4 ms·

> The regulator originally said it was looking into 11 such crashes. A 12th occurred on Saturday But there are 4500 crashes every year, and that's only includi

> The regulator originally said it was looking into 11 such crashes. A 12th occurred on Saturday But there are 4500 crashes every year, and that's only including ambulances (https://www.ems.gov/pdf/GroundAmbulanceCrashesPresentation.pdf https://www.ems.gov/pdf/GroundAmbulanceCrashesPresentation.p... pg 22). So why is Tesla being investigated for being involved in 0.25% of these crashes when they made up 3% of car sales in 2020? Also, radar ignores stationary objects on any car. Why is only Tesla being investigated when this exact same flaw exists in every other car manufacturer that uses radar based cruise control?

roystonvassey 5y ago
I think the right stat to measure is - of all the Tesla cars out there, how many had crashes, and compare this against the average for other car brands/models.
- SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
  I'd hope that "automated driving" has standards much much higher than the average.
asddubs 5y ago
They're looking specifically into crashes happening on autopilot though, so using that 3% figure assumes people are using the tesla in autopilot mode 100% of the time
okl 5y ago
No offense but that is whataboutism. I think every crash, where an investigation could prevent another crash in the future, should be investigated. Shouldn't Tesla "celebrate their mistakes" (yes, morbid, sorry) and see this as an opportunity to improve their product?
- DennisP 5y ago
  Tesla is already putting a lot of resources into improving Autopilot and FSD. I'm not sure how regulators are going to help that process, and I think there are a couple possible pitfalls: (1) Will they take relative risk into account? If the car sometimes crashes but less often than humans, will that be sufficient, or considered a flaw because it's not perfect and regulators hate looking bad? (2) Will they take progress into account? If the car drives worse than humans but its accident rate drops 10% per year, then after some number of years we'll accumulate fewer total accidents than if we hadn't allowed progress to continue. That's important because progress won't continue without lots of cars on the road using Autopilot and FSD betas.
  - __m 5y ago
    I never crashed into a stationary vehicle or had a crash. I want a FSD vehicle to be at least as safe as me, not some bad or drunken driver, that's what FSD should be measured against.
    - DennisP 5y ago
      If the FSD vehicle is safer than the average driver, but not as safe as you, then you should want the FSD to be allowed by regulators. The average safety of other drivers will increase, lowering your chance of an accident, without degrading your own driving if you don't use FSD yourself.
- shkkmo 5y ago
  It isn't whataboutism to ask that statistics include the necessary context. The person you are replying to doesn't give a full and proper context, but that doesn't make attempting to provide that context "whataboutism".
  - okl 5y ago
    Sorry, but that - "So why is Tesla being investigated for being involved in 0.25% of these crashes when they made up 3% of car sales in 2020?" - pointing at others/numbers to detract from your own mistakes clearly is whataboutism.
    - shkkmo 5y ago
      Nope, it really isn't. Go read about what "whataboutism" is and where it came from. It is a rhetorical technique where you deflect criticism by asserting that the group you are being criticized by is hypocritical because they do the same thing they are accusing you of doing. There is no implication of hypocrisy here, nor could there be since the NHTSA doesn't make cars... Instead this is a comment asking a legitimate question about the basis for the investigation given the overall rates of occurence for the incident in question. Other repliers attempted to answer this question, you decided to try to shut down discussion by mis-applying a rhetorical label.
- jsight 5y ago
  They should, but people here are afraid that this looks like a government overreaction that won't actually find an accurate result. IMO, they are wrong and this will likely lead to guidance for all automakers, including Tesla. I doubt anything that comes out of this will be a problem for Tesla, if anything it might end up being harder for the others. NHTSA is pretty reasonable most of the time.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
KptMarchewa 5y ago
Are those 12 crashes in one year? The 0.25% figure could be further off.
omgwwwlol 5y ago
The answer seems obvious. Legacy car makers will continue to invest heavily in disinformation and lobbying to try to break Tesla. They can't compete on product, especially when you consider a dealer-free buying experience.
dbsmith83 5y ago
> So why is Tesla being investigated for being involved in 0.25% of these crashes when they made up 3% of car sales in 2020? How does the proportion of sales in one year have anything to do with the proportion of crashes that involve cars on the road which were purchased at any time? Furthermore, this is Teslas on autopilot mode--not Teslas in manual driving mode
- tablespoon 5y ago
  >> So why is Tesla being investigated for being involved in 0.25% of these crashes when they made up 3% of car sales in 2020? > How does the proportion of sales in one year have anything to do with the proportion of crashes that involve cars on the road which were purchased at any time? Furthermore, this is Teslas on autopilot mode--not Teslas in manual driving mode Also, a faulty design is a faulty design, regardless of the proportion of total accidents it causes. All faulty designs should be investigated. The theoretical existence of a "faultier" design isn't a get out of jail for all other designs. Unfortunately, Tesla has a lot of apologists whose main concern seems to defend it for all criticism, even if the arguments required to do that are specious and unreasonable.
bagacrap 5y ago
these are 12 crashes into stationary emergency vehicles, whereas your figure is almost certainly mostly driving ambulances.
hypertele-Xii 5y ago
Maybe because every other car manufacturer calls it "cruise control" and not "full self driving autopilot"?
- flavius29663 5y ago
  or lane assist that protests after a few seconds of you taking the hands off the wheel
- panick21 5y ago
  Funny then the Ford calls it Co-Pilot. There are many names that companies use, the idea that they all call it cruise control is just non-sense. And Tesla also doesn't call it 'full self driving autopilot'. They simply call it Autopilot.
praestigiare 5y ago
The poor statistics of this comment aside, if I drove into 12 emergency vehicles in a year, I can assure you I would also be investigated.
- fallingknife 5y ago
  Unless, apparently, you were a car manufacturer that isn't Tesla.
  - detaro 5y ago
    Which other car manufacturer has its assistance system crash into emergency vehicles more often than that? If there is one, that certainly should be given the same attention, yes.

roystonvassey 5y ago

I think the right stat to measure is - of all the Tesla cars out there, how many had crashes, and compare this against the average for other car brands/models.

SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
I'd hope that "automated driving" has standards much much higher than the average.

asddubs 5y ago

They're looking specifically into crashes happening on autopilot though, so using that 3% figure assumes people are using the tesla in autopilot mode 100% of the time

okl 5y ago

No offense but that is whataboutism. I think every crash, where an investigation could prevent another crash in the future, should be investigated. Shouldn't Tesla "celebrate their mistakes" (yes, morbid, sorry) and see this as an opportunity to improve their product?

DennisP 5y ago
Tesla is already putting a lot of resources into improving Autopilot and FSD. I'm not sure how regulators are going to help that process, and I think there are a couple possible pitfalls: (1) Will they take relative risk into account? If the car sometimes crashes but less often than humans, will that be sufficient, or considered a flaw because it's not perfect and regulators hate looking bad? (2) Will they take progress into account? If the car drives worse than humans but its accident rate drops 10% per year, then after some number of years we'll accumulate fewer total accidents than if we hadn't allowed progress to continue. That's important because progress won't continue without lots of cars on the road using Autopilot and FSD betas.
- __m 5y ago
  I never crashed into a stationary vehicle or had a crash. I want a FSD vehicle to be at least as safe as me, not some bad or drunken driver, that's what FSD should be measured against.
  - DennisP 5y ago
    If the FSD vehicle is safer than the average driver, but not as safe as you, then you should want the FSD to be allowed by regulators. The average safety of other drivers will increase, lowering your chance of an accident, without degrading your own driving if you don't use FSD yourself.
shkkmo 5y ago
It isn't whataboutism to ask that statistics include the necessary context. The person you are replying to doesn't give a full and proper context, but that doesn't make attempting to provide that context "whataboutism".
- okl 5y ago
  Sorry, but that - "So why is Tesla being investigated for being involved in 0.25% of these crashes when they made up 3% of car sales in 2020?" - pointing at others/numbers to detract from your own mistakes clearly is whataboutism.
  - shkkmo 5y ago
    Nope, it really isn't. Go read about what "whataboutism" is and where it came from. It is a rhetorical technique where you deflect criticism by asserting that the group you are being criticized by is hypocritical because they do the same thing they are accusing you of doing. There is no implication of hypocrisy here, nor could there be since the NHTSA doesn't make cars... Instead this is a comment asking a legitimate question about the basis for the investigation given the overall rates of occurence for the incident in question. Other repliers attempted to answer this question, you decided to try to shut down discussion by mis-applying a rhetorical label.
jsight 5y ago
They should, but people here are afraid that this looks like a government overreaction that won't actually find an accurate result. IMO, they are wrong and this will likely lead to guidance for all automakers, including Tesla. I doubt anything that comes out of this will be a problem for Tesla, if anything it might end up being harder for the others. NHTSA is pretty reasonable most of the time.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

KptMarchewa 5y ago

Are those 12 crashes in one year? The 0.25% figure could be further off.

omgwwwlol 5y ago

The answer seems obvious. Legacy car makers will continue to invest heavily in disinformation and lobbying to try to break Tesla. They can't compete on product, especially when you consider a dealer-free buying experience.

dbsmith83 5y ago

> So why is Tesla being investigated for being involved in 0.25% of these crashes when they made up 3% of car sales in 2020? How does the proportion of sales in one year have anything to do with the proportion of crashes that involve cars on the road which were purchased at any time? Furthermore, this is Teslas on autopilot mode--not Teslas in manual driving mode

tablespoon 5y ago
>> So why is Tesla being investigated for being involved in 0.25% of these crashes when they made up 3% of car sales in 2020? > How does the proportion of sales in one year have anything to do with the proportion of crashes that involve cars on the road which were purchased at any time? Furthermore, this is Teslas on autopilot mode--not Teslas in manual driving mode Also, a faulty design is a faulty design, regardless of the proportion of total accidents it causes. All faulty designs should be investigated. The theoretical existence of a "faultier" design isn't a get out of jail for all other designs. Unfortunately, Tesla has a lot of apologists whose main concern seems to defend it for all criticism, even if the arguments required to do that are specious and unreasonable.

bagacrap 5y ago

these are 12 crashes into stationary emergency vehicles, whereas your figure is almost certainly mostly driving ambulances.

hypertele-Xii 5y ago

Maybe because every other car manufacturer calls it "cruise control" and not "full self driving autopilot"?

flavius29663 5y ago
or lane assist that protests after a few seconds of you taking the hands off the wheel
panick21 5y ago
Funny then the Ford calls it Co-Pilot. There are many names that companies use, the idea that they all call it cruise control is just non-sense. And Tesla also doesn't call it 'full self driving autopilot'. They simply call it Autopilot.

praestigiare 5y ago

The poor statistics of this comment aside, if I drove into 12 emergency vehicles in a year, I can assure you I would also be investigated.

fallingknife 5y ago
Unless, apparently, you were a car manufacturer that isn't Tesla.
- detaro 5y ago
  Which other car manufacturer has its assistance system crash into emergency vehicles more often than that? If there is one, that certainly should be given the same attention, yes.