7 ms·

I think the point he's making is that it's worse if a person dies because of something they have no control over (self-driving car malfunction) than if a person

I think the point he's making is that it's worse if a person dies because of something they have no control over (self-driving car malfunction) than if a person dies because of their own stupid choices (driving drunk, driving too fast for conditions, running red lights, etc). This, of course, ignores the fact that stupid choices drivers make tend to affect other people on the road who did nothing wrong, so the introduction of a self-driving car which makes less stupid decisions would reduce deaths from both categories of people here.

matte_black 9y ago
No, that conclusion completely ignores the fact that the kind of people who buy Teslas are generally not the kind of people who drive unsafely anyway and die in terrible wrecks. If you give every shitty driver a self driving Tesla maybe you would do something to make roads safer, but if you’re just giving it to higher net worth individuals who place greater value on their own life, you haven’t even made a dent in traffic safety. In fact in some cases all you’re doing is making drivers unsafer because the autopilot encourages them to not pay attention to the road no matter how much you think they are watching carefully. The men killed in Teslas could have all avoided their deaths if only they had been paying attention. If I see a Tesla on the road I stay the hell away lest it do something irrational from an error and kill us both.
- rileymat2 9y ago
  Is there evidence for your better driver claim? https://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/the-rich-drive-differently-a-study-suggests/ https://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/the-rich-drive-d... I do see some sources that claim rich divers get better insurance rates, but it is unclear to me if that is due to driving skill or a number of other factors that increase rates like liklyhood of being stolen or miles driven.
- ajross 9y ago
  Seems like your first two paragraphs are amenable to analysis. Surely there is data out there that splits traffic accident statistics on income, or some proxy for income. Is a Tesla on autopilot more accident-prone than a BMW or Lexus? The numbers as they stand certainly seem to imply "no", but I'd be willing to read a paper. The third paragraph though is just you flinging opinion around. You assert without evidence that a Tesla is likely to "do something irrational from an error and kill us both" (has any such crash even happened? Seems like Tesla's are great at avoiding other vehicles and where they fall down it tends to be in recognizing static/slow things like medians, bikers and turning semis and not turning to avoid them). I mean, sure. You be you and "stay the hell away" from Teslas. But that doesn't really have much bearing on public policy.
  - matte_black 9y ago
    Drunk drivers, recklessly fast drivers, redlight runners, stop sign blowers, high speed tailgaters... those are the demographic you have to compare the Tesla drivers to. Do people who buy Teslas engage in those kinds of dangerous activities?
    - YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago
      There was a recent news item about a Tesla driver who fell asleep at the wheel and who was allegedly over the legal limit: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tesla+driver+drunk+asleep&t=ffsb&atb=v100-7&ia=videos https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tesla+driver+drunk+asleep&t=ffsb&a...
    - foolfoolz 9y ago
      yes
    - detaro 9y ago
      Yes, that sounds like a pretty good profile of people buying expensive high-performance cars.
    - ajross 9y ago
      > Drunk drivers, recklessly fast drivers, redlight runners, stop sign blowers, high speed tailgaters. Wait, so you are willing to share the road with all those nutjobs, yet you're "staying the hell away from" Teslas you see which you claim are NOT being driven by these people? I think you need to reevaluate your argument. Badly. That even leaves aside the clear point that a Tesla on autopilot is significantly less likely to make any of those mistakes...
      - ksk 9y ago
        >That even leaves aside the clear point that a Tesla on autopilot is significantly less likely to make any of those mistakes... What are you basing this on? Specifically how is it 'clear' and what data has shown this to be 'significant' ?
- whichdan 9y ago
  Well, this is pretty classist...
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    The reason why people buy expensive cars is because it is one of the ways in which they can quickly and quietly signal wealth or status. Cars are classicist, like it or not. After all, how much better can a $500K supercar be compared to a $50K car? Definitely not ten times better, the speed limits are the same, seating capacity is likely smaller, there may be a marginal improvement in acceleration and a corresponding reduction in range (and increased fuel consumption). Even having a car / not having a car is a status thing for many people (and it goes both ways, some see not having a car as being 'better' than those that have cars and vice versa, usually dependent on whether or not car ownership was decided from a position of prosperity or poverty).
    - dwighttk 9y ago
      >Cars are classicist, like it or not. as a trained classicist, I take exception to the idea a car could do what I do
      - jacquesm 9y ago
        I meant it as an adjective, not as a noun (I'd have added 'a' in front). Is it incorrect?
        dwighttk 9y ago
        You'd want "classist" if you mean prejudice against a class
        jacquesm 9y ago
        Noted! Thank you.
    - whichdan 9y ago
stale2002 9y ago
> I think the point he's making is that it's worse if a person dies because of something they have no control over Perhaps. I reject this argument though. A death is a death. And if you prevent lifesaving technology then you are responsible for a whole lot of deaths, irregardless of how "deserved" those deaths are.
- ksk 9y ago
  >Perhaps. I reject this argument though. A death is a death. A death caused by shitty engineering (e.g. Tesla in this case) is not the same as a death caused by gross negligence on ones own part. >And if you prevent lifesaving technology then you are responsible for a whole lot of deaths, irregardless of how "deserved" those deaths are. How many deaths has Tesla prevented, which would have happened otherwise?
  - AliShug 9y ago
    > How many deaths has Tesla prevented, which would have happened otherwise? Certainly a larger number than the number of deaths caused by Autopilot failure (which makes major news in every individual case). Have a look at YouTube for videos of Teslas automatically avoiding crashes.
    - ksk 9y ago
      I don't see a number.
  - mike10010100 9y ago
    > A death caused by shitty engineering (e.g. Tesla in this case) is not the same as a death caused by gross negligence on ones own part. The result is the same, no? Isn't the idea to save lives? Why does one life have more value than another's simply because someone's death was caused by their own negligence? What about the other people on the road? Do their lives matter less because of the gross negligence of the person not paying attention while they're driving? This issue is a lot more complicated than you're making it seem.
bendauphinee 9y ago
> because of something they have no control over Expect in this case, the driver has 100% control.
- macawfish 9y ago
  The driver's not the only one on the road.

matte_black 9y ago

No, that conclusion completely ignores the fact that the kind of people who buy Teslas are generally not the kind of people who drive unsafely anyway and die in terrible wrecks. If you give every shitty driver a self driving Tesla maybe you would do something to make roads safer, but if you’re just giving it to higher net worth individuals who place greater value on their own life, you haven’t even made a dent in traffic safety. In fact in some cases all you’re doing is making drivers unsafer because the autopilot encourages them to not pay attention to the road no matter how much you think they are watching carefully. The men killed in Teslas could have all avoided their deaths if only they had been paying attention. If I see a Tesla on the road I stay the hell away lest it do something irrational from an error and kill us both.

rileymat2 9y ago
Is there evidence for your better driver claim? https://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/the-rich-drive-differently-a-study-suggests/ https://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/the-rich-drive-d... I do see some sources that claim rich divers get better insurance rates, but it is unclear to me if that is due to driving skill or a number of other factors that increase rates like liklyhood of being stolen or miles driven.
ajross 9y ago
Seems like your first two paragraphs are amenable to analysis. Surely there is data out there that splits traffic accident statistics on income, or some proxy for income. Is a Tesla on autopilot more accident-prone than a BMW or Lexus? The numbers as they stand certainly seem to imply "no", but I'd be willing to read a paper. The third paragraph though is just you flinging opinion around. You assert without evidence that a Tesla is likely to "do something irrational from an error and kill us both" (has any such crash even happened? Seems like Tesla's are great at avoiding other vehicles and where they fall down it tends to be in recognizing static/slow things like medians, bikers and turning semis and not turning to avoid them). I mean, sure. You be you and "stay the hell away" from Teslas. But that doesn't really have much bearing on public policy.
- matte_black 9y ago
  Drunk drivers, recklessly fast drivers, redlight runners, stop sign blowers, high speed tailgaters... those are the demographic you have to compare the Tesla drivers to. Do people who buy Teslas engage in those kinds of dangerous activities?
  - YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago
    There was a recent news item about a Tesla driver who fell asleep at the wheel and who was allegedly over the legal limit: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tesla+driver+drunk+asleep&t=ffsb&atb=v100-7&ia=videos https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tesla+driver+drunk+asleep&t=ffsb&a...
  - foolfoolz 9y ago
    yes
  - detaro 9y ago
    Yes, that sounds like a pretty good profile of people buying expensive high-performance cars.
  - ajross 9y ago
    > Drunk drivers, recklessly fast drivers, redlight runners, stop sign blowers, high speed tailgaters. Wait, so you are willing to share the road with all those nutjobs, yet you're "staying the hell away from" Teslas you see which you claim are NOT being driven by these people? I think you need to reevaluate your argument. Badly. That even leaves aside the clear point that a Tesla on autopilot is significantly less likely to make any of those mistakes...
    - ksk 9y ago
      >That even leaves aside the clear point that a Tesla on autopilot is significantly less likely to make any of those mistakes... What are you basing this on? Specifically how is it 'clear' and what data has shown this to be 'significant' ?
whichdan 9y ago
Well, this is pretty classist...
- jacquesm 9y ago
  The reason why people buy expensive cars is because it is one of the ways in which they can quickly and quietly signal wealth or status. Cars are classicist, like it or not. After all, how much better can a $500K supercar be compared to a $50K car? Definitely not ten times better, the speed limits are the same, seating capacity is likely smaller, there may be a marginal improvement in acceleration and a corresponding reduction in range (and increased fuel consumption). Even having a car / not having a car is a status thing for many people (and it goes both ways, some see not having a car as being 'better' than those that have cars and vice versa, usually dependent on whether or not car ownership was decided from a position of prosperity or poverty).
  - dwighttk 9y ago
    >Cars are classicist, like it or not. as a trained classicist, I take exception to the idea a car could do what I do
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      I meant it as an adjective, not as a noun (I'd have added 'a' in front). Is it incorrect?
      - dwighttk 9y ago
        You'd want "classist" if you mean prejudice against a class
        jacquesm 9y ago
        Noted! Thank you.
  - whichdan 9y ago

stale2002 9y ago

> I think the point he's making is that it's worse if a person dies because of something they have no control over Perhaps. I reject this argument though. A death is a death. And if you prevent lifesaving technology then you are responsible for a whole lot of deaths, irregardless of how "deserved" those deaths are.

ksk 9y ago
>Perhaps. I reject this argument though. A death is a death. A death caused by shitty engineering (e.g. Tesla in this case) is not the same as a death caused by gross negligence on ones own part. >And if you prevent lifesaving technology then you are responsible for a whole lot of deaths, irregardless of how "deserved" those deaths are. How many deaths has Tesla prevented, which would have happened otherwise?
- AliShug 9y ago
  > How many deaths has Tesla prevented, which would have happened otherwise? Certainly a larger number than the number of deaths caused by Autopilot failure (which makes major news in every individual case). Have a look at YouTube for videos of Teslas automatically avoiding crashes.
  - ksk 9y ago
    I don't see a number.
- mike10010100 9y ago
  > A death caused by shitty engineering (e.g. Tesla in this case) is not the same as a death caused by gross negligence on ones own part. The result is the same, no? Isn't the idea to save lives? Why does one life have more value than another's simply because someone's death was caused by their own negligence? What about the other people on the road? Do their lives matter less because of the gross negligence of the person not paying attention while they're driving? This issue is a lot more complicated than you're making it seem.

bendauphinee 9y ago

> because of something they have no control over Expect in this case, the driver has 100% control.

macawfish 9y ago
The driver's not the only one on the road.