6 ms·

> Tesla FSD navigating the complex city streets of LA for 60 minutes with zero human intervention. 17 fatalities, 736 crashes: The shocking toll of Tesla’s Aut

by conroy 3y ago

> Tesla FSD navigating the complex city streets of LA for 60 minutes with zero human intervention. 17 fatalities, 736 crashes: The shocking toll of Tesla’s Autopilot https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/06/10/tesla-autopilot-crashes-elon-musk/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/06/10/tesla-a...

fallingknife 3y ago
You're right, that is shockingly low! 43,000 people die in car crashes in the US every year, and only 17 in Teslas since 2019. That's only 1 in 7500.
- georgyo 3y ago
  These statistics are meaningless. How many Tesla cars with full self driving are there compared to regular cars? A Tesla with FSD will only be using FSD a small fraction of the time. If we had statistics on the number of hours FSD was active compared to the number of hours all other car driving of all cars we might be able to compared these numbers. Hour wise, I think normal driving is way above 7500:1.
  - Eisenstein 3y ago
    Why are people willing to excuse things because they happen in a car? If an AI power tool were going haywire once in a while and chopping the arms off of bystanders near by, would we find that acceptable because people using non-AI powered tools also chop off their body parts sometimes? 'We can't know if it would have happened if a person were in control' is not an argument that would fly for anything else just as dangerous.
    - fallingknife 3y ago
      > would we find that acceptable because people using non-AI powered tools also chop off their body parts sometimes? Yes, if the AI power tools chop off less limbs than the human controlled power tools, I would find that acceptable.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
- code_duck 3y ago
  For that to be meaningful, one would have to consider what proportion of miles driven are in teslas, and where.
charcircuit 3y ago
Just because you crash that doesn't mean you aren't able to navigate without human intervention. Humans are also capable of crashing their car.
merth 3y ago
He means under their supervisor control. There are "normal" people who do their best to cause a crash.
bmicraft 3y ago
Without any comparison to humans those numbers are completely meaningless
- worik 3y ago
  > Without any comparison to humans those numbers are completely meaningless I disagree. What I want to know, is is it safe? Not is it safer than the average human driver, but is it safe in an absolute sense. When a human driver crashes we can almost always pin the cause down to human error. Errors caused by some human failing, being less than they could be. The promise of machines is that they are consistent. They are never "less than they could be", but are consistently at their best. Comparing humans and machines is comparing dogs and roses - it is interesting a rose smells better, interesting a dog is more loving (or fierce), but not a valid comparison Self driving cars stand or fall on their own capabilities.
  - est31 3y ago
    Sure it's different whether you were hit by a malfunctioning machine that was confused by sunlight or whether you were hit by a driver who wasn't paying attention because they texted. In one instance you have the person genuinely apologize to you while in the autonomous car case, maybe there wasn't a passenger at all. But on the other hand, if you can identify the most accident prone group of humans, and require them to use AI cars, and with this you could significantly reduce the number of road kills/accidents, wouldn't that be an improvement?
  - nearbuy 3y ago
    1. It's the adaptive cruise control, not the FSD. 2. What would a good absolute number for that period be? Our threshold can't be zero or we'd have to give up every technology from showers/baths (~60x more deadly) to fresh produce (E. coli, salmonella, listeria).
    - worik 3y ago
      > 2. What would a good absolute number for that period be? Our threshold can't be zero or we'd have to give up every technology from showers/baths (~60x more deadly) to fresh produce (E. coli, salmonella, listeria). Zero accidents caused by the failure of the software. (Clearly a good system may have some obscure bug that makes it fail - but failure of a self driving system should cause uproar and consternation - unlike the reaction of Tesla to the deaths caused by their systems, it seems) If I slip over in the shower it is not because the shower head went rouge and strangled me. If a shower was designed that in the period of one year strangled eleven people (a fair comparison to Tesla's record) imagine that? Point being your comparisons (food poisoning or household mishaps) are not relevant
readams 3y ago
Autopilot is just fancy cruise control. How many crashes have there been with cruise control turned on? It's just a completely meaningless thing to even look at. How many crashes would there have been during those miles without autopilot?
- pell 3y ago
  Tesla doesn’t sell Autopilot as cruise control though.
  - fastball 3y ago
    Yes they do? Autopilot is standard in all Teslas, which is different from the Tesla FSD (Beta) that Mercedes is being compared to here.
  - belter 3y ago
    Because even if they did, would still be worst than many others. "Ford’s BlueCruise Ousts GM’s Super Cruise as CR’s Top-Rated Active Driving Assistance System - Tesla Autopilot falls to midpack as other high-tech systems improve" (Jan 2023) - https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-safety/active-driving-assistance-systems-review-a2103632203/ https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-safety/active-drivi... "...Of the 12 ADA systems we just finished testing, Ford BlueCruise came out on top, followed by Cadillac Super Cruise and Mercedes-Benz Driver Assistance. Tesla, once an innovator in ADA with its Autopilot system, fell from its second-place showing in 2020 to seventh this time around—about the middle of the pack. That’s because Tesla hasn’t changed Autopilot’s basic functionality much since it first came out, instead just adding more features to it, says Fisher... ...“After all this time, Autopilot still doesn’t allow collaborative steering and doesn’t have an effective driver monitoring system. While other automakers have evolved their ACC and LCA systems, Tesla has simply fallen behind.”..."
concordDance 3y ago
That's the number of crashes where Autopilot was enabled, not the number where it was at fault. So its a meaningless number.

by conroy 3y ago

fallingknife 3y ago

You're right, that is shockingly low! 43,000 people die in car crashes in the US every year, and only 17 in Teslas since 2019. That's only 1 in 7500.

georgyo 3y ago
These statistics are meaningless. How many Tesla cars with full self driving are there compared to regular cars? A Tesla with FSD will only be using FSD a small fraction of the time. If we had statistics on the number of hours FSD was active compared to the number of hours all other car driving of all cars we might be able to compared these numbers. Hour wise, I think normal driving is way above 7500:1.
- Eisenstein 3y ago
  Why are people willing to excuse things because they happen in a car? If an AI power tool were going haywire once in a while and chopping the arms off of bystanders near by, would we find that acceptable because people using non-AI powered tools also chop off their body parts sometimes? 'We can't know if it would have happened if a person were in control' is not an argument that would fly for anything else just as dangerous.
  - fallingknife 3y ago
    > would we find that acceptable because people using non-AI powered tools also chop off their body parts sometimes? Yes, if the AI power tools chop off less limbs than the human controlled power tools, I would find that acceptable.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
code_duck 3y ago
For that to be meaningful, one would have to consider what proportion of miles driven are in teslas, and where.

charcircuit 3y ago

Just because you crash that doesn't mean you aren't able to navigate without human intervention. Humans are also capable of crashing their car.

merth 3y ago

He means under their supervisor control. There are "normal" people who do their best to cause a crash.

bmicraft 3y ago

Without any comparison to humans those numbers are completely meaningless

worik 3y ago
> Without any comparison to humans those numbers are completely meaningless I disagree. What I want to know, is is it safe? Not is it safer than the average human driver, but is it safe in an absolute sense. When a human driver crashes we can almost always pin the cause down to human error. Errors caused by some human failing, being less than they could be. The promise of machines is that they are consistent. They are never "less than they could be", but are consistently at their best. Comparing humans and machines is comparing dogs and roses - it is interesting a rose smells better, interesting a dog is more loving (or fierce), but not a valid comparison Self driving cars stand or fall on their own capabilities.
- est31 3y ago
  Sure it's different whether you were hit by a malfunctioning machine that was confused by sunlight or whether you were hit by a driver who wasn't paying attention because they texted. In one instance you have the person genuinely apologize to you while in the autonomous car case, maybe there wasn't a passenger at all. But on the other hand, if you can identify the most accident prone group of humans, and require them to use AI cars, and with this you could significantly reduce the number of road kills/accidents, wouldn't that be an improvement?
- nearbuy 3y ago
  1. It's the adaptive cruise control, not the FSD. 2. What would a good absolute number for that period be? Our threshold can't be zero or we'd have to give up every technology from showers/baths (~60x more deadly) to fresh produce (E. coli, salmonella, listeria).
  - worik 3y ago
    > 2. What would a good absolute number for that period be? Our threshold can't be zero or we'd have to give up every technology from showers/baths (~60x more deadly) to fresh produce (E. coli, salmonella, listeria). Zero accidents caused by the failure of the software. (Clearly a good system may have some obscure bug that makes it fail - but failure of a self driving system should cause uproar and consternation - unlike the reaction of Tesla to the deaths caused by their systems, it seems) If I slip over in the shower it is not because the shower head went rouge and strangled me. If a shower was designed that in the period of one year strangled eleven people (a fair comparison to Tesla's record) imagine that? Point being your comparisons (food poisoning or household mishaps) are not relevant

readams 3y ago

Autopilot is just fancy cruise control. How many crashes have there been with cruise control turned on? It's just a completely meaningless thing to even look at. How many crashes would there have been during those miles without autopilot?

pell 3y ago
Tesla doesn’t sell Autopilot as cruise control though.
- fastball 3y ago
  Yes they do? Autopilot is standard in all Teslas, which is different from the Tesla FSD (Beta) that Mercedes is being compared to here.
- belter 3y ago
  Because even if they did, would still be worst than many others. "Ford’s BlueCruise Ousts GM’s Super Cruise as CR’s Top-Rated Active Driving Assistance System - Tesla Autopilot falls to midpack as other high-tech systems improve" (Jan 2023) - https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-safety/active-driving-assistance-systems-review-a2103632203/ https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-safety/active-drivi... "...Of the 12 ADA systems we just finished testing, Ford BlueCruise came out on top, followed by Cadillac Super Cruise and Mercedes-Benz Driver Assistance. Tesla, once an innovator in ADA with its Autopilot system, fell from its second-place showing in 2020 to seventh this time around—about the middle of the pack. That’s because Tesla hasn’t changed Autopilot’s basic functionality much since it first came out, instead just adding more features to it, says Fisher... ...“After all this time, Autopilot still doesn’t allow collaborative steering and doesn’t have an effective driver monitoring system. While other automakers have evolved their ACC and LCA systems, Tesla has simply fallen behind.”..."

concordDance 3y ago

That's the number of crashes where Autopilot was enabled, not the number where it was at fault. So its a meaningless number.