3 ms·

You asked about non-autopilot cars and how common it is. I gave you data. I can also find no data that suggests any other TACC is crashing into vehicles (no NT

You asked about non-autopilot cars and how common it is. I gave you data. I can also find no data that suggests any other TACC is crashing into vehicles (no NTSB studies, investigations, etc) at all. So yeah, i'm going to conclude, based on what i've seen so far, that autopilot is part of the problem. If you have data that says autopilot is not worse, i'd love to see it.

mikeash 8y ago
I asked about actual crashes. You gave me info about a controlled test where the exact car discussed in this article avoided the test collision. Given that the car discussed in this article crashed in real life, the controlled test is clearly not the final word in whether these other cars are experiencing crashes like this in the real world. Also, I wasn't asking about how Autopilot compares to similar systems from other manufacturers, I was asking how it compares to the Mark I Human, which is a driving system that crashes into stationary vehicles with distressing frequency.
- DannyBee 8y ago
  I'm just going to leave you to your non-data driven skepticism of "everything other than tesla", because this is clearly not a useful conversation. That isn't what you originally asked (and as you see, i wasn't the only one who interpreted it this way), and imho it's not a useful comparison. I have no idea why one would ask "is autopilot worse" and then say "but only compared to humans, not taking into account the other systems that do the same thing and humans are also using on a regular basis" It doesn't answer the question whether autopilot is really worse or not, because nobody cares if it's better or worse than a straw man human who has disabled the collision avoidance on their car.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    I'm not talking about people who disable collision avoidance. I'm talking about people driving cars that don't have it at all. These are, as far as I know, still the vast majority of cars out there. The data you provided is clearly not sufficient to reach conclusions about actual crash rates, so I really don't see how it's useful to present.
    - DannyBee 8y ago
      and again, you literally have no data at all, sufficient or not, to back up your claims. Instead, you just shit on all data that doesn't agree with your pet theory as insufficient. I'll take insufficient data over zero data any day of the week.

mikeash 8y ago

I asked about actual crashes. You gave me info about a controlled test where the exact car discussed in this article avoided the test collision. Given that the car discussed in this article crashed in real life, the controlled test is clearly not the final word in whether these other cars are experiencing crashes like this in the real world. Also, I wasn't asking about how Autopilot compares to similar systems from other manufacturers, I was asking how it compares to the Mark I Human, which is a driving system that crashes into stationary vehicles with distressing frequency.

DannyBee 8y ago
I'm just going to leave you to your non-data driven skepticism of "everything other than tesla", because this is clearly not a useful conversation. That isn't what you originally asked (and as you see, i wasn't the only one who interpreted it this way), and imho it's not a useful comparison. I have no idea why one would ask "is autopilot worse" and then say "but only compared to humans, not taking into account the other systems that do the same thing and humans are also using on a regular basis" It doesn't answer the question whether autopilot is really worse or not, because nobody cares if it's better or worse than a straw man human who has disabled the collision avoidance on their car.
- mikeash 8y ago
  I'm not talking about people who disable collision avoidance. I'm talking about people driving cars that don't have it at all. These are, as far as I know, still the vast majority of cars out there. The data you provided is clearly not sufficient to reach conclusions about actual crash rates, so I really don't see how it's useful to present.
  - DannyBee 8y ago
    and again, you literally have no data at all, sufficient or not, to back up your claims. Instead, you just shit on all data that doesn't agree with your pet theory as insufficient. I'll take insufficient data over zero data any day of the week.