On a personal level I definitely do not give a *sugar* about disagrees
But we have a very clear cognitive dissonance phenomenon going on
People are being told, straightforward, that new 3's and Y's will have less FSD functionality compared to old ones, back to 2017, yet they HATE to hear that new 3's and Y's will be restricted and disempowered in places those vehicles performed in.
I don't care on an ego level. Give me all the dislikes.
But to pretend everything is fine from a consumer level is RETARDED.
I'm probably accepting a new M3P in the next couple weeks and I will probably enjoy driving it.
It will probably never achieve parity with radar cars ever.
Love, SpaceCash
Candidly your grammar is quite deficient, and you fail to understand the development fo new technological approaches. For nearly everything, when a major technological advance happens, the very first implementation has some deficiencies compared to the previous technology. Soon, very soon, the new approach proves to be far more capable.
Specifically with reference to vision only vs radar and vision, there is a very simple and practical reason why vision will be a superior solution.
That is inherent in radar, which requires sending a signal, receiving a return, then processing the results of the returns. That takes time and huge amounts of signal processing.
In vision only systems the lags are far shorter than for radar, partly because signal ambiguity and lack of specificity are not major processing issues.
Both are valuable, but radar is ill-equipped to handle highly variable signal returns. Vision, OTOH, requires less processing because the signal is inherently visual to begin with.
That is an overly simplistic description, to be sure. It does help explain why a mixed system creates insoluble issues precisely because the signal timing is not perfectly equivalent, radar has slower updates and less detail.
Superficial analysis invariably yields inaccurate results.
Many people, ostensibly well-informed are devoted to lidar just as others are to radar. Both technologies have excellent use cases. In neither case is driving automation an ideal use case. In all driving automaton cases technological advances can render obsolete some earlier choices. Both lidar and radar fit in this category.
Vision, of course, has limitations. Whenever vision will be inadequate we may well find that road-going vehicles should not be operated at all. Blinding snow , torrential rain, volcanic eruptions are all cases where no potential solution will be likely to enable safe road-going vehicle operation at all.
For that matter airplanes cannot safely operate through volcanic ash, nor in blinding snow, nor unusually heavy precipitation. No matter what sensory will be chosen none will ever solve every conceivable problem.
In the meantime within a few weeks vision only will be superior to previous vision+radar.