3 ms·
> Anything in the middle (like what Tesla is doing) is IMO more dangerous than useful. Even if a hypothetical, future Tesla FSD sometimes crashes in ways that
by redox99 4y ago
> Anything in the middle (like what Tesla is doing) is IMO more dangerous than useful.
Even if a hypothetical, future Tesla FSD sometimes crashes in ways that could be prevented had the driver payed attention, it could still be statistically safer than a fully human driver (ie the number of FSD crashes even if left unattended < the number of crashes by humans driving).
To clarify, I'm not talking about the current state of FSD, I'm talking about a hypothetical, future Level 3.
- paxys 4y agoDoing such aggregations is pointless. The majority of traffic accidents are caused by drunk drivers, drivers who are too young/too old, people on their phones or otherwise distracted, people driving in bad conditions, people driving unsafe cars etc. So yes, while Tesla autopilot may be better than all of them on average, I will still only use it if it is better than ME.
- redox99 4y ago> I will still only use it if it is better than ME. You're free to not use it. But if Tesla FSD is safer than the average driver (even if that's because the average driver is on their phone) then, going back to your statement, it is more useful than dangerous for the average driver.
- paxys 4y agoWhat is your definition of "average driver"? There are ~250M drivers in the US and a little over 2 million car accidents that result in injuries every year. So the average driver is doing perfectly fine. In fact 99% of them are fine. Car accidents don't follow a bell curve. If you want to make the roads safer you need to target the bottom 1% of drivers, but there is no guarantee that they are the ones who will adopt autopilot. If everyone else takes their eyes off the road it will actually make things worse.