You could certainly train AI to navigate that particular maze of netting, but I'm far from convinced you could train an AI to navigate a near-infinite variety of novel, hostile measures not present in the training corpus.

It seems trivial to confuse a Tesla's AI. I'm assuming they're fairly near the top of the game when it comes to that, yes?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1MigIJXJx8

This sort of intentionally hostile pathological case is of course rare in real-world driving. It will not be rare in warfare.

And a drone has to operate fully in three dimensions, unlike a Tesla which is effectively operating in two dimensions.

An autonomous drone will also have extremely constrained computing resources relative to a Tesla due to size/weight/power constraints.

Self-driving cars are a political problem, not a technical one. We have self-driving cars on Mars.

Autonomous drones, yeah, well... https://www.tudelft.nl/en/2025/lr/autonomous-drone-from-tu-d...

Perseverance "self drives" at 0.1mph on a nearly flat, static landscape with zero other threats or moving objects.

(Sure, it's a hostile landscape with regards to dust/temperature/radiation. And getting to Mars and landing safely is a fiendishly difficult task. But those aren't concerns of the self-driving system...)

https://science.nasa.gov/resource/how-perseverance-drives-on...

The problem space is truly not comparable to that of a drone that needs to navigate an actively hostile, evolving environment in three dimensions at two orders of magnitude greater speed.

Campy, low budget action movies are not a sound basis for forming public policy.

Whether it should is a different question. It certainly can.