3 ms·
> I want the technology, and I'm comfortable assuming the risk if there's a fuck-up. If Musk needs a way to prove I wasn't watching and that the liability to tr
by enragedcacti 3y ago
> I want the technology, and I'm comfortable assuming the risk if there's a fuck-up. If Musk needs a way to prove I wasn't watching and that the liability to transfer to me -- that's fine. I want the option. And Ford/GM/BMW et al won't give it to me.
It isn't just about you, its about everyone else on the road as well. You don't automatically deserve to operate a less safe system on public roads just because you are willing to accept liability. Other manufacturers, at least with regard to autonomy, recognize that fact and design products that mitigate risks with a proper safety lifecycle and design domain.
- hcurtiss 3y agoBut that's where you're wrong. All data indicate it's SAFER than human drivers. My decision is, on average, making people more safe, not less. https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-autopilot-is-x9-safer-tesla-vehicles-are-x2-safer-than-cars-of-other-brands https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/tesla-autopil...
- enragedcacti 3y agoThere are serious statistical issues with Teslas claimed rates, but even so autopilot != FSD and Tesla FSD is, imo, currently benefiting from the left hand side of this chart: http://safeautonomy.blogspot.com/2019/01/how-road-testing-self-driving-cars-gets.html?m=1 http://safeautonomy.blogspot.com/2019/01/how-road-testing-se... Their disengagement rate is so high that as it stands it keeps drivers vigilant, but as the system improves driver vigilance WILL fade and without robust mitigations FSD will become less safe than a human for a considerable amount of it's development.