3 ms·

I had a really negative view on FSD from just reading and seeing stuff online until I finally decided to rent a Model Y on Turo with FSD...I was absolutely blow

I had a really negative view on FSD from just reading and seeing stuff online until I finally decided to rent a Model Y on Turo with FSD...I was absolutely blown away. I drove it from Houston to Amarillo (600 miles) and had to touch the wheel only a couple times. That includes pulling me off the freeway, into the freaking parking spot next to the Supercharger, and finally through my neighborhood to the front of my house. For the price I don't think the MY or M3 can be beat and will surely be very high on the list for my family's next vehicle

llamaimperative 2y ago
[flagged]
- carlgreene 2y ago
  If you are going to talk about statistics then please cite the accident statistics of people using things like FSD vs. not... From the horse's mouth it appears using things like FSD is considerably safer than not[0]. While an independent statistic would be nice, I couldn't find one. Would appreciate seeing your source [0]: https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    I used your metrics -- a few (let's say 3) interventions over 600 miles. Tesla doesn't publish the relevant stats, probably because they're so outrageously good and strong and perfect that the public can't handle how amazing FSD works in reality. Edit in response to your edit: You're showing me Autopilot data which 1) is a different system and 2) is only useful on highways, so even if it did nothing at all you'd expect to see a massive reduction in frequency of accidents when it was "using Autopilot." Given that Autopilot is mostly ADS features, you'd also expect a large reduction. The better comparison point is "United States recent luxury model highway miles." Distance sensors, lane assist, auto-braking, etc all very obviously improve safety.
  - carlgreene 2y ago
    Also, intervention !== accident. Not sure where you made that conclusion
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      Were you intervening on a system that was working perfectly? "Using FSD as full self driving" == no intervention possible. Would you not have crashed if you couldn't intervene?
      - Retric 2y ago
        Not all failures relate to safety. Self driving needs to get somewhere specific reasonably quickly, and avoid accidents.
      - pants2 2y ago
        There's a pretty big spectrum between perfect driving and a collision. FSD could drive on the wrong side of the road for miles with no accident because it's an empty road, or oncoming traffic swerved to avoid you.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - andrewstuart2 2y ago
        I've used FSD as a subscription from time to time. I can't think of an intervention (and there have been many) that was to avoid an accident. They were all things like "that's closer to those cones than I'd like to be," "okay, apparently missing lane markers that have yet to be repainted is understandably hard," or "that was a trailer speed limit sign -- we're not towing so now we're going way below the posted limit."
        llamaimperative 2y ago
        The first two examples, in most scenarios, would yield an accident if unrecovered. The lattermost is also quite dangerous on highways (because driving way below posted limits causes accidents).
  - Someone1234 2y ago
    Tesla doesn't release raw data, hard to read anything into their claims either way. I do suspect though that if the raw data was beyond reproach then there would be a zip file with CSVs of it in them for third parties/academics to go over.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - ra7 2y ago
    That report is pretty much worthless and fails any sort of statistical rigor. It makes many apples-to-oranges comparison and doesn't control for variables such as road type (highway/city), geography, time of day, age of cars and safety features. Tesla refuses to provide raw data like the other self driving companies do to avoid scrutiny.
daveguy 2y ago
Highway driving 600 miles is significantly different than driving in a city. You should test it around town first and hope for no regressions. Yes, once through the neighborhood was good, but that's probably also significantly less than 13 miles.
whiplash451 2y ago
While people certainly appreciate anecdata on self-driving experiences, by the very nature of driving incidents/accidents (very rare events highly unevenly distributed following a power law distribution), anecdata will always be detrimental to the collective understanding of FSD. We really need to stop sharing personal stories on FSD. What we need is a public statistical description of the situation.
buran77 2y ago
> I was absolutely blown away. All my acquaintances who have Teslas and FSD were insisting on the same. But every time I hitched a ride as a passenger, most of the times with the explicit goal of seeing this miracle in action, I mainly got a long string of "that shouldn't have happened, usually it's a lot better". I'll happily take the blame on me and assume I'm a jinx but it's more likely that Tesla owners get really enthusiastic about their purchase and prop it up by committing the good experiences to anyone that will have them, and the "oh God my life flashed before my eyes" moments to /dev/null. Nobody likes the discomfort of post-decision dissonance.

llamaimperative 2y ago

[flagged]

carlgreene 2y ago
If you are going to talk about statistics then please cite the accident statistics of people using things like FSD vs. not... From the horse's mouth it appears using things like FSD is considerably safer than not[0]. While an independent statistic would be nice, I couldn't find one. Would appreciate seeing your source [0]: https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  I used your metrics -- a few (let's say 3) interventions over 600 miles. Tesla doesn't publish the relevant stats, probably because they're so outrageously good and strong and perfect that the public can't handle how amazing FSD works in reality. Edit in response to your edit: You're showing me Autopilot data which 1) is a different system and 2) is only useful on highways, so even if it did nothing at all you'd expect to see a massive reduction in frequency of accidents when it was "using Autopilot." Given that Autopilot is mostly ADS features, you'd also expect a large reduction. The better comparison point is "United States recent luxury model highway miles." Distance sensors, lane assist, auto-braking, etc all very obviously improve safety.
- carlgreene 2y ago
  Also, intervention !== accident. Not sure where you made that conclusion
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    Were you intervening on a system that was working perfectly? "Using FSD as full self driving" == no intervention possible. Would you not have crashed if you couldn't intervene?
    - Retric 2y ago
      Not all failures relate to safety. Self driving needs to get somewhere specific reasonably quickly, and avoid accidents.
    - pants2 2y ago
      There's a pretty big spectrum between perfect driving and a collision. FSD could drive on the wrong side of the road for miles with no accident because it's an empty road, or oncoming traffic swerved to avoid you.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - andrewstuart2 2y ago
      I've used FSD as a subscription from time to time. I can't think of an intervention (and there have been many) that was to avoid an accident. They were all things like "that's closer to those cones than I'd like to be," "okay, apparently missing lane markers that have yet to be repainted is understandably hard," or "that was a trailer speed limit sign -- we're not towing so now we're going way below the posted limit."
      - llamaimperative 2y ago
        The first two examples, in most scenarios, would yield an accident if unrecovered. The lattermost is also quite dangerous on highways (because driving way below posted limits causes accidents).
- Someone1234 2y ago
  Tesla doesn't release raw data, hard to read anything into their claims either way. I do suspect though that if the raw data was beyond reproach then there would be a zip file with CSVs of it in them for third parties/academics to go over.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ra7 2y ago
  That report is pretty much worthless and fails any sort of statistical rigor. It makes many apples-to-oranges comparison and doesn't control for variables such as road type (highway/city), geography, time of day, age of cars and safety features. Tesla refuses to provide raw data like the other self driving companies do to avoid scrutiny.

daveguy 2y ago

Highway driving 600 miles is significantly different than driving in a city. You should test it around town first and hope for no regressions. Yes, once through the neighborhood was good, but that's probably also significantly less than 13 miles.

whiplash451 2y ago

While people certainly appreciate anecdata on self-driving experiences, by the very nature of driving incidents/accidents (very rare events highly unevenly distributed following a power law distribution), anecdata will always be detrimental to the collective understanding of FSD. We really need to stop sharing personal stories on FSD. What we need is a public statistical description of the situation.

buran77 2y ago

> I was absolutely blown away. All my acquaintances who have Teslas and FSD were insisting on the same. But every time I hitched a ride as a passenger, most of the times with the explicit goal of seeing this miracle in action, I mainly got a long string of "that shouldn't have happened, usually it's a lot better". I'll happily take the blame on me and assume I'm a jinx but it's more likely that Tesla owners get really enthusiastic about their purchase and prop it up by committing the good experiences to anyone that will have them, and the "oh God my life flashed before my eyes" moments to /dev/null. Nobody likes the discomfort of post-decision dissonance.