3 ms·

It does seem rather ridiculous that they’re allowed to call this feature either autopilot or full self driving beta.

• BugsJustFindMe 2y ago
  Oh, I don't know. When my brain is on autopilot I'm prone to accidents too.
  • sjrjsksjf 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • madamelic 2y ago
      Even if self-driving is 1% better in the best conditions, that's a safer car than one driven entirely by humans. Humans right now are the best they'll ever be at driving, you can't say the same for self-driving cars. Even for a mediocre solution currently, it's likely better to use the self-driving in good conditions than drive it manually. Computers never get tired, distracted, or emotional. What the humans' jobs are is to understand when it is a good condition for self-driving and when isn't it. I'd venture to guess these fatal self-driving accidents are one of the following: - freak accidents (ie: not the self-driving cars fault / it would've happened either way) - accidents due to humans trusting the car too much (ie: we aren't level 5, be available to take over) - the self-driving just being bad. This is the category a lot of people want these to be. To get really morbid in my full-throated apology: cars are really dangerous. People die in car accidents all the time. The main reason these get attention is because it is notable. It's unfortunately not nationally notable when an entire family gets wiped out on their way to their child's soccer game in a non self-driving car.
      • dools 2y ago
        But the article specifically says that the features contributed to the accident in foreseeable ways. Meaning that a human without the feature would not have had the accident. It may well be a power user problem, ie. it makes you better if you use it properly but otherwise makes it worse.
    • dools 2y ago
      I actually think it was just a joke. Acknowledgingthat FSB and autopilot are accident prone and therefore appropriately named.
      • BugsJustFindMe 2y ago
        This is correct.