5 ms·

> When it's fully rolled out, it's going to kill a loooot of people. Do you have any data to back this up? Because there is definitely evidence that shows tha

> When it's fully rolled out, it's going to kill a loooot of people. Do you have any data to back this up? Because there is definitely evidence that shows that it is saving lives: https://twitter.com/Model3Owners/status/1383545728488808453 https://twitter.com/Model3Owners/status/1383545728488808453 I think it is more fruitful to realize that humans also make mistakes. It may also be also beneficial to compare Human + FSD driving vs. Human driving (instead of just FSD vs Human).

anotherman554 5y ago
You could have told us your evidence of Tesla safety data is "Tesla says" and saved me a click.
- HatchedLake721 5y ago
  Are you suggesting Tesla is lying?
  - soneil 5y ago
    They can be cherry-picking without being lying.
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    Is it a lie to call Tesla's level 2[1] driving system "Full Self Driving" when it isn't actually capable of full self-driving? What about when Tesla's marketing says FSD can do[2] things it can't do? [1] https://www.thedrive.com/tech/39647/tesla-admits-current-full-self-driving-beta-will-always-be-a-level-2-system-emails https://www.thedrive.com/tech/39647/tesla-admits-current-ful... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/comments/oey4g1/for_those_who_never_know_and_those_who_have/ https://old.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/comments/oey4g1/for_tho...
  - Syonyk 5y ago
    As a general rule of thumb, if someone has a large, comprehensive data set about something, has claimed they've used it to back a conclusion that is very favorable to them or some cause they're supporting, and refuses to let anyone else see the data set, it's a reasonable bet that they've been "creative" with at least some of the interpretations and analysis. It doesn't mean they're directly lying, in the sense of "You can't reasonable get these numbers out of the dataset." But it probably means that there are some games being played such that the number you're getting isn't the number it's strongly implied (or, occasionally, outright stated) to be. Or, if it is, it doesn't mean what they'd like you to think it means. So, if you go back a few years to the first waves of numbers Tesla trotted out to "prove" how amazing Autopilot was, you roughly had: - The fatality rate per mile of all drivers, in all vehicles, in all conditions being compared with: - The fatality rate per mile of expensive luxury cars, driven by older, well off drivers, mostly on limited access divided highways, in "easy" driving conditions. You can certainly do the math and get a comparison, but it's not a particularly reasonable comparison, because: - In general, six figure luxury cars are really, really safe. They're big, heavy, loaded with airbags and safety features, and really don't kill people very often at all. You can go look at a breakdown of death by vehicle type and class, and it turns out that luxury cars are very much under-represented in fatalities. - Expensive cars tend to be driven by older, more experienced drivers. There's a bathtub curve of fatality rates by age (https://aaafoundation.org/rates-motor-vehicle-crashes-injuries-deaths-relation-driver-age-united-states-2014-2015/ https://aaafoundation.org/rates-motor-vehicle-crashes-injuri...) - younger drivers without much driving experience die more, and once you get to 70+, your fatality rate goes up, but there's a sharp drop going to the 30-39 group, continuing to decline up to the 60-69 group. Guess what age range is going to be mostly buying Teslas? - Divided highways tend to be fairly safe places to drive - especially in lower speed situations where a lot of people are going to be using Autopilot. You're exceedingly unlikely to die doing 20mph in rush hour traffic. Even running at speed, limited access highways are fairly safe places. - And Autopilot simply doesn't work in bad enough weather. Again, a lot of traffic deaths are in pretty sketchy conditions - rain, snow, sleet... things that older Autopilot, especially, simply won't work in. So, yes, a straight up comparison of the two numbers ("fatalities per million miles in Teslas with Autopilot engaged" vs "fatalities per million miles of all vehicles in all conditions") is at least somewhat deceptive.
teraflop 5y ago
That press release is not evidence that Tesla's Autopilot is saving lives, for at least three major reasons. For one thing, Autopilot is more likely to be engaged for some types of driving than others. Comparing statistics with Autopilot engaged to the total of all miles driven is comparing apples and oranges. Similarly, it's comparing statistics about the people who buy and drive Teslas with the entire driving public. You don't know how many accidents Tesla owners would have gotten into if they were in cars that didn't have self-driving features. Finally, you can't draw any conclusions about whether lives were saved by just looking at the number of accidents and ignoring their severity. Hypothetically, if Autopilot caused fewer accidents at low speeds but more catastrophic collisions on highways, it could be easily be causing more deaths than it prevents.
croes 5y ago
This statistics simply proves that Tesla drivers know when it's safe to activate autonomous driving. Make it self driving 100% of the time under all lighting and weather conditions and then compare the numbers.
Bancakes 5y ago
The idea of AI and mathematics as a whole is to compute and do what is humanly impossible. It's expected that self driving means not just superhuman but almost perfect.
- drw85 5y ago
  I disagree. None of the things AI or mathematics do are humanly impossible. In fact most things are better done by humans, because they understand context, which most AI/ML currently doesn't. AI is great for tasks that can be done without much context and can be incredibly efficient and fast compared to manual work. Everything else, including "self-driving" currently needs supervision or produces terrible results.

anotherman554 5y ago

You could have told us your evidence of Tesla safety data is "Tesla says" and saved me a click.

HatchedLake721 5y ago
Are you suggesting Tesla is lying?
- soneil 5y ago
  They can be cherry-picking without being lying.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  Is it a lie to call Tesla's level 2[1] driving system "Full Self Driving" when it isn't actually capable of full self-driving? What about when Tesla's marketing says FSD can do[2] things it can't do? [1] https://www.thedrive.com/tech/39647/tesla-admits-current-full-self-driving-beta-will-always-be-a-level-2-system-emails https://www.thedrive.com/tech/39647/tesla-admits-current-ful... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/comments/oey4g1/for_those_who_never_know_and_those_who_have/ https://old.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/comments/oey4g1/for_tho...
- Syonyk 5y ago
  As a general rule of thumb, if someone has a large, comprehensive data set about something, has claimed they've used it to back a conclusion that is very favorable to them or some cause they're supporting, and refuses to let anyone else see the data set, it's a reasonable bet that they've been "creative" with at least some of the interpretations and analysis. It doesn't mean they're directly lying, in the sense of "You can't reasonable get these numbers out of the dataset." But it probably means that there are some games being played such that the number you're getting isn't the number it's strongly implied (or, occasionally, outright stated) to be. Or, if it is, it doesn't mean what they'd like you to think it means. So, if you go back a few years to the first waves of numbers Tesla trotted out to "prove" how amazing Autopilot was, you roughly had: - The fatality rate per mile of all drivers, in all vehicles, in all conditions being compared with: - The fatality rate per mile of expensive luxury cars, driven by older, well off drivers, mostly on limited access divided highways, in "easy" driving conditions. You can certainly do the math and get a comparison, but it's not a particularly reasonable comparison, because: - In general, six figure luxury cars are really, really safe. They're big, heavy, loaded with airbags and safety features, and really don't kill people very often at all. You can go look at a breakdown of death by vehicle type and class, and it turns out that luxury cars are very much under-represented in fatalities. - Expensive cars tend to be driven by older, more experienced drivers. There's a bathtub curve of fatality rates by age (https://aaafoundation.org/rates-motor-vehicle-crashes-injuries-deaths-relation-driver-age-united-states-2014-2015/ https://aaafoundation.org/rates-motor-vehicle-crashes-injuri...) - younger drivers without much driving experience die more, and once you get to 70+, your fatality rate goes up, but there's a sharp drop going to the 30-39 group, continuing to decline up to the 60-69 group. Guess what age range is going to be mostly buying Teslas? - Divided highways tend to be fairly safe places to drive - especially in lower speed situations where a lot of people are going to be using Autopilot. You're exceedingly unlikely to die doing 20mph in rush hour traffic. Even running at speed, limited access highways are fairly safe places. - And Autopilot simply doesn't work in bad enough weather. Again, a lot of traffic deaths are in pretty sketchy conditions - rain, snow, sleet... things that older Autopilot, especially, simply won't work in. So, yes, a straight up comparison of the two numbers ("fatalities per million miles in Teslas with Autopilot engaged" vs "fatalities per million miles of all vehicles in all conditions") is at least somewhat deceptive.

teraflop 5y ago

That press release is not evidence that Tesla's Autopilot is saving lives, for at least three major reasons. For one thing, Autopilot is more likely to be engaged for some types of driving than others. Comparing statistics with Autopilot engaged to the total of all miles driven is comparing apples and oranges. Similarly, it's comparing statistics about the people who buy and drive Teslas with the entire driving public. You don't know how many accidents Tesla owners would have gotten into if they were in cars that didn't have self-driving features. Finally, you can't draw any conclusions about whether lives were saved by just looking at the number of accidents and ignoring their severity. Hypothetically, if Autopilot caused fewer accidents at low speeds but more catastrophic collisions on highways, it could be easily be causing more deaths than it prevents.

croes 5y ago

This statistics simply proves that Tesla drivers know when it's safe to activate autonomous driving. Make it self driving 100% of the time under all lighting and weather conditions and then compare the numbers.

Bancakes 5y ago

The idea of AI and mathematics as a whole is to compute and do what is humanly impossible. It's expected that self driving means not just superhuman but almost perfect.

drw85 5y ago
I disagree. None of the things AI or mathematics do are humanly impossible. In fact most things are better done by humans, because they understand context, which most AI/ML currently doesn't. AI is great for tasks that can be done without much context and can be incredibly efficient and fast compared to manual work. Everything else, including "self-driving" currently needs supervision or produces terrible results.