Grandiose pronouncements from Elon Musk are no longer exactly shocking. From his original mission statement we will not stop until every car on the road is electric to his curious decision to build flamethrowers, we are used to hearing Teslas CEO put his mouth where he hopes his company will follow.

Nonetheless, his recent proclamation that Teslas Autopilot system will be ready for full Level 5 autonomy by the end of this year came as a great surprise to all the experts and, by all, I mean pretty much everyone else in the entire automotive industry who think 2025, or even 2030, is the very earliest we might see full automotive autonomy.

Now, theres no absolutely no doubt that Tesla is a leader if not the leader in self-driving software. Oh, Waymos autonomous system may be more effective than Autopilot, but it employs far more complex sensor arrays (various forms of LIDAR and more radar sensors) than Teslas comparatively crude camera-based system. Were there an award for simplest self-driving systems doing the most with the least, if you will Tesla would win hands down.

Nonetheless, the industrys skepticism has less to do with Teslas hardware than exactly what Mr. Musk means by Level 5 autonomy. Theoretically, the answer to that is straightforward: the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which sets the standards for six levels of self-driving, defines Level 0 as complete human control while Level 5, the top echelon, means your robotic car can go anywhere at any time, in any weather or road condition.

And therein lies the rub. There are plenty of semi-autonomous Level 2 cars that can drive themselves under certain conditions (General Motors Super Cruise and Teslas Autopilot being the leaders). A few Level 4 vehicles notably Waymo can drive themselves without supervision, but only on specific roads. In other words, their complete autonomy is rigidly geo-fenced.

The problem is that Level 5 really does imply Mr. Musks Model 3s should soon be able to drive straight from the factory floor in Fremont all the way to Fairbanks, neither rain nor snow nor seemingly unmarked gravel roads keeping Autopilot from its appointed rounds.

Except thats clearly not possible. Self-driving cars may have proven themselves (semi-) capable of navigating the straight and narrow of Arizona highways, and even a select few suburban California neighbourhoods, but no one has figured out how to completely conquer snow banks, black ice, and the perils of sensor-clogging salt. Hell, in my experience, theres not a single automaker yet capable of getting one of their comparatively simple radar-based adaptive cruise control systems through a Canadian winter. Simply put, anyone that thinks their Model S is going to drive from downtown Montreal to their cottage north of Mont Tremblant in the middle of a January snowstorm is in for a rude awakening.

And thus we find ourselves once again dealing with Mr. Musks penchant for, lets call them exaggerations, running headlong into what would seem to be some very specific standards. Indeed, his claims to the World Artificial Intelligence Conference (WAIC) in Shanghai that complete autonomy will happen very quickly, then appear to be muddled by him implying that Level 5 autonomy will first be limited to California.

Well, besides the fact that other automakers are continuously expanding their self-driving capabilities to more California roads, theres the simple fact that, if the next generation of Autopilot is geo-fenced to the Golden State, strictly speaking thats Level 4 autonomy not Level 5.

Semantics, you say?

Not quite. Legion are the Tesla owners doing what my dear old dad would call when I arrived home with yet another dislocated shoulder from yet another motocross crash stupid s^%t. One Tesla acolyte Forbes John Koetsier recently boasted that Teslas self-driving technology is advancing faster than other manufacturers, citing the example of a friend who drove from Los Angeles to Las Vegas, using a fruit wedged in the steering wheel to simulate a human touch. Nor is this silliness limited to North America, the BBC recently reporting that a British man had his licence suspended for 18 months because he turned Autopilot on and then climbed into the passenger seat. Musks pronouncements even have some ardent fanboys predicting that Teslas next over-the-air Autopilot upgrade as in, later this year will be the whole Level 5 enchilada.

Now its possible, in a fine example of Trumpian obfuscation that finely honed process whereby the leader of the free world dog whistles exactly what he means to say and then provides himself an out-clause that Mr. Musks contention that Tesla will have the basic functionality of Level 5 autonomy is his weasel-clause. After all, Tesla has always taken pains to note the risk-taking daredevilry that has already been attributed to Autopilot Joshua Brown who centre-punched a transport truck, Walter Huang who rammed into a concrete barrier while reportedly playing a video game, etc. occurred when the company was (officially) claiming that Autopilot was only semi-autonomous. Nonetheless, the most recent claims make me wonder what manner of mayhem will occur now that Mr. Musk says Level 5 autonomy is within sight.

The most recent claims make me wonder what manner of mayhem will occur now that Mr. Musk says Level 5 autonomy is within sight.

But, you might be thinking, Tesla cant be held responsible if its owners misuse the companys cars.

Actually, they can and already have, a Munich court having recently ruled Tesla had to pull advertising that claimed its cars had the full potential for autonomous driving. The tribunal went even farther in stating that just by using the term Autopilot and other wording, the defendant suggests that their vehicles are technically able to drive completely autonomously. That, again, is when Tesla was officially claiming its cars were but semi-self-autonomous.

But lets just say for you-know-what-and-giggles, that Tesla can by some miracle put a totally self-driving car in consumers hands next year. The question then becomes who will be responsible for any collisions involving a totally self-driving Tesla. Insurance companies will almost certainly balk at bearing responsibility when their client, the cars owner, might have been asleep in the passenger seat. Will Tesla admit culpability? With Autopilot previously requiring human supervision, who was responsible was fairly easily delineated. With the car completely in charge, who is responsible for its operation becomes far more problematic.

And lets understand that Teslas, Level 5 or not, will still be involved in collisions. As Motor Mouth recently reported, the U.S. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) recently predicted that simply computerizing our cars will only reduce accidents by a third. Only by forcing computers into extremely cautious, borderline pedantic driving habits can self-driving get to the zero-fatality future weve all been told automotive autonomy promises. Mr. Musk has already posited that some level of danger will still be present, even with Level 5 Teslas. At the very least, crawling along at speeds that would likely make Autopilot safe enough for human use would seem at odds with one of the companys other main marketing messages ludicrous acceleration.

Like Mr. Trumps antics, I think weve all become inured to Elon Musks bold assertions. Its part of his management style, a major reason that Tesla is so successful and why he is worshipped by so many. But to claim his cars will be ready for completely driverless operation would seem to move his marketing game from merely audacious to downright reckless. Technology isnt ready. Our legal and insurance systems arent ready.

And, judging by the hare-brained antics of some Tesla owners, consumers definitely arent ready for the basic functionality of Level 5 autonomy.

See the original post:

Motor Mouth: The truth about Tesla's Autopilot claims - Driving