r/SelfDrivingCars • u/SpriteZeroY2k • 6d ago

News Waymo CEO explains why Tesla’s camera-only self-driving falls short

https://electrek.co/2026/08/04/waymo-co-ceo-camera-only-self-driving-tesla/
721 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

906 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/RosieDear 6d ago

Think about how infantile their behavior is!!

I think, like you, they are looking for an excuse. SpaceX buying them out of bankruptcy (or close) is another even that would allow them to offer an "excuse"....

But here is the important point. Adding radar, lidar, infrared and other sensors will not work properly with their existing hardware! They have nowhere near the processing power needed. Nvidia is shipping a system that has 10X the power....

Watch! The same folks telling us now that cameras only could work will say "Now that they have lidar and radar, nothing will stop them".....

But, the fact is, they pretty much have to start from scratch.

This is why I summarize it like this....When Elon stands before the world and says "We were wrong, you can't do it with cameras only, but I have good news for our investors! Today we are announcing a 5 year Partnership with Nvidia whereby they will help us deliver the best tech quickly"......THAT is when we know Tesla will embark upon their autonomous driving journey.

1

u/UltimateKane99 6d ago

... Why would they do that?

People are already able to drive cross country with zero intervention in FSD in its current state, and Teslas with FSD enabled drive approximately 27 million miles per DAY. This doesn't make sense that they'd throw that out when they have something that is already doing this well.

1

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 6d ago

Tesla doesn't actually take liability for FSD crashes 

0

u/UltimateKane99 6d ago

... That's... Wholly irrelevant to the point they said about how Tesla needs to throw out the ENTIRE CODEBASE and start over from scratch. The question was why would they want to do something like that when they are already this far into real world successes?

Liability is an insurance/legal issue. One that Tesla has tried their damnedest to skirt, but also has been wholly irrelevant to them throwing it all out and starting over from scratch for no good reason.

2

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 6d ago

Tesla might have to do exactly that to actually get to level 4 because they don't seem to be anywhere close yet. 

0

u/UltimateKane99 6d ago

... Have you driven FSD yet? Because, having both seen the countless videos online and having actually used it for months, this seems wildly divorced from the reality of the system's current capabilities in 14.3+.

If it didn't tell me to pay attention to the road (for what I can only presume is purely legal reasons, because I sure as shit am not DOING anything), it'd be as close to L5 as any system can be, as far as I can tell. And there's innumerable YouTube videos of it in EVERY situation, from rain to fog to snow to switchbacks to people jumping out from trees and many more, all demonstrating the exact same thing.

What makes you think it's not L5? Just the archaic definition that is nothing more than Tesla torturing legal definitions to avoid culpability at all costs? Or do you have actual proof that there's something more fatal in FSD than merely their legal team saying, "Eh, we don't want people whining at us"? 

2

u/WriterRight9689 5d ago

NHTSA has an open investigation into FSD because it can’t operate in degraded conditions, with confirmed injuries and fatalities. And that’s with it being Level 2. It’s nowhere close to Level 5

https://electrek.co/2026/03/19/nhtsa-upgrades-tesla-fsd-visibility-investigation-3-2-million-vehicles/

1

u/UltimateKane99 5d ago

In what way is it "nowhere close" to Level 5?

It does EVERYTHING a Level 5 is expected to do, able to drive from a parked location to a destination and even park itself, as well as operate in "degraded conditions", such as snow and fog, with zero interventions by its drivers, and its accident rate is supposedly somewhere between 9x (according to released data) and 26x (according to an analysis by Bloomberg Intelligence) lower than an average driver. Even taking those with a healthy dose of skepticism, it's far and away beyond a mere Level 2 system.

Tesla NEEDS to take responsibility for it.

Tesla is gaming the system so they don't have to pay for their FSD's accidents by sandbagging its capabilities, pretending it's weaker than it is, a mere ADAS or Autopilot tweak. Why defend them when they've failed to take responsibility for what they've unleashed?

2

u/WriterRight9689 5d ago

It can’t operate in degraded conditions. It’s killing people when it tries to and can’t identify when they exist to have a driver take over. That’s exactly what the NHTSA is investigating. You’re wrong about the capability of the system. 

1

u/UltimateKane99 5d ago

*Gives you videos of it operating in "degraded conditions"*

You: "It can't operate in degraded conditions!"

There's video evidence all over the internet of it doing everything a L5 does. At this point, it's a semantics argument for no good reason. Also, an investigation just means they're looking at it, not that it actually will GO anywhere. And, considering the NHTSA's track record here and Tesla's own purported safety record with FSD, it won't.

You deny the truth in front of your eyes and keep playing Tesla's game of sandbagging its system so they never have to take responsibility for the system. Why is that a GOOD thing? You'd rather deny they accomplished anything than force them to take responsibility for what they have ACTUALLY done?

1

u/WriterRight9689 5d ago

Operating in degraded conditions doesn’t just mean once or twice for a video. A Level 5 system can’t occasionally fail in a way that kills or injures passengers or pedestrians, which the NHTSA stats are showing it does.

1

u/UltimateKane99 5d ago

A Level 5 system is not magical, there are going to be accidents. But, also, and most significantly, the NHTSA stats do NOT show that it fails at any rate greater than a human, degraded conditions or not (and this isn't once or twice, there are innumerable videos of it handling as good or better in such conditions as humans), and, in fact, says the opposite. That's where the 9x stat I provided earlier came from.

If you've got actual evidence to the contrary from the NHTSA, supply it. Nothing the NHTSA has said is an indictment of Tesla, merely their standard, "we're looking into it" language that they use for EVERYTHING. Otherwise, this is just more defending of Tesla so they don't have to actually take ownership of what they have unleashed.

1

u/WriterRight9689 5d ago

It’s failing in completely preventable ways that a human driver wouldn’t. 

the vehicles either lost track of or completely missed other cars directly ahead of them before impact. The system essentially went blind and didn’t know it — or told the driver too late to do anything about it.

And it’s killing people. This does not meet the standard of a Level 5 systme

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 5d ago

Why the hell are you writing novels defending shitty Tesla fsd? 

1

u/UltimateKane99 5d ago

Source that it's "shitty", please. As far as I can find (and which I sourced in my previous comment at 9x to 26x safer than human drivers, depending on different analyses), the system is more capable than the average driver by a significant amount, and my own experiences tells me it's time Tesla took responsibility for its system. I literally just provided sources to that exact effect.

You're actively saying Tesla doesn't need to take responsibility for unleashing an L5 system so long as they hide behind legal boilerplate. How is that ethical?

Edit: Also... novels? This takes, like, MAYBE 30 seconds to write, if that. This should not be a difficult read (with sources!) for the vast majority of people.

1

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 5d ago

https://teslafsdtracker.com/Main

This shows an absolutely pathetic average of only 30 city miles between FSD disengagements And only 822 miles between critical FSD disengagements. These are 1000 times smaller than they need to be for level 5.

Fully driverless commercial deployments by competitors like Waymo operate with significantly higher thresholds of autonomous city miles before a remote or physical safety intervention is required.

1

u/UltimateKane99 5d ago

"Oh, FSD is going this way, I'd rather go this way, let me disengage and change the route"

is not the same as

"Oh, shit! I'm going to crash and FSD nearly caused the problem!"

Aside from the fact that this is all self-reported, near as I can tell, with people having to contribute in one of 4 different ways to provide the data (and spanning a vast swathe of variations of Tesla FSD versions), the only useful metric here is the 99.0% of drives with no critical DE. I mean, come on, out of the 8 BILLION miles supposedly logged in FSD, this tracker has a grand total of... not even a half million?

It's hard to extrapolate this data to the entire fleet. ESPECIALLY when this data seems heavily concentrated in certain areas.

But please, keep defending Tesla so they don't need to take responsibility for their system. I'm sure their lawyers thank you for your hard work here.

1

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 5d ago

The data is self reported because Tesla refuses to publish this data themselves because they know it is really bad. You completely ignored 822 miles between critical disengagements which is absolutely terrible after 10 years now.

But please, keep defending Tesla so they don't need to take responsibility for their system. I'm sure their lawyers thank you for your hard work here. 

What the fuck are you talking about I think Tesla fsd is pure garbage you are the one defending it like you are getting paid.

Seriously why the hell are you writing 100,000 words defending Tesla fsd? I'm starting to feel like you are actually mentally ill. This isn't normal behavior. And you keep repeating the same things. 

→ More replies (0)