3 ms·
It's still a regulatory failure in the end. If the government does not want to lay down exactly what path should be taken in getting to FSD, then we should not
by jimmydorry 5y ago
It's still a regulatory failure in the end. If the government does not want to lay down exactly what path should be taken in getting to FSD, then we should not complain when we don't agree with the path that the manufacturers choose.
As long as Tesla can demonstrate a similar or better rate of serious harm than human drivers, why should we stop them? It's up to government to do their job and outline exactly what price society should bear in the pursuit of this paradigm shift (because let's not kid ourselves, FSD is a complete shift in paradigm for society).
- FireBeyond 5y ago> As long as Tesla can demonstrate a similar or better rate of serious harm than human drivers, why should we stop them? Because it can't, or won't. Instead they release statistics that _imply_ that it is better, that they have to know are absolutely misleading, because anyone who did high school statistics would be aware thereof. Everything else, they refuse to release.
- jimmydorry 5y agoI'm not aware of _anyone_ releasing such data in a way. Not that I have been looking that closely for it (so I certainly could have missed this!). This is another major regulatory failure. Government should lay out the minimum data that the companies must publish, so we can get a better idea of their performance. (It's still a chicken and egg scenario though. You can't get that kind of data anywhere but on public roads in uncontrolled environments.)