4 ms·

I thought your Your 2.08 crashes/million miles number had to be wrong, since if that were true the average person would have about 1 accident every 50 years or

I thought your Your 2.08 crashes/million miles number had to be wrong, since if that were true the average person would have about 1 accident every 50 years or so (which doesn't match my experience of everyone I know having accidents). Your number was "police reported accidents" which was apparently 6.7M. Anecdotally, I have been involved in 10 accidents or so as a passenger or driver, and none were reported to the police. So I can't find good numbers on what the real number is but I think its conservative to estimate it at 1/2 are reported to the police. In addition, "Crashes" mostly involve 2 cars, so the "police reported cars that crashed" is roughly 2x, or >12M. Basically, those changes makes it roughly 8 crashes per million miles for normal driving, or Waymo being basically the same. I still think that accident rate is too low though. This estimate is 6 crashes every million miles based on allstate data https://mashable.com/2012/08/07/google-driverless-cars-safer-than-you/ https://mashable.com/2012/08/07/google-driverless-cars-safer.... If that was the case, then humans would be at about 12 vehicle crashes/million miles, almost 2x as dangerous as Waymo. So about 2x better than human performance?

maliker 6y ago
Great analysis and new data!
- mchusma 6y ago
  Thank you for getting it started. I'm not 100% sure I understand it all. It's obviously important to figure out if it is safer or riskier.
YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
>> So about 2x better than human performance? If you really want the comparison to be on an even footing, you should consider only the crashes that happen during miles driven by humans in Phoenix. Not all over the US. In Phoenix only- because Waymo would have many more crashes outside Phoenix (e.g. New York or LA, from what I'm told of the traffic conditions there) and because so would humans.
- rootusrootus 6y ago
  This is an excellent point, it is the same problem as trying to compare autopilot crashes to human crashes. The context is critical.
- patall 6y ago
  I think even then, we do not know enough to make any such claim. When did the Waymo cars drive, during the day, in rush hour, at night??? Did they simulate the typical use of an average car or just drove around in the next suburb. And yeah, only Phoenix, so I assume few rainy days, barely any mist, snow, freezing and so on. The info of driven miles is nice to have but does not translate to normal human driven miles

maliker 6y ago

Great analysis and new data!

mchusma 6y ago
Thank you for getting it started. I'm not 100% sure I understand it all. It's obviously important to figure out if it is safer or riskier.

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago

>> So about 2x better than human performance? If you really want the comparison to be on an even footing, you should consider only the crashes that happen during miles driven by humans in Phoenix. Not all over the US. In Phoenix only- because Waymo would have many more crashes outside Phoenix (e.g. New York or LA, from what I'm told of the traffic conditions there) and because so would humans.

rootusrootus 6y ago
This is an excellent point, it is the same problem as trying to compare autopilot crashes to human crashes. The context is critical.
patall 6y ago
I think even then, we do not know enough to make any such claim. When did the Waymo cars drive, during the day, in rush hour, at night??? Did they simulate the typical use of an average car or just drove around in the next suburb. And yeah, only Phoenix, so I assume few rainy days, barely any mist, snow, freezing and so on. The info of driven miles is nice to have but does not translate to normal human driven miles