"thats how we did it before" is the number one inhibitor in the name of progress.
Remember your windows pre updates. Full of security holes and no way to patch, or bugs that linger and create problems that could never be fully eliminated.
Let me tell you something you didnt think of. Imagine i am doing my diligence before releasing a software but didnt fully factor in all the unknowns in the process. It happens, shit breaks all the time, right? Now imagine instead of uncontrollably calling everyone in house, i start 1% roll out, and gather data, find some problems with that investigate and push the real fix. See the efficiency gains? I prevented the chaos of 99% of cars, and i did somrthing data driven
When people are relying on software for their safety, no, it doesn't. Bugs in critical systems for things like planes and cars are rare because going faster kills people. Using 1% of your users as tests is fine if you're making a website but much less fine if your new code means they might die.
Real life disagrees with you. It is a simple math: roll out a safety update to everyone manually and have no idea on the real life performance, or roll out slowly and get the data.
Bringing cars in house makes no improvement over what i am proposing.
Remember your windows pre updates. Full of security holes and no way to patch, or bugs that linger and create problems that could never be fully eliminated.
Let me tell you something you didnt think of. Imagine i am doing my diligence before releasing a software but didnt fully factor in all the unknowns in the process. It happens, shit breaks all the time, right? Now imagine instead of uncontrollably calling everyone in house, i start 1% roll out, and gather data, find some problems with that investigate and push the real fix. See the efficiency gains? I prevented the chaos of 99% of cars, and i did somrthing data driven
Good luck on that without an ota.