5 ms·

I have read the criticism of how the Autopilot miles aren't apples-to-apples comparisons with national averages many times. However, this cherry-picks a single

I have read the criticism of how the Autopilot miles aren't apples-to-apples comparisons with national averages many times. However, this cherry-picks a single number from the safety report and ignores the other reported statistics. If the explanation for why Autopilot miles were so much safer than non-Autopilot miles is that people turn it off in dangerous situations — and thus equal or greater numbers of crashes were occurring for Autopilot users overall compared to the national average, they were just occurring when Autopilot was off — the crash rate without Autopilot engaged would have to be higher than the national average. Otherwise, where would the crashes go? However, it isn't. The crash rate with Autopilot off (but with other safety features on) is about 4x better than the national average. And with all safety features turned off, it's still 2x better. I don't think you can explain away the high safety record of Autopilot by claiming the crashes are concentrated in the non-Autopilot miles, because they aren't. While Autopilot miles are safer than non-Autopilot miles, non-Autopilot miles are no more dangerous than the national average (and in fact are less dangerous). Autopilot+human is considerably safer than human alone.

nnm 6y ago
The total crash rate in Tesla cars is not necessary less than that of say Prius cars. Comparing Tesla cars crash rate with that of the overall population is dishonest: 1. drivers are biased population 2. the age of the car is biased
- reissbaker 6y ago
  It is not "dishonest." Toyota, AFAIK, does not publish these numbers; comparing to the national average is just the best you can do. Publishing the numbers without any comparison would be silly; what does it mean to know Tesla's accidents per mile if you not only don't know it for any other manufacturer, you also don't even know what the national average is? And while I couldn't find numbers for Prius specifically, it seems that hybrid cars are actually on average more dangerous than other cars, so I would be surprised if Tesla were not handily besting the Toyota Prius given Tesla's safety record: https://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1022235_hybrid-drivers-more-ticket-and-accident-prone https://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1022235_hybrid-drivers... Yes, there may be biases in driver population that make Tesla owners slightly more or less likely to crash. However, I think it is a very large stretch to claim that this would result in the fairly astoundingly different safety numbers. As for the age of the car: car age is mostly a statistical factor due to safety systems in newer cars. (It is also important in terms of deaths due to safety standards like crumple zones and airbags, but we are talking about a count of accidents, not deaths; if a crumple zone has been used, it is an accident.) Tesla publishes the statistics both with safety features on (4x better than national average), and the numbers for if they have been disabled which is still 2x better. I think if the claim that the crashes are concentrated in the non-Autopilot miles were true, and that Autopilot+human is more dangerous than human alone, it would be very hard to understand how the crash rate was still 2x better than the national average with safety features disabled and Autopilot off.
  - FireBeyond 6y ago
    > It is not "dishonest." Toyota, AFAIK, does not publish these numbers; comparing to the national average is just the best you can do. When you know, unequivocally, that you are missing huge swathes of information, and drawing all manner of conclusions and inferences not supported by those statistics, it's not "just doing the best you can", it's "being disingenuous and misleading with numbers".
    - reissbaker 6y ago
      The real world is not perfect. People have to make the best decisions they can with the data available. I think it's better to publish the numbers that are available. Tesla can't publish Toyota's numbers, because they don't have them. I don't think they're at fault for comparing against the only benchmark available, and I think it's better to have that comparison than not. Many, many writers have claimed that Autopilot is inherently unsafe and believed it would cause massive numbers of crashes compared to traditional cars. The data shows that not to be the case.
      - davrosthedalek 6y ago
        If you make your decisions based on partial information, knowing that large parts of the information is missing, and then pretend that it's not, you are not making the best decision. The best decision must take into account that information is indeed missing.
  - jtbayly 6y ago
    Really? I think I remember reading that accidents in newer cars are more rare. How does anybody know that? Can we not at least compare to similar aged cars?
    - reissbaker 6y ago
      Can we not at least compare to similar aged cars? I would love that. Do you know where to find that data though? I don't think it is published anywhere, which is why it's hard to use as a benchmark.
YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
The quoted statistics on either side are not helpful here. See: >> Driving to Safety >> How Many Miles of Driving Would It Take to Demonstrate Autonomous Vehicle Reliability? >> Key Findings >> Autonomous vehicles would have to be driven hundreds of millions of miles and sometimes hundreds of billions of miles to demonstrate their reliability in terms of fatalities and injuries. >> Under even aggressive testing assumptions, existing fleets would take tens and sometimes hundreds of years to drive these miles — an impossible proposition if the aim is to demonstrate their performance prior to releasing them on the roads for consumer use. >> Therefore, at least for fatalities and injuries, test-driving alone cannot provide sufficient evidence for demonstrating autonomous vehicle safety. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1478.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1478.html Note also that Tesla's numbers are reported after several years that Tesla cars with Autopilot have already been driven on public roads. Whatever the numbers say now when Autopilot was first released there was no evidence of it being safer than human-driven cars, only wishfull thinking and marketing concerns.
bcrl 6y ago
Please correct for demographics. The average Telsa owner does not include poor people driving beaters with bad brakes, so there's a heck of a lot of self selection going on that is probably skewing the statistics.
vladoh 6y ago
Even if what you argue is true, it doesn't follow from this report. Why is the accident rate of Tesla with Autopilot and all safety features off 2x better than the national average? Because there is a difference in the demographics - Tesla drivers are probably younger and more enthusiastic about driving than the average driver. Now, if you do the same statistics on the same demographics for all non Tesla cars, you could actually get less accidents than Tesla - here are where the hidden accidents went. Again, I don't have the data about this and I don't claim it is true, but without knowing this, you cannot make the conclusion you are making as well. Otherwise I agree with you - I also believe that Autopilot+human is safer than just human. Unfortunately, the usual way that people interpret these numbers is that Autopilot is safer than human...
- josephcsible 6y ago
  > Tesla drivers are probably younger Don't younger (hence less experienced) drivers generally have more accidents? If this is true, isn't it more evidence that Tesla's safety features are helpful?
  - fredophile 6y ago
    That depends on how you define younger. Not many teenagers can afford a Tesla though so in this case younger probably means mid 30s to early 40s. That largely removes very inexperienced drivers and the elderly.
  - wlesieutre 6y ago
    I think "younger" here is meant more as "not old." 16 year olds are less safe drivers, yes, but on account of the price they're not going to be a big part of Tesla's demographic. Since there's no affordable model, and they're a newfangled gadget with strange refueling infrastructure and a giant touchscreen for a console, Tesla owners probably skew toward middle aged. So they'll have fewer drivers in the less safe age ranges at both ends of the spectrum.
  - bkberry352 6y ago
    Risk by age decreases from 16-25, bottoming out from 30 to 40, before increasing again. 30-40 is, likely, a huge part of the Tesla demographic.
FireBeyond 6y ago
> However, it isn't. The crash rate with Autopilot off (but with other safety features on) is about 4x better than the national average. And with all safety features turned off, it's still 2x better. You still can't figure that out from Tesla's stats. It'd have to be "compared to the same roads in the same conditions". Tesla only knows where its vehicles have been driven, not every vehicle on the road. Let's be honest, this stat is just marketing.

nnm 6y ago

The total crash rate in Tesla cars is not necessary less than that of say Prius cars. Comparing Tesla cars crash rate with that of the overall population is dishonest: 1. drivers are biased population 2. the age of the car is biased

reissbaker 6y ago
It is not "dishonest." Toyota, AFAIK, does not publish these numbers; comparing to the national average is just the best you can do. Publishing the numbers without any comparison would be silly; what does it mean to know Tesla's accidents per mile if you not only don't know it for any other manufacturer, you also don't even know what the national average is? And while I couldn't find numbers for Prius specifically, it seems that hybrid cars are actually on average more dangerous than other cars, so I would be surprised if Tesla were not handily besting the Toyota Prius given Tesla's safety record: https://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1022235_hybrid-drivers-more-ticket-and-accident-prone https://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1022235_hybrid-drivers... Yes, there may be biases in driver population that make Tesla owners slightly more or less likely to crash. However, I think it is a very large stretch to claim that this would result in the fairly astoundingly different safety numbers. As for the age of the car: car age is mostly a statistical factor due to safety systems in newer cars. (It is also important in terms of deaths due to safety standards like crumple zones and airbags, but we are talking about a count of accidents, not deaths; if a crumple zone has been used, it is an accident.) Tesla publishes the statistics both with safety features on (4x better than national average), and the numbers for if they have been disabled which is still 2x better. I think if the claim that the crashes are concentrated in the non-Autopilot miles were true, and that Autopilot+human is more dangerous than human alone, it would be very hard to understand how the crash rate was still 2x better than the national average with safety features disabled and Autopilot off.
- FireBeyond 6y ago
  > It is not "dishonest." Toyota, AFAIK, does not publish these numbers; comparing to the national average is just the best you can do. When you know, unequivocally, that you are missing huge swathes of information, and drawing all manner of conclusions and inferences not supported by those statistics, it's not "just doing the best you can", it's "being disingenuous and misleading with numbers".
  - reissbaker 6y ago
    The real world is not perfect. People have to make the best decisions they can with the data available. I think it's better to publish the numbers that are available. Tesla can't publish Toyota's numbers, because they don't have them. I don't think they're at fault for comparing against the only benchmark available, and I think it's better to have that comparison than not. Many, many writers have claimed that Autopilot is inherently unsafe and believed it would cause massive numbers of crashes compared to traditional cars. The data shows that not to be the case.
    - davrosthedalek 6y ago
      If you make your decisions based on partial information, knowing that large parts of the information is missing, and then pretend that it's not, you are not making the best decision. The best decision must take into account that information is indeed missing.
- jtbayly 6y ago
  Really? I think I remember reading that accidents in newer cars are more rare. How does anybody know that? Can we not at least compare to similar aged cars?
  - reissbaker 6y ago
    Can we not at least compare to similar aged cars? I would love that. Do you know where to find that data though? I don't think it is published anywhere, which is why it's hard to use as a benchmark.

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago

The quoted statistics on either side are not helpful here. See: >> Driving to Safety >> How Many Miles of Driving Would It Take to Demonstrate Autonomous Vehicle Reliability? >> Key Findings >> Autonomous vehicles would have to be driven hundreds of millions of miles and sometimes hundreds of billions of miles to demonstrate their reliability in terms of fatalities and injuries. >> Under even aggressive testing assumptions, existing fleets would take tens and sometimes hundreds of years to drive these miles — an impossible proposition if the aim is to demonstrate their performance prior to releasing them on the roads for consumer use. >> Therefore, at least for fatalities and injuries, test-driving alone cannot provide sufficient evidence for demonstrating autonomous vehicle safety. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1478.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1478.html Note also that Tesla's numbers are reported after several years that Tesla cars with Autopilot have already been driven on public roads. Whatever the numbers say now when Autopilot was first released there was no evidence of it being safer than human-driven cars, only wishfull thinking and marketing concerns.

bcrl 6y ago

Please correct for demographics. The average Telsa owner does not include poor people driving beaters with bad brakes, so there's a heck of a lot of self selection going on that is probably skewing the statistics.

vladoh 6y ago

Even if what you argue is true, it doesn't follow from this report. Why is the accident rate of Tesla with Autopilot and all safety features off 2x better than the national average? Because there is a difference in the demographics - Tesla drivers are probably younger and more enthusiastic about driving than the average driver. Now, if you do the same statistics on the same demographics for all non Tesla cars, you could actually get less accidents than Tesla - here are where the hidden accidents went. Again, I don't have the data about this and I don't claim it is true, but without knowing this, you cannot make the conclusion you are making as well. Otherwise I agree with you - I also believe that Autopilot+human is safer than just human. Unfortunately, the usual way that people interpret these numbers is that Autopilot is safer than human...

josephcsible 6y ago
> Tesla drivers are probably younger Don't younger (hence less experienced) drivers generally have more accidents? If this is true, isn't it more evidence that Tesla's safety features are helpful?
- fredophile 6y ago
  That depends on how you define younger. Not many teenagers can afford a Tesla though so in this case younger probably means mid 30s to early 40s. That largely removes very inexperienced drivers and the elderly.
- wlesieutre 6y ago
  I think "younger" here is meant more as "not old." 16 year olds are less safe drivers, yes, but on account of the price they're not going to be a big part of Tesla's demographic. Since there's no affordable model, and they're a newfangled gadget with strange refueling infrastructure and a giant touchscreen for a console, Tesla owners probably skew toward middle aged. So they'll have fewer drivers in the less safe age ranges at both ends of the spectrum.
- bkberry352 6y ago
  Risk by age decreases from 16-25, bottoming out from 30 to 40, before increasing again. 30-40 is, likely, a huge part of the Tesla demographic.

FireBeyond 6y ago

> However, it isn't. The crash rate with Autopilot off (but with other safety features on) is about 4x better than the national average. And with all safety features turned off, it's still 2x better. You still can't figure that out from Tesla's stats. It'd have to be "compared to the same roads in the same conditions". Tesla only knows where its vehicles have been driven, not every vehicle on the road. Let's be honest, this stat is just marketing.