Tesla has yet to start testing its robotaxi without driver weeks before launch

Testing vs “move fast” in safety‑critical systems

• One side argues Musk’s philosophy is effectively “test in production,” pushing risk onto the public; they see this as natural for profit‑driven firms.
• Others push back that requiring every software change to undergo months of independent testing would massively slow progress and might freeze innovation.
• A counterpoint: for safety‑critical systems like cars, even small updates can cause catastrophic failures, so conservative processes are justified.

Regulation, capitalism, and societal risk

• Some commenters blame weak regulation and profit incentives for broader harms: environmental damage, chemicals, social media impacts, etc.
• Others argue that rapid tech advancement has vastly improved human welfare (medicine, travel, information) and that heavier process would have slowed these gains.
• There’s a meta‑debate: tighter testing won’t send us back to the 18th century vs. “if we’d had those rules earlier, we’d have advanced more slowly.”

Comparisons to aviation and other domains

• Aviation is cited as proof that heavy regulation and slow updates can coexist with high safety.
• Others reply that aviation itself was once lightly regulated during its formative period; experimental and military domains still “test in prod.”
• Several note that many safety rules are “written in blood” after disasters, arguing that strong regulation is itself an innovation.

Autonomous buses and public transit

• Some see city buses as an easier autonomy problem: fixed routes, no parking. Others argue the opposite: large, dangerous vehicles, complex interactions, and higher legal standards.
• Key non‑technical challenges: drivers handle fare issues, unruly passengers, safety incidents, and provide a social presence; removing them raises trust and security concerns.
• Corner cases (merging aggressively, blocked lanes, tunnels, hijackings, antisocial behavior) are seen as hard to encode or delegate to remote operators.
• Economics are debated: removing drivers could greatly cut operating costs and enable more frequent service, but development and insurance are very expensive.
• Autonomous trains/metros exist but are usually fully segregated; extending this to street‑level trams/buses is viewed as much harder.

Robotaxis, Waymo, and Tesla

• Waymo is reported as working reliably and cheaper than Uber in some areas, but likely still heavily subsidized and small‑scale.
• Some argue the robotaxi business model remains unproven economically despite technical progress.
• Tesla’s specific robotaxi timeline is widely doubted; commenters see a pattern of overpromising (FSD, Cybertruck) and note that recent stock gains reduce pressure to actually deliver soon.