4 ms·
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
by 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 agoIt'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 agoI 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 agoIf it improves safety then it isn't wrong
- Tempest1981 3y agoI 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 agoSure 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 agoThat's why the data should be collected by a government department rather than Tesla
- TheCleric 3y agoI agree it should, but good luck getting Elon to cooperate to gather the necessary data points (e.g., was FSD enabled?).
- Tempest1981 3y agoHow quickly can the governments detect a regression? Weeks or months later? The claim here is that an overnight minor update from v11.4.4 to v11.4.7 caused a significant regression.
- jacquesm 3y agoThat doesn't matter. What matters is that Tesla doesn't get to fudge the record, wipe evidence or misrepresent things.