3 ms·

I’m all for the personal responsibility thing. In Canada if you do 50km/h over the limit they seize your car roadside, fine you $10k, suspend your license, and

I’m all for the personal responsibility thing. In Canada if you do 50km/h over the limit they seize your car roadside, fine you $10k, suspend your license, and likely charge you criminally for dangerous driving. We also have private race tracks where you can take your Civic and put yourself into a wall at 170km/h if you so choose. I don’t care for arguments about safety statistics or the ends justifying the means. My kids are on these streets. It’s not your autonomy test track.

sebzim4500 3y ago
For the most part I agree with you, but >I don’t care for arguments about safety statistics is insane. If it's safer it's safer, and the only way to know is statistics. The fact that (seemingly) no government department is collecting and publishing safety statistics on every self driving car manufacturer defies belief.
- Waterluvian 3y ago
  They’re my kids so I just don’t care if using them as a test subject results in longer term safer roads for everyone. But I think what you’re talking about is if autonomy makes my kids safer in the immediate, and not as an end result of public testing. Yes, I support that. I don’t think this is that yet. The word beta is right there.
- theptip 3y ago
  Strongly agree with the sentiment. Note NHSTA in the US recently started publishing incident counts for self-driving vehicles, but its total counts by company, not per-mile, and therefore mostly meaningless
- 6D794163636F756 3y ago
  They specifically said test track. Once it's proven then put it on the roads. But in it's current state it should be severely restricted. They may need training data but then they can pay for it or pay to construct suitable tests
  - sebzim4500 3y ago
    It's already on the road driving millions of miles. Someone should just count how many accidents it has had, and compare to how many are expected given the number of miles driven under each driving condition. If FSD has more accidents then ban it.
    - Waterluvian 3y ago
      I love this “logic.” You can do something wrong but if it works out, hey, it’s fine right? This also creates a wonderfully sloppy veil. Hey it’s proven safe. So we’re going to go ahead and fuck with the settings more.”
      - sebzim4500 3y ago
        If it improves safety then it isn't wrong
        Tempest1981 3y ago
        I think the point is that if it's "proven" safer today, the manufacturer can then make changes and test publicly, and be absolved of responsibility if there are regressions.
    - TheCleric 3y ago
      Sure this will go fine since it's not like we have a track record of people dying in Teslas, with Tesla taking zero accountability, and withholding the crash data from open scrutiny. This experiment is sure to be unbiased.
      - sebzim4500 3y ago
        That's why the data should be collected by a government department rather than Tesla
        3y ago

sebzim4500 3y ago

For the most part I agree with you, but >I don’t care for arguments about safety statistics is insane. If it's safer it's safer, and the only way to know is statistics. The fact that (seemingly) no government department is collecting and publishing safety statistics on every self driving car manufacturer defies belief.

Waterluvian 3y ago
They’re my kids so I just don’t care if using them as a test subject results in longer term safer roads for everyone. But I think what you’re talking about is if autonomy makes my kids safer in the immediate, and not as an end result of public testing. Yes, I support that. I don’t think this is that yet. The word beta is right there.
theptip 3y ago
Strongly agree with the sentiment. Note NHSTA in the US recently started publishing incident counts for self-driving vehicles, but its total counts by company, not per-mile, and therefore mostly meaningless
6D794163636F756 3y ago
They specifically said test track. Once it's proven then put it on the roads. But in it's current state it should be severely restricted. They may need training data but then they can pay for it or pay to construct suitable tests
- sebzim4500 3y ago
  It's already on the road driving millions of miles. Someone should just count how many accidents it has had, and compare to how many are expected given the number of miles driven under each driving condition. If FSD has more accidents then ban it.
  - Waterluvian 3y ago
    I love this “logic.” You can do something wrong but if it works out, hey, it’s fine right? This also creates a wonderfully sloppy veil. Hey it’s proven safe. So we’re going to go ahead and fuck with the settings more.”
    - sebzim4500 3y ago
      If it improves safety then it isn't wrong
      - Tempest1981 3y ago
        I think the point is that if it's "proven" safer today, the manufacturer can then make changes and test publicly, and be absolved of responsibility if there are regressions.
  - TheCleric 3y ago
    Sure this will go fine since it's not like we have a track record of people dying in Teslas, with Tesla taking zero accountability, and withholding the crash data from open scrutiny. This experiment is sure to be unbiased.
    - sebzim4500 3y ago
      That's why the data should be collected by a government department rather than Tesla
      - 3y ago