> requirements for electronics in a car are pretty extreme + the salaries of everyone working on that stuff, not just assembly but also writing the code to sup

> requirements for electronics in a car are pretty extreme + the salaries of everyone working on that stuff, not just assembly but also writing the code to support it Not that I disagree, either: at the volumes that a modest car company puts out, I'd assume it's easily worth the, say, 3% cost premium on the car's total price to have something that can actually see things you don't see and thus makes a safer system. It might even reduce costs by having lower requirements for the vision hardware and software, but that's not something I can know. There's a lot of unknowns here that I think mean we can't really do a good comparison indeed