3 ms·

Tesla FSD isn't restricted to specific locations, and seems to be reducing the number of human interventions per hour at a pretty decent pace.

• lolinder 3y ago
  Interventions per hour isn't a great metric for deciding if the tech is going to be actually capable of replacing the human driver. The big problem with that number is that the denominator (per hour) only includes times when the human driver has chosen to trust FSD. This means that some improvements will be from the tech getting better, but a good chunk of it will be from drivers becoming better able to identify when FSD is appropriate and when it's not. Additionally, the metric completely excludes times where the human wouldn't have considered FSD at all, so even reaching 0 on interventions per hour will still exclude blizzards, heavy rain, dense fog, and other situations where the average human would think "I'd better be in charge here."
  • DennisP 3y ago
    So add the percentage of driving time using FSD. That's improving too, by quite a bit if you consider that Autopilot only does highways.
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    • DennisP 3y ago
      Maybe: (avg miles between interventions) * (percentage of miles using self-driving)