Dan O’Dowd is the CEO of Green Hills Software. He is a self-admitted competitor of Tesla. Dan has recently been involved in a scandal regarding an ad he put up in the New York Times. In this video, I will be shooting down their campaign 5 arguments and will unpack Dan’s motives behind this move.
The first argument they have in their campaign is “if full self-driving was fully self-driving every car, millions would die every day”. This argument is ridiculous because full self-driving is in beta, it is not a finished product, once it is safe enough it will then be approved by local governments for use by the general public. There is no way on earth that the scenario of all cars on earth just picking up Tesla’s FSD beta software and resulting in many deaths would ever come true. This scenario can’t come true hence why this argument has no merit.
The second argument is “about every 8 minutes, full self-driving malfunctions and commits a critical driving error, as defined by the DMV driving performance evaluation.”. The main point in this argument is that Tesla’s full self-driving software wouldn’t pass a road test. The issue with this argument is that Tesla’s full self-driving software is in its beta phase, Tesla never said its full self-driving beta software is capable of passing a road test and their software doesn’t malfunction every 8 minutes. From what I have seen many times it doesn’t malfunction for hours. This is why their argument of the beta software not being ready to pass a road test has no merit.
The third argument is “about every 38 minutes, tesla’s full self-driving software commits an unforced error that if not corrected by a human would likely cause a collision. This argument has no merit because Tesla’s handpicks beta testers who they think are skilled enough to correct Tesla’s FSD beta software which has resulted in not a single beta tester being in a collision.
The fourth argument is “unassisted, full self-driving software can’t reliably drive for one day without crashing, but human drivers drive many years between crashes. This argument is implying Tesla’s full self-driving software is inferior to a skilled human driver which is true for now, but just like how artificial intelligence software which use to get beaten by average chess players now out skills the best chess players on earth, full self-driving will do the same.
The final argument is “humans are thousands of times better at driving than Tesla full self driving”. The problem with this argument is same as the previous one, there will come a time when full self driving is a million times better than humans.
The reason Dan is doing this is because he is also the owner of Green Hills Software, a huge company with a thousand employees. He has a lot to lose with the rise of full self driving. Many business owners love their businesses like a child, he is just trying to protect his baby from dying with whatever underhanded tactic he can use. He has a big incentive to try his best to get full self driving to get canceled. It is either full self driving gets canceled or the mass majority of his net worth goes down the drain. If Elon didn’t have security I wouldn’t be surprised if he hired a hit man to take out Elon.
#tesla #tsla #teslastock
Comments