It is quite impressive, but I'll honestly have a hard time getting excited about self-driving cars until I see a demo of driving at night in a snow storm (heck, even heavy rain would be nice to see) around road construction, poor signage and faint lines on the road. Believe it or not, those kinds of conditions are fairly common in places outside of California, and until we have self-driving cars that can do really well in those conditions, this is basically just a fun demo in my opinion.<p>I'm really not trying to downplay the hard work and technical merit of Tesla; sped-up video and opportune edits aside, it is very cool. But I can't help but feel that it's a bit like showing off (to the world) your shiny new web app that only works in IE with ActiveX installed, only if your name is "demo user", and only when the planets are in perfect alignment - or in other words, a functional prototype by anyone else's standards. It's a great achievement, but we're certainly not "there" yet - if that's what it's trying to communicate. And yes, the "Full Self-Driving Hardware" headline certainly seems to suggest that (at least) the hardware is "there" now, and that it's only a matter of software iteration to be done.<p>Before you respond with the typical "but those are just nitpicky details" or "this is only v1; v2 will be able to solve those things easily", let me say this: going from this to a system that can handle challenging road conditions is <i>not</i> just a matter of software iteration. Since poor road conditions threaten the reliability of sensor data itself, we're talking about a problem that gets increasingly more difficult. The most sophisticated software in the world can't do anything if cameras and sensors are frozen or obstructed, and when signage and lines are lacking, the software must rely on more and more human-like levels of AI inference - not just about driving, but about the complex world in general.