I believe a huge chunk of Tesla’s valuation is based on their automation tech, despite having very little real success towards full automation. So they have to focus on that and try to prove they can deliver.
But I’m guessing they won’t succeed, as there are fundamental flaws with the technology itself, that can’t be solved by throwing more sensors at the problem.
It seems their stock valuation rests on an assumption that their self-driving tech is unique, useful and best-of-class. I don’t see how they can benefit putting these claims to the test by trying to compete in the robotaxi market.
Their stock valuation rests entirely on large entities shorting the stock, and other large entities saying “I will take that bet!”. That’s pretty much it.
All stock valuation rests on like three entities making numbers up, that’s not the thing. The question is how long will Wall Street keep Musky boy on the nice list if he is becoming more and more visibly incompetent.
How does it compare to Waymo and Cruise? How many cities let driverless Teslas roam around? Those are the questions that will get asked from here on out, since they said they want to compete there.
I don’t know anyone who makes videos about Waymo or Cruise on YouTube so I have no clue how it compares. That wasn’t my point. I’m only comparing current FSD beta to the previous versions of itself.
CYBRLFT does ridesharing videos where he lets FSD beta do the driving and I believe the success rate with V12 has been over 90% that the car didn’t need any driver interference.
Waymo and Cruise aim at no drivers. So “driver interference” is not even an option. And they’re already on the road in selected cities.
I believe FSD is making great progress yes. They’re probably better than the competition (from car manufacturers’ equivalent). But I don’t think they’re working at the same level as Waymo. Just not.
In Tesla’s defence; their system works anywhere even when the road is not mapped, but these robo taxi services only do on selected geo-fenced areas. Atleast that’s my understanding of it. It’s conceiviable that what Tesla is doing by completely relying on neural nets is the right way to go where as the other with human programmes is a dead end. Only time will tell I guess. I’m not educated enough on Cruise and Waymo in general so I can’t really comment on that.
To be fair, Tesla is probably doing testing in winter too. But again, Tesla doesn’t seem to be aiming at level 4, while Waymo is going level 5 all the way.
But can it be solved by throwing less sensors at the problem? Cause that’s what he’s been doing. Removing sensors from the newer versions that were in the older ones.
I believe a huge chunk of Tesla’s valuation is based on their automation tech, despite having very little real success towards full automation. So they have to focus on that and try to prove they can deliver.
But I’m guessing they won’t succeed, as there are fundamental flaws with the technology itself, that can’t be solved by throwing more sensors at the problem.
It seems their stock valuation rests on an assumption that their self-driving tech is unique, useful and best-of-class. I don’t see how they can benefit putting these claims to the test by trying to compete in the robotaxi market.
Their stock valuation rests entirely on large entities shorting the stock, and other large entities saying “I will take that bet!”. That’s pretty much it.
All stock valuation rests on like three entities making numbers up, that’s not the thing. The question is how long will Wall Street keep Musky boy on the nice list if he is becoming more and more visibly incompetent.
Untill they released FSD Beta V12. The leap it took from the previous version is insane. It drives really good now.
How does it compare to Waymo and Cruise? How many cities let driverless Teslas roam around? Those are the questions that will get asked from here on out, since they said they want to compete there.
I don’t know anyone who makes videos about Waymo or Cruise on YouTube so I have no clue how it compares. That wasn’t my point. I’m only comparing current FSD beta to the previous versions of itself.
CYBRLFT does ridesharing videos where he lets FSD beta do the driving and I believe the success rate with V12 has been over 90% that the car didn’t need any driver interference.
Waymo and Cruise aim at no drivers. So “driver interference” is not even an option. And they’re already on the road in selected cities.
I believe FSD is making great progress yes. They’re probably better than the competition (from car manufacturers’ equivalent). But I don’t think they’re working at the same level as Waymo. Just not.
In Tesla’s defence; their system works anywhere even when the road is not mapped, but these robo taxi services only do on selected geo-fenced areas. Atleast that’s my understanding of it. It’s conceiviable that what Tesla is doing by completely relying on neural nets is the right way to go where as the other with human programmes is a dead end. Only time will tell I guess. I’m not educated enough on Cruise and Waymo in general so I can’t really comment on that.
Don’t know about Cruise, but Waymo also, and they’ve been tested in snow and rain that Tesla doesn’t even engage. https://twitter.com/Waymo/status/1721629316625093035
To be fair, Tesla is probably doing testing in winter too. But again, Tesla doesn’t seem to be aiming at level 4, while Waymo is going level 5 all the way.
But can it be solved by throwing less sensors at the problem? Cause that’s what he’s been doing. Removing sensors from the newer versions that were in the older ones.
Drop the cameras, add lidar instead. That’s true 3d vision, which no amount of cameras can replace.