> If something is safer than average, then it is objectively an improvement, and that's all it needs to be. GP is asserting that FSD is significantly less safe

> If something is safer than average, then it is objectively an improvement, and that's all it needs to be. GP is asserting that FSD is significantly less safe than previously known, and only driver intervention is preventing FSD from killing more people. Personally I’ve heard way too many “FSD regularly tries to drive into that bridge pillar” for me to believe an assertion that FSD is safer than drivers without significant evidence. Second, we’re talking about a case where even Tesla owners acknowledge that an update made their cars noticeably less safe. Even in cases where FSD is better than human drivers, which I don’t think is the case yet, we should be quite concerned about the possibility of software updates making vehicles less safe.