Why Tesla’s AI trainers don’t trust its self-driving tech – or its safety stats

Ah, Tesla's Full Self-Driving software is 'up to 10 times safer than human drivers' — provided, of course, you define 'safety' as 'we mapped every possible route in advance and told the car exactly what to do.' Reuters has spoken to former employees who confirm that staff meticulously pre-mapped routes and trained the software to make the tech look far more capable than it actually is. It's the AI equivalent of a student who memorises the exam paper before walking into the hall, then claims to be a genius.

This isn't just embarrassing for Elon Musk's favourite project; it's a masterclass in how to manufacture safety statistics. The company has been touting FSD's miraculous improvement in miles between disengagements, but if the training data is essentially a cheat sheet, those numbers are about as meaningful as a participation trophy. One former employee told Reuters the system was 'brittle' — it works brilliantly on the routes it's been taught, but throw it an unfamiliar junction and it has a toddler's grasp of the road. Ten times safer? Only if you never leave the test track.

And here's the kicker: regulators are supposed to be evaluating this technology for broader deployment. If the numbers are cooked, the entire approval process is built on sand. Tesla has built a Potemkin village of autonomy, and the villagers are the drivers who actually believe the marketing. The gallows humour writes itself: your 'self-driving' car isn't learning — it's just better at remembering the test. Cheers, Elon. 🍻