3 ms·
That's not how this works. If the cars are safer, there should be independent data that shows this. As it is, we get one-sentence "safety reports" from the manu
by unityByFreedom 7y ago
That's not how this works. If the cars are safer, there should be independent data that shows this. As it is, we get one-sentence "safety reports" from the manufacturer with a single data point. They're not safer by default because the manufacturer says so.
- robotresearcher 7y agoThe claim was that Tesla’s system is not safer, and that only level 4 would increase safety. I asked if data supported those two independent claims. I’m ok if we assume that things are unsafe before we have evidence they are safe, but that’s not the same as declaring they are unsafe without evidence.
- mannykannot 7y agoThe current situation is somewhere between the two: There have been some crashes (e.g. Boca Raton) that strongly suggest there is a dangerous systemic problem. In such cases, demanding statistical confirmation that it is a significant problem (as NASA did with the O-ring erosion problem) is not the right response. It reminds me of a case in the building of the 688 class submarines: a cracked weld, that had supposedly passed multiple inspections, was found in part of the torpedo-handling equipment. At that point, all welds, including pressure-hull welds, became suspect. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/31730.Running_Critical https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/31730.Running_Critical
- pinkfoot 7y agoUnless you are Boeing.