‘Recipe for tragedy’: government adviser warns about Tesla’s FSD
An Aussie motoring expert has delivered a grim assessment of Tesla’s newest and much-hyped piece of car technology.
When Tesla flicked the switch on its Full Self-Driving FSD (Supervised) technology in September, Australians became the first right-hand-drive market in the world to get the controversial feature.
But experts warn the system is “dangerously misleading” and unregulated, putting lives at risk.
Car Mechanical Services CEO, Co-founder and long-time government safety adviser Raffy Sgroi said Tesla’s branding gives drivers a false sense of security.
“The term ‘Full Self-Driving’ is dangerously misleading,” she said.
MORE: Tesla enables full self driving in Australia
“Despite its name, this system is not autonomous. It requires constant driver supervision, hands on the wheel, and eyes on the road. Yet the branding encourages a false sense of security, one that directly contradicts the system’s actual capabilities.”
At midnight on September 18, Tesla rolled out FSD (Supervised) across Australia and New Zealand, with more than 50,000 local owners having access to the latest technology.
The over-the-air update allows the cars to steer, brake, change lanes merge, and navigate intersections and roundabouts with minimal driver input, but under Australian law, the driver must remain fully attentive at all times.
RELATED: Elon Musk responds to Aussie journo
Ms Sgroi has spent more than two decades advising government on regulatory compliance, says Tesla’s approach is unlike anything she has seen before and that Australia has effectively allowed an unfinished technology to operate without oversight.
‘STARK DISCONNECT’
“In my 20-plus years advising governments on safety protocols and regulatory compliance, I have never seen such a stark disconnect between a product’s name and its functional reality,,” she said.
She compared the tech industry’s “move fast, and break things” attitude to “a recipe for tragedy” when applied to public roads.
Tesla insists the technology remains a level 2 advanced driver-assistance system, not an autonomous one.
“Drivers must maintain proper control of the vehicle at all times,” the company said in its Australian release.
Ms Sgroi said Tesla’s global approach to development, learning through the live driver data, means Australians are effectively participating in an experiment every time they turn it on.
“What troubles me deeply is that Tesla has effectively turned public roads into a testing laboratory. Every FSD-equipped vehicle is collecting data, learning, and yes, making mistakes,” she said.
MORE: Tesla’s Full Self-Driving puts Aussies at risk
“But these are not mistakes made on closed courses with professional safety drivers. These are errors happening at 110 km/h on highways, in school zones, and at busy intersections, often where families are simply trying to get to work or school.”
She said the system’s braking and automation capabilities risk “automation complacency”, where drivers trust the car too much and become distracted.
“Here’s what concerns me most: we are deploying beta-level technology that fundamentally misunderstands human psychology,” she said.
Ms Sgroi believes the rollout is especially risky because the system was trained primarily on American roads.
“Australia’s right-hand drive configuration introduces an entirely different set of variables. Our roundabouts, unique intersection designs, and road signage conventions differ substantially from the environments where this system received most of its training data,” she said.
“I’ve seen first-hand how systems optimised for one market can fail catastrophically in another without proper adaptation.”
MORE: Tesla faces class action over Full Self-Driving failures
Adding to this, Ms Sgroi said that under current laws, if a crash occurs while using FSD, the driver remains responsible, which leaves drivers vulnerable.
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?
“When an FSD-enabled Tesla crashes in Australia, who is responsible? The driver who was told to remain vigilant but was lulled into complacency by the system’s name? The company that pushed an unfinished product to public roads? The state government which licenses drivers? The federal government that approved vehicle imports?,” she said.
“This legal and ethical grey zone is unprecedented in automotive history.”
The federal government is currently drafting an Automated Vehicle Safety Law, expected to come into effect in 2026, which will establish national standards for automated driving systems.
However, Ms Sgroi said “it’s taking too much time to develop the National framework adequately” and that the Federal government isn’t listening to industry-based insights.
“It needs to be developed before goals are formally announced (as is currently the case),” she said.
Ms Sgroi supports the development of autonomous vehicles but said Australia must not confuse innovation with readiness.
“Innovation has saved countless lives over my career, from airbags to electronic stability control but importantly, each advance was carefully tested, validated, and adapted for Australian conditions before deployment,” she said.
“The current approach to FSD is recklessness dressed as innovation. Australia is allowing deployment of technology not adequately trained for local conditions, on a road network unlike that used for development, with wildlife and weather hazards unique to our country, and essentially no regulatory framework to ensure public safety. We are gambling with lives.”
Tesla has been approached for comment.
Originally published as ‘Recipe for tragedy’: government adviser warns about Tesla’s FSD
