5 ms·

We have actual statistics on how well humans do with Tesla ADAS and it’s remarkably well. The accident rate numbers are hard to compare apples-to-apples since m

by zaroth 5y ago

We have actual statistics on how well humans do with Tesla ADAS and it’s remarkably well. The accident rate numbers are hard to compare apples-to-apples since miles driven with all ADAS features active are different from miles driven without the full ADAS active, but the numbers show that the software is absolutely not “1000x more dangerous”. > In the 1st quarter [2021], we registered one accident for every 4.19 million miles driven in which drivers had Autopilot engaged. For those driving without Autopilot but with our active safety features, we registered one accident for every 2.05 million miles driven. For those driving without Autopilot and without our active safety features, we registered one accident for every 978 thousand miles driven. By comparison, NHTSA’s most recent data shows that in the United States there is an automobile crash every 484,000 miles. https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

Invictus0 5y ago
> one accident for every 4.19 million miles driven Not really a great metric. We should be looking at disengagements per MM.
- marvin 5y ago
  If you're evaluating the system as a L5 autonomous driving system. Not if you're evaluating it as a safety assistance feature.
  - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    If it’s a safety assistance feature, it’s not full self driving is it? My crosstrek comes with plenty of safety assistance features too.
    - marvin 5y ago
      That’s true enough, but I’m not going to argue semantics. Tesla is explicitly clear in their product communication that what they’re selling as «full self driving» comes with the massive asterix of «someday» and is not currently an L5 autonomous driving system. The part of the discussion that concerns their marketing is uninteresting and overdone; someone else can discuss that part.
studentrob 5y ago
The rub in Tesla's safety report is it compares Teslas to all makes of vehicles, including motorcycles and trucks, and all costs. A fair comparison would be to newer vehicles in a similar price range. Their autopilot stat is also misleading because AP will most likely be engaged only in ideal weather conditions on divided roads.
- zaroth 5y ago
  Yes, this is the retort every time someone posts these numbers, which is why I said they are not apples to apples comparisons. But in the context of the OP comment that Tesla ADAS software makes driving 1000x more dangerous it is clear evidence to the contrary. Mostly the Tesla numbers are comparing accident rates of just Teslas. You can ignore average accident rate across all vehicles if you like. If would be truly great if the NHTSA could publish accident rates broken down is various ways like by road type and weather conditions. I’ve never been able to find this data.
  - Veserv 5y ago
    I made no such claim that the actual success rate is 99.99%. I was replying to a person who supposed a 99.99% success rate based on their observation and I was pointing out that even an absurdly generous interpretation of a 99.99% success rate would constitute the most dangerously defective product in the car industry in half a century by multiple orders of magnitude. The point being that the failure rates society accepts for cars are actually pretty amazingly low and human drivers are surprisingly good. These things are measured with 6-7 9s as a non-negotiable minimum, so positing hypotheticals at the 99-99.99% is highly non-representative of what is actually acceptable. Anybody discussing things at that level is making a pretty fundamental category error and any conclusion that anyone might draw from those thought experiments are largely invalid due to the multiple order of magnitude difference between such a thought experiment and reality.
  - deschutes 5y ago
    The Tesla safety numbers are pure marketing. They make no attempt to control for obvious problems like the kind of miles. Notice how they say autopilot engaged not autopilot equipped when talking about autopilot miles. I bet gm has great numbers for cruise control engaged accident rate too but Id hardly call it a safety device, more like a convenience. Given the telemetry the car is equipped with they absolutely have the data to control for some of these factors yet they make no attempt to do so. Why is that? My take is that after doing so autopilot doesn't look so good.

by zaroth 5y ago

Invictus0 5y ago

> one accident for every 4.19 million miles driven Not really a great metric. We should be looking at disengagements per MM.

marvin 5y ago
If you're evaluating the system as a L5 autonomous driving system. Not if you're evaluating it as a safety assistance feature.
- amanaplanacanal 5y ago
  If it’s a safety assistance feature, it’s not full self driving is it? My crosstrek comes with plenty of safety assistance features too.
  - marvin 5y ago
    That’s true enough, but I’m not going to argue semantics. Tesla is explicitly clear in their product communication that what they’re selling as «full self driving» comes with the massive asterix of «someday» and is not currently an L5 autonomous driving system. The part of the discussion that concerns their marketing is uninteresting and overdone; someone else can discuss that part.

studentrob 5y ago

The rub in Tesla's safety report is it compares Teslas to all makes of vehicles, including motorcycles and trucks, and all costs. A fair comparison would be to newer vehicles in a similar price range. Their autopilot stat is also misleading because AP will most likely be engaged only in ideal weather conditions on divided roads.

zaroth 5y ago
Yes, this is the retort every time someone posts these numbers, which is why I said they are not apples to apples comparisons. But in the context of the OP comment that Tesla ADAS software makes driving 1000x more dangerous it is clear evidence to the contrary. Mostly the Tesla numbers are comparing accident rates of just Teslas. You can ignore average accident rate across all vehicles if you like. If would be truly great if the NHTSA could publish accident rates broken down is various ways like by road type and weather conditions. I’ve never been able to find this data.
- Veserv 5y ago
  I made no such claim that the actual success rate is 99.99%. I was replying to a person who supposed a 99.99% success rate based on their observation and I was pointing out that even an absurdly generous interpretation of a 99.99% success rate would constitute the most dangerously defective product in the car industry in half a century by multiple orders of magnitude. The point being that the failure rates society accepts for cars are actually pretty amazingly low and human drivers are surprisingly good. These things are measured with 6-7 9s as a non-negotiable minimum, so positing hypotheticals at the 99-99.99% is highly non-representative of what is actually acceptable. Anybody discussing things at that level is making a pretty fundamental category error and any conclusion that anyone might draw from those thought experiments are largely invalid due to the multiple order of magnitude difference between such a thought experiment and reality.
- deschutes 5y ago
  The Tesla safety numbers are pure marketing. They make no attempt to control for obvious problems like the kind of miles. Notice how they say autopilot engaged not autopilot equipped when talking about autopilot miles. I bet gm has great numbers for cruise control engaged accident rate too but Id hardly call it a safety device, more like a convenience. Given the telemetry the car is equipped with they absolutely have the data to control for some of these factors yet they make no attempt to do so. Why is that? My take is that after doing so autopilot doesn't look so good.