4 ms·
> it does not have to be flawless, it just has to statistically cause fewer accidents per kilometer/year than what human drivers cause in a similar situation (w
by oxplot 7y ago
> it does not have to be flawless, it just has to statistically cause fewer accidents per kilometer/year than what human drivers cause in a similar situation (which is already non-zero, and in some countries actually quite high).
Even though it logically makes sense, there are some nuances to it, most prominent of which is: When human drivers cause accidents, they are held responsible by the legal system. Who's responsible when your car made the decision? Is it Tesla? Is it the driver? Society is probably not going to accept a small improvement over humans while all the legal burden goes up in the air. It may demand a much higher improvement to compensate.
- spookthesunset 7y ago> Who's responsible when your car made the decision? Is it Tesla? Is it the driver? Any time a Tesla is involved in an accident, it seems like the company is more than happy to throw out reams of log data "proving" that it isn't their fault. But yet at the same time they maintain marketing material claiming their "auto pilot" feature is (or will be) so awesome that the human driver is only there to make the lawyers happy.
- Slartie 7y agoThat's actually totally non-contradictory. The human is there to make Tesla's lawyers happy, and they are definitely very happy to have an easy scapegoat to blame if their tech fails to live up to the hype.