Considering 68.25% of all US crashes involving driver assist systems were due to Tesla Autopilot, I agree it’s an experiment.
Edit: let me clarify, ALL lane-assist based systems in my opinion are not ready for public road use. Tesla sucks, but they all suck if they are causing accidents and fatalities.
Suburbs and diffuse urban centers connected by highways are a consequence of cars, not the other way around. The US could have instead opted for public transport and densely packed services so a full shopping trip doesn’t take you all the way around the state. Here in the UK I can just walk into town and all the things you need are an easy walk from each other,
Caused by minimum parking laws that we don’t need. We could fix the problem by building our cities the way we used to before GM bought all the trolleys, and scrapped them, to sell more cars.
I’m right there with you. I immigrated to the Netherlands and I no longer own a car (well I have a track car, but that’s different). I just bike or take the train everywhere.
People are always going to adjust their risk upwards as technology gets safer. Even if all cars were self-driving and perfect, some pedestrian will push the bounds of physics, stepping out with no time to stop.
These drivers aren’t going to sleep or Tiktoking in the first 30 minutes. They are being lulled into complacency by a tech that generally does a good job, and they have been told by marketing that we are so close to FSD.
I live in American suburbia and have far more miles on my bike than a car. And yes I have kids too. Yes the zoning sucks, but also Americans are just more lazy.
My parents have that Lidar cruise control on their Toyota. It was active—but not on—one day when I was driving, and the damned car started freaking out BRAKE BRAKE BRAKE thinking I’m about to plow into a parked car because there was a gentle curve in the road.
This is one of those times you should realize how misleading statistics can be. Can you think of what might be a more informative measurement if we are actually after the truth?
Love it haha. I don’t care about Tesla at all, but including the share of miles driven on Autopilot versus other companies’ tech would be much more revealing. If 90% of miles driven were on Autopilot, they would be outperforming their competitors.
You’re being pedantic then. The issue is not the stats because the fundamental is they should not be beta testing this on public roads. Have you signed any waivers if one kills you or maims you? I know I haven’t.
It is relevant when your talking about the application of statistics when the statistics don’t matter because there should be 0 km tested on public roads without everyone signed on.
I understand what you’re saying. I’m telling you you’re wrong as is everyone else. The only statistic that should matter in this scenario is 0. Hence you’re being pedantic and hiding behind “hurr durr this is how you do statistics”.
Anyways, I’ve made my point. You bicker with others around breakdowns on highway vs construction vs city traffic and miles driven.
It would be nice if the above statistic mentioned the ratio of Tesla’s compared to other cars. If 90% of cars with autopilot are trslas but they only account for 70% of crashes, that’s a good thing. There’s also the problem with wording, driving assist does includes a lot more than just a fully self driving car.
But the only important statistic is how likely a self driving car is to get into an accident compared to a human driver.
People really have to learn to seperate the tech from the man. Elon Musk is a piece of shit, that doesn’t mean everything he has his hand in is. Self driving cars are cool as fuck and if they aren’t safer than human drivers atm, they clearly quickly will be.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) cautioned against using the numbers to compare automakers, saying it did not weight them by the number of vehicles from each manufacturer or how many miles those vehicles traveled.
I’m trying to find the Tesla:others ratio, but that’s proving a bit difficult.
A bit of a moot point in my eyes as I consider all 400 accidents unacceptable, but you are right, I shouldn’t use stats just to shit on Tesla.
Close, but usage matters too. Just owning a car with driver assist doesn’t mean you use it at the same rate. Share of miles driven with assist features would be better.
Then if you want to get gritty, I guess we could try to quantify how complex the miles were. Dense city miles and construction zones should count more.
I guess accidents per thousand/million cars on road would be more representative.
Think of it like this, if ~70% of all autonomous driving cars were Teslas, and they have a ~70% contribution to the accident volume, then they’re as bad as the competition.
I’m not saying Tesla’s auto pilot doesn’t have problems, but this particular metric is not the best one to say how it is compared to the competition.
Personal opinion: No manufacturer has an auto pilot capable enough to be on the road.
Another point that rarely seems to be accounted for is what type of miles are being used for comparison.
Aggregate autopilot crash rates may look good compared to non-autopilot rates, but if autopilot cannot be used in inclement weather, challenging roads, or other risky situations, then the statistic is misleading. (Statistics??? Misleading??? Well, I never…)
Considering 68.25% of all US crashes involving driver assist systems were due to Tesla Autopilot, I agree it’s an experiment.
Edit: let me clarify, ALL lane-assist based systems in my opinion are not ready for public road use. Tesla sucks, but they all suck if they are causing accidents and fatalities.
Woah that sounds really great actually, considering Tesla probably has 10x the autopilot miles driven compared to other manufacturers.
Any accident caused by lane-assist technology is too many. I won’t accept the loss of human life for a convenience technology.
That is silly to say. Cars themselves are a convenience technology.
Are they? Maybe here in the EU they are, but growing up in American Suburbia, a car was a necessity.
I’m not going to go down your slippery slope of ever expanding scopes on convenience technology though.
Suburbs and diffuse urban centers connected by highways are a consequence of cars, not the other way around. The US could have instead opted for public transport and densely packed services so a full shopping trip doesn’t take you all the way around the state. Here in the UK I can just walk into town and all the things you need are an easy walk from each other,
In America walking from one store to another store 4 stores away could be an over half a mile long stroll.
Caused by minimum parking laws that we don’t need. We could fix the problem by building our cities the way we used to before GM bought all the trolleys, and scrapped them, to sell more cars.
I’m right there with you. I immigrated to the Netherlands and I no longer own a car (well I have a track car, but that’s different). I just bike or take the train everywhere.
People are always going to adjust their risk upwards as technology gets safer. Even if all cars were self-driving and perfect, some pedestrian will push the bounds of physics, stepping out with no time to stop.
These drivers aren’t going to sleep or Tiktoking in the first 30 minutes. They are being lulled into complacency by a tech that generally does a good job, and they have been told by marketing that we are so close to FSD.
Isn’t every technology a convenience technology?
We weren’t making fires or using levers to inconvenience ourselves.
I live in American suburbia and have far more miles on my bike than a car. And yes I have kids too. Yes the zoning sucks, but also Americans are just more lazy.
One of the fortunate American suburbanites, many are not so lucky. I now live in the Netherlands and either bike or take the train where I need to go.
you have to compare it with human shampoo drivers to have this number mean anything
My parents have that Lidar cruise control on their Toyota. It was active—but not on—one day when I was driving, and the damned car started freaking out BRAKE BRAKE BRAKE thinking I’m about to plow into a parked car because there was a gentle curve in the road.
My car looks to slam on the brakes when I back out of my driveway sometimes. Super annoying
“WHOA THERE DUDE! Geez, didn’t you see that paper cup being blown by the wind?? Totally saved your ass.”
This is one of those times you should realize how misleading statistics can be. Can you think of what might be a more informative measurement if we are actually after the truth?
The number of inches of Elon’s dick is in your throat?
Love it haha. I don’t care about Tesla at all, but including the share of miles driven on Autopilot versus other companies’ tech would be much more revealing. If 90% of miles driven were on Autopilot, they would be outperforming their competitors.
How does that make it any more “right” that they’re testing on public roads?
Will you bend over for Elon when one of his “tests” ram a minivan on a highway killing a family of 5?
“Oh but this was one accident out of 5000 test miles driven”
I am not defending him, just saying it’s wrong to use misleading stats even with a good point.
You’re being pedantic then. The issue is not the stats because the fundamental is they should not be beta testing this on public roads. Have you signed any waivers if one kills you or maims you? I know I haven’t.
You should go to another part of the comments, then, because over here we were discussing the application of the statistic.
It is relevant when your talking about the application of statistics when the statistics don’t matter because there should be 0 km tested on public roads without everyone signed on.
I understand what you’re saying. I’m telling you you’re wrong as is everyone else. The only statistic that should matter in this scenario is 0. Hence you’re being pedantic and hiding behind “hurr durr this is how you do statistics”.
Anyways, I’ve made my point. You bicker with others around breakdowns on highway vs construction vs city traffic and miles driven.
Okay mate, why don’t you show us all what the “more informative measurement” is for this?
It would be nice if the above statistic mentioned the ratio of Tesla’s compared to other cars. If 90% of cars with autopilot are trslas but they only account for 70% of crashes, that’s a good thing. There’s also the problem with wording, driving assist does includes a lot more than just a fully self driving car.
But the only important statistic is how likely a self driving car is to get into an accident compared to a human driver.
People really have to learn to seperate the tech from the man. Elon Musk is a piece of shit, that doesn’t mean everything he has his hand in is. Self driving cars are cool as fuck and if they aren’t safer than human drivers atm, they clearly quickly will be.
Yes, you’re correct. From source:
I’m trying to find the Tesla:others ratio, but that’s proving a bit difficult.
A bit of a moot point in my eyes as I consider all 400 accidents unacceptable, but you are right, I shouldn’t use stats just to shit on Tesla.
Close, but usage matters too. Just owning a car with driver assist doesn’t mean you use it at the same rate. Share of miles driven with assist features would be better.
Then if you want to get gritty, I guess we could try to quantify how complex the miles were. Dense city miles and construction zones should count more.
I guess accidents per thousand/million cars on road would be more representative.
Think of it like this, if ~70% of all autonomous driving cars were Teslas, and they have a ~70% contribution to the accident volume, then they’re as bad as the competition.
I’m not saying Tesla’s auto pilot doesn’t have problems, but this particular metric is not the best one to say how it is compared to the competition.
Personal opinion: No manufacturer has an auto pilot capable enough to be on the road.
Another point that rarely seems to be accounted for is what type of miles are being used for comparison.
Aggregate autopilot crash rates may look good compared to non-autopilot rates, but if autopilot cannot be used in inclement weather, challenging roads, or other risky situations, then the statistic is misleading. (Statistics??? Misleading??? Well, I never…)
100% of the crashes in question were caused by autopilot