this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2024
918 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

69156 readers
2765 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

You can literally type in an address and the car will take you there with zero input on the driver's part. If that's not full self-driving then I don't know what is. What FSD was capable of a year ago and how it performs today is completely different.

Not only does these statistics include the way less capable older versions of it, it also includes accidents caused by autopilot which is a different system than FSD. It also fails to mention how the accident rate compares to human drivers.

If we replace every single car in the US with a self-driving one that's 10x safer driver than your average human that means you're still getting over 3000 deaths a year due to traffic accidents. That's 10 people a day. If one wants to ban these systems because they're not perfect then that means they'll rather have 100 people die every day instead of 10.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It also fails to mention how the accident rate compares to human drivers.

That may be because Tesla refuses to publish proper data on this, lol.

Yeah, they claim it's ten times better than a human driver, but none of their analysis methods or data points are available to independent researchers. It's just marketing.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the part that bothers me.

l’d defend Tesla when FSD gets into accidents, even fatal ones, IF they showed that FSD caused fewer accidents than the average human driver.

They claim that’s true, but if it is why not release data that proves it?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

It isn't the average driver. Most cars are equipped with driver assist features, we have to say that is should be better than people using current driver assist features from other companies. If Tesla is behind everyone else, but better than a 20 year-old car, it's still problematic.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I have a feeling that user blocks people that are critical of Tesla. They are probably oblivious to several comments in this thread. It's really no wonder why they have no clue about how bad Tesla really is.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

You might find this page interesting -

https://www.flyingpenguin.com/?p=35819

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm not claiming it is 10x safer than a human - I'm saying that even if it was there would still be daily deaths despite that.

Tesla has published the data - people just refuse to believe it because it doesn't show what they think it should. There's nothing more Tesla can do about it at this point. It's up to independent researches from now.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I would love to see this data, can you link it? Either a paper by unaffiliated researchers or the raw data is fine.
I am aware their marketing pushes the "10x better" number. But I have yet to see the actual data to back this claim.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Either a paper by unaffiliated researchers or the raw data is fine.

Like I said; the only data available is from Tesla itself which any reasonable person should take with a grain of salt. If you want to see it you can just google it. There's plenty of YouTubers independently testing it aswell but these are all obviously biased fanboys that can't be trusted either.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Tesla sues people that criticise them in the media. You really can't trust most reviews. The reviews are also looking for money from companies like Tesla so their not impartial.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Comment:

none of their analysis methods or data points are available to independent researchers.

Your response:

It's up to independent researches from now.

I think you missed an important point there. Can you show the detailed methods and data points that Tesla used for their marketing materials?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You can literally type in an address and the car will take you there with zero input on the driver's part. If that's not full self-driving then I don't know what is.

Who is responsible if there is an accident, you or Tesla? That is the difference from true FSD and regular driver assistance features.

Regarding driving regulations -

If we had better raw data, I'm sure we could come up with better conclusions. Knowing the absolutely tremendous amount of BS that Musk spews, we can't trust anything Tesla reports. We're left to speculate.

At this point, it is probably best to compare statistics for other cars with similar technologies. For example, Volvo reported that they went 16 years without a fatal accident in their XC90 model in the UK (don't know about other places). That was a couple of years ago, I don't know if they have been able to keep that record up. With that kind of record that has lasted for so long, I think we have to ask why Tesla is so bad.