[rxhernandez]

> And that this is a test version of the software isn't irrelevant, it makes a huge difference—I am much less opposed to internal company testers who know what they're doing than I am to a public beta in the hands of people who believe Tesla's (really egregious) marketing.

There is absolutely no reason you should assume "testers" know what they are doing. I have met plenty of people with decades of experience in "testing" barely know what they are doing. Even in the case they know what they are doing, they shouldn't be testing a *deadly* vehicle with potentially broken software on heavily populated *public* roads.

[lolinder]

> Even in the case they know what they are doing, they shouldn't be testing a deadly vehicle with potentially broken software on heavily populated public roads.

This is another way of saying that self-driving vehicles shouldn't exist at all. At some point we have to test them on public roads, preferably before putting the software into the hands of regular users. If you ban even internal company testing, then what you're saying is that self-driving vehicles should never exist.

[rxhernandez]

Not even remotely the same thing. You completely glossed over me saying potentially broken software and heavily populated. Surely there is a way to simulate a left turn signal in a more safe manner on software this early in the testing process.

[jjoonathan]

Agreed, but I'd go further.

> This is another way of saying that self-driving vehicles shouldn't exist at all.

It's another way of saying that self-driving vehicles should be invented somewhere else, so that in 10 years you have to beg and plead for an overpriced second-rate implementation with a worse safety profile.