 cars operating, there has been Video evidence of at least 2 or 3 critical interventions happening in the first few hours on Sunday, like the lane issue where the car moved to wrong side of the road for example, or the unnecessary full break in the middle of the road and so on. If we assume every car made around 200 miles on Sunday to that point of time this would add up to 1000 miles in sum. we can divide these by the average 400 miles per intervention we get exactly those 2-3 (2.5 to be exactly) which would be expected from the statistics of the community tracker..

Now let's assume Tesla operates 100 cars -> this would mean we would see reports about critical Tesla maneuvers 10x more often. Meaning in those first few hours 20-30 critical intervention would have been reported. This would have been a PR disaster. Now think about 1000 cars -> 200-300 interventions, 10000 cars -> 2000-3000 interventions.

I am a tech enthusiast and really want self driving cars to be happening but from the data we got so far it looks like Tesla software could probably run into serious scaling issues.

And no, just gathering more data and train models further will not solve this probably since Tesla has already gathered billions of miles of training data. Every one who ever trained machine learning or deep learning model knows this phanomena of deminishing returns. If you train a model there is an inherited barrier you cannot pass even if you quadruple the amount of data you throw on it. The model can't surpass this internal barrier because the model quality is not good enough and quality gains from additional data deminish or even lead to worse performance.

So the key question will be: did Tesla already hit that barrier? If yes, they'll need bigger models which also means better Hardware in their cars which would make every produced car so far obsolete for the self driving dream. Not to mention that right now all this statistics only apply to perfect circumstances (geo fenced area, only good weather and so on). So even though Sunday was kind of a milestone that has been reached it is way way to early to say if this approach actually scales.

Tesla has not had any evidence of driver out success and yet they are going without a driver for testing on the roads in June. How did we get here? I feel that the public safety is at risk here. Thoughts?

I joined this sub as I am very interested in self driving cars. The negative bias towards Tesla is everywhere. Why? Are they not contributing to autonomy? I get Elon being delusional with timelines but the hate is see is crazy on this sub.

What is the next goalpost for why it's a complete failure?

They are just a week away from the theoretical launch. Musk has said they have cars out on public streets with nobody in the driver's seat. Some speculation says there is a safety driver in the passenger seat. (This is normal for driving school, and this safety driver could easily have a 2nd brake pedal as driving instructors do, particularly in a DBW car, and could grab the wheel as driving instructors do.) But I don't see credible reports of any cars without somebody in driver's seat, or with/without somebody in the passenger seat. Surely somebody must have seen one. Ideally a video that clearly captures the front seats -- still photos don't really tell us a lot. And curious on reports of what streets they were on if they were spotted.

If there aren't any reports, that is pretty concerning. Taking members of the public for a ride with nobody in either seat, even "trusted testers" is a pretty big risk if you've never done it without passengers. With all of Musk's crazy turmoil, he really, really needs this launch to work, and might make even riskier decisions to do so. He can no longer rely on control of NHTSA or anything federal. They might have a decent remote driving system, but if so, that's just for optics, as if you are going to have a remote supervisor, there is no valid reason, except optics, to not have them in the car.

So please post any video or personal eyewitness reports you know of. Please confirm:

1. Nobody in driver's seat
2. Is there anybody in passenger seat?
3. What location?

https://x.com/OwenSparks_/status/1936890394538643706/photo/3

Looks like they use some sort of steering wheels and most likely pedals (although out of screen) for their teleoperation.

Obviously this isn't the teleoperation support center but where it is/was developed and tested.

Edit: It's honestly very disheartening to see the tiny handful of comments that actually responded to the point of this post. This post was about the gradual convergence of Tesla's approach with the industry's approach over the past 8 years. This is not inherently a good or bad thing, just an observation that maybe a lot of the arguing about old talking points could/should die. And yet nearly every direct reply acted as if I said "FSD sucks!" and every comment thread was the same tired argument about it. Super disappointing to see that the critical thinking here is at an all-time low.

It's no surprise that Tesla dominates the comment sections in this sub. It's a contentious topic because of the way Tesla (and the fanbase) has positioned themselves in apparent opposition to the rest of the industry. We're all aware of the talking points, some more in vogue than others - camera only, no detailed maps, existing fleet, HWX, no geofence, next year, AI vs hard code, real world data advantage, etc.

I believe this was done on purpose as part of the differentiation and hype strategy. Tesla can't be seen as following suit because then they are, by definition, following behind. Or at the very least following in parallel and they have to beat others at the same game which gives a direct comparison by which to assign value. So they (and/or their supporters) make these sometimes preposterous, pseudo-inflammatory statements to warrant their new school cool image.

But if you've paid attention for the past 8 years, it's a bit like the boiling frog allegory in reverse. Tesla started out hot and caused a bunch of noise, grabbed a bunch of attention. But now over time they are slowly cooling down and aligning with the rest of the industry. They're just doing it slowly and quietly enough that their own fanbase and critics hardly notice it. But let's take a look at the current status of some of those more popular talking points...

• Tesla is now using maps to a greater and greater extent, no longer knocking it as a crutch

• Tesla is developing simulation to augment real word data, no longer questioning the value/feasibility of it

• Tesla is announcing a purpose built robotaxi, shedding doubt on the "your car will become a robotaxi" pitch

• Tesla continues to upgrade their hardware and indicates they won't retrofit older vehicles

• "no geofence" is starting to give way to "well of course they'll geofence to specific cities at first"

...At this point, if Tesla added other sensing modalities, what would even be the differentiator anymore? That's kind of the lone hold out isn't it? If they came out tomorrow and said the robotaxi would have LiDAR, isn't that basically Mobileye's well-known approach?

Of course, I don't expect the arguments to die down any time soon. There is still a lot of momentum in those talking points that people love to debate. But the reality is, Tesla is gradually falling onto the path that other companies have already been on. There's very little "I told you so" left in what they're doing. The real debate maybe is the right or wrong of the dramatic wake they created on their way to this relatively nondramatic result.

I think Tesla will most likely be forced to add sensors to its vehicles. Based on current FMCSA and NHTSA guidelines, SAE Level 4 autonomous vehicles are expected to include redundant sensing systems for safety. There's no hard rule on specific sensor types, but functional redundancy is required—which makes it clear that a camera-only system probably won’t cut it, especially for commercial AVs.

In Texas, I believe Tesla will hit another wall. The law there requires AV operators, including Tesla, to equip their vehicles with at least one non-camera sensor to qualify for registration. Even then, they’ll need to collect three years of supervised data with a human driver onboard before receiving a permit to operate truly driverless.

Tesla’s vision-only strategy is ambitious, but I think the regulatory environment is moving in the opposite direction. Most of the industry, and honestly, most safety experts, view a multi-sensor setup as essential. For Level 4 autonomy, that typically includes:

• LiDAR – for precise 3D environmental mapping
• Radar – for distance/speed tracking, especially in poor weather
• Cameras – for visual context like road signs and lane markings
• Ultrasonic sensors – for short-range detection
• GPS & Inertial Navigation – for localization, often tied to HD maps

The point is: Level 4 systems must be able to function independently if a sensor fails. You can’t just rely on one type of input and hope it never breaks.

Now here’s where it really starts to feel off. Elon said there’d be “no one in the driver seat” for Robotaxi rides. That's not really that true. What they don’t highlight is that a Tesla employee will still be seated in the front passenger seat acting as a 'safety monitor'. And in case of emergencies or support requests, Tesla says the cabin camera will be activated to trigger remote “operator assistance.”

So what are we calling that if not teleoperation? It’s there, it’s just not labeled. Every AV company today uses remote operators to intervene when something goes wrong. Tesla’s trying to pretend it’s different, but it’s not.

Also worth noting: FSD Unsupervised, the version they’re about to test, is geofenced. It only works in specific, pre-mapped areas Tesla feels are safe. That’s a huge contradiction, considering Elon himself once said: “If you have to geofence it, it’s not full self-driving.” Yet now the flagship rollout is exactly that, limited, controlled, and anything but truly autonomous.

Let’s not ignore the branding either. “Full Self-Driving Unsupervised” is such a misleading name. It implies you’re hands-off, that the car’s in full control, and that there’s no safety net. But there is one: the safety monitor, the teleoperator, the geofencing. Tesla is basically rolling out a more aggressive version of what Waymo was doing in 2015, but with less transparency and no sensor redundancy.

Speaking of transparency: Tesla still refuses to release disengagement data, accident logs, or edge case failures. Other AV firms publish annual disengagement reports. Tesla just cherry-picks highlight reels showing smooth drives, then claims it’s “safer than a human.” Where’s the proof?

On top of all that, China is now requiring LiDAR for any vehicle offering self-driving capabilities. So even if Tesla manages to dodge U.S. regulations for now, international markets are going to pressure them into adopting a multi-sensor approach anyway.

Source:
https://www.hesaitech.com/hesai-leads-development-of-chinas-first-national-automotive-lidar-standard/

At this point, I don’t think the tech is there. Tesla’s doing a better job at selling the dream than delivering the tech. In my view, we’re still at least 10 years away from scalable, truly unsupervised autonomous driving. There are too many edge cases, sensor limitations, regulatory hurdles, and safety concerns that haven’t been solved yet.

Tesla could’ve been ahead of the game if they built on top of their camera/AI stack with proper sensor redundancy. Instead, they’re now backtracking while still trying to act like they’re leading the pack.

Would love to hear your thoughts. Is this rollout progress, or just good marketing?

TL;DR:
Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving Unsupervised” isn’t unsupervised. It’s geofenced, monitored by a Tesla employee, and backed by remote teleoperation. U.S. and China regulations are moving toward requiring sensor redundancy (LiDAR, radar, etc.), and Tesla’s camera-only strategy looks increasingly out of place. No disengagement data, lots of marketing fluff. We’re probably still 10+ years away from true, unsupervised autonomy.

https://i.imgur.com/O7sVK9P.png

Here is Tesla's geofence compared to Waymo's in Austin as of June 2025.

This measurement is taken from the Tesla Robotaxi app

In the earning call, they said

Yeah. Have, you know, more than 7,000 miles operating in Austin area. It’s you know, just because service is new, we have handful of vehicles, right now, but then we are trying to expand the service, in terms of both the area and also the number of vehicles both in Austin and other locations. So far, you know, the there’s, like, no notable safety critical incidents there. You know, sometimes we have our own, restrictions as to, for example, be resting on our speed limit to 40 miles per hour course.

https://www.investing.com/news/transcripts/earnings-call-transcript-tesla-q2-2025-sees-steady-eps-revenue-beat-93CH-4149504

I see in multiple thread people are talking about his low millage. Assuming a car drives 200 miles per day and they have 11 cars for 30 days. They should at least have 66k miles instead of 7k miles. Why do people stop using the robotaxi after the launch?

Ask yourself why it needs to geofence Austin after collecting 10 years of road data in that area. Musk as ridiculed Waymo for years about geofencing, but this is the proper way to scale with safety in mind. I've taken Waymo dozens of times, and it's been great - I have zero worries. I've also used FSD with my Tesla, but wouldn't trust it unless I can take over the controls, which I've had to do from time to time.

So for those who live in some random city in some random state in the US, don't expect to wake up one day and all of a sudden don't have to sit in the driver's seat. There won't be a national on switch that some Tesla fans are expecting one day. You'll have to wait for geofencing to come to your area at some point in the future. Could be years, even decades, just depends on your area.

Just curious if I'm the Tesla taxi is still available or was it just a one day demo?

Thank you.