4 ms·
«the damn technology isn't ready/safe enough» What data are you basing this statement on? Or is this just your vague gut feeling based on reading about a few a
by mrb 8y ago
«the damn technology isn't ready/safe enough»
What data are you basing this statement on? Or is this just your vague gut feeling based on reading about a few accidents in the news? I thought statistical data showed otherwise, that the technology was safe enough (ie. better than humans).
Edit: removed "debunked stats".
- _Codemonkeyism 8y agoThese numbers from Tesla have been debunked several times (see every older discussion on this on HN) because of the flawed methodology (mostly comparing apples to oranges).
- perl4ever 8y agoReading that blog entry makes me more distrustful of Tesla than I was, because I don't think it's appropriate to compare Autopilot miles to generic human driver miles. Autopilot is not suitable for all types of driving. The most readily accessible statistics that would be more comparable would be fatalities on interstates. US interstate deaths are about 1 per 183 million miles, so while Autopilot may be safer, it's not as clear depending on the uncertainty of the 320 million mile figure. Also, German drivers on the autobahn have roughly half the fatality rate, which is better than the claim for Autopilot. All in all, I think an honest assessment would be that it's probably as good as an average driver in good conditions who isn't drunk. But rhetoric about saving 900K lives raises my hackles - I do not want to trust the source of this sort of PR with my life.