Tesla first promised L4 capabilities for the personally owned vehicle. Then they saw the robotaxi light (aka. $'s) and RT became the priority. There was a fundamental shift in what they were developing. RT software is not the same as my personally owned L4 system.
It's not appropriate for a RT to let the human pick the max speed but as my own vehicle where I am still pilot in command it is essential. Or how aggressive to be in lane changes, California stops (I know, NHTSA), follow distance, and simply "stay in this lane" when FSD insists in making a stupid move. FSD today considers any human input to be erroneous outside of pre-built profiles - probably appropriate for an RT but diasterous for me. I don't want a RT. While I love using AI, I'm still of the mindset that I want to tell my computers what to do - not vice versa.
Could Lucid succeed in both the RT concept and personal L4 ADAS end-to-end? It's certainly possible and I hope they deliver. Tesla is clearly not doing that. All I know is that these are 2 functially different software stacks with many similarities - no such thing as "one size fits all". Although (for what little I know) they could use the same E2E AI's but allow for human-input parameters (i.e. max speed, follow distance minimum, or even "park here") to the personal L4 system.
So today we hear Lucid saying both products are being developed. I'm curious how they split the resources between the two initiatives. Are they on the same footing? Will RT take almost all development resources as it appears has happened with Tesla?
