5 ms·

To be fair to Tesla and other self driving taxis, urban and shorter journeys usually have worse collision rates than the average journey - and FSD is likely to

To be fair to Tesla and other self driving taxis, urban and shorter journeys usually have worse collision rates than the average journey - and FSD is likely to be owners driving themselves to work etc.

Veserv 8mo ago
Great, we can use Tesla's own numbers once again by selecting non-highway. Average human is 178,000 non-highway miles per minor collision resulting in "Professional Driver + Most Advanced 'Robotaxi' FSD version under test with careful scrutiny" at 3x worse than the average non-professional driver alone. They advertise and market a safety claim of 986,000 non-highway miles per minor collision. They are claiming, risking the lives of their customers and the public, that their objectively inferior product with objectively worse deployment controls is 1,700% better than their most advanced product under careful controls and scrutiny when there are no penalties for incorrect reporting.
- jmcgough 8mo ago
  Would be nice if we had a functioning legislative body that did more than pass a single "give billionaires more tax breaks" bill each term.
foxyv 8mo ago
It is kind of comparing apples to oranges. The more appropriate would be to compare it with other Taxis. https://www.rubensteinandrynecki.com/brooklyn/taxi-accident-lawyers/ https://www.rubensteinandrynecki.com/brooklyn/taxi-accident-... Generally about 1 accident per 217k miles. Which still means that Tesla is having accidents at a 4x rate. However, there may be underreporting and that could be the source of the difference. Also, the safety drivers may have prevented a lot of accidents too.
- philistine 8mo ago
  I'm sure insurers will love your arguments and simply insure Tesla at the exact same rate they insure everyone else. I think Tesla's egg is cooked. They need a full suite of sensors ASAP. Get rid of Elon and you'll see an announcement in weeks.
  - harmmonica 8mo ago
    Always comes up but think it's worth repeating: if he's not there the stock will take a massive haircut and no Tesla investor wants that regardless of whether it would improve Tesla's car sales or its self-driving. Elon is the stock price for the most part. And just to muse on the current reason, it's not Optimus or self driving, but an eventual merger with SpaceX. My very-not-hot take is that they'll merge within months of the SpaceX IPO. A lot of folks say it ain't happening, but I think that's entirely dependent on how well Elon and Trump are getting along at the moment the merger is proposed (i.e., whether Trump gives his blessing in advance of any announcement).
    - foxyv 8mo ago
      Tesla's only chance at this point is government money. Consumers just aren't buying. It doesn't help that Elon was heavily involved with Epstein and is constantly spouting white nationalist propaganda on X. This is on top of his gaffe with "My Heart Goes Out to You". Only a certain type of consumer is going to buy from a company like that.
      - harmmonica 8mo ago
        What form would those funds take? I would agree that the government could pull one lever that would cause Tesla's sales to spike and that would be reintroducing the ev credit. To really juice them they'd have to reintroduce and increase it. I don't think there's another lever they have at their disposal that would do anything material. The government buying a bunch of vehicles for a single or multiple departments wouldn't move the needle. Basically you have to incentivize the masses to purchase. Of course none of that would happen with the current admin and congress. EV's are anathema to the platform. As an aside, the situation at Tesla sure is getting stranger. I don't know if it was yesterday or earlier in the week, but Elon saying that at least one Cybercab will be sold to a "consumer" before the end of '26 for under $30k makes no sense (yeah yeah promises promises). But wasn't the idea that Tesla would control the fleet? Why would they sell a person a Cybercab to operate as a taxi? That would mean that there's profit to be had by that buyer and so why the heck wouldn't Tesla just keep that profit for itself and run the entire operation? Some kind of balance sheet gimmick? Offloading the insurance risk to someone else? Maybe someone reading this long-ass reply will clue me in. And I get it the majority of the folks these days think it's all vaporware, but doesn't the vaporware at least have to make some sense?
flutas 8mo ago
Yup as context, in the same time Waymo had 101 collisions according to the same NHTSA dataset.
- harmmonica 8mo ago
  Is this the same time or the same miles driven? I think the former, and of course I get that's what you wrote, but I'm trying to understand what to take away from your comment.
- ra7 8mo ago
  Waymo drives 4 million miles every week (500k+ miles each day). Vast majority of those collisions are when Waymos were stationary (they don’t redact narrative in crash reports like Tesla does, so you know what happened). That is an incredible safety record.

Veserv 8mo ago

Great, we can use Tesla's own numbers once again by selecting non-highway. Average human is 178,000 non-highway miles per minor collision resulting in "Professional Driver + Most Advanced 'Robotaxi' FSD version under test with careful scrutiny" at 3x worse than the average non-professional driver alone. They advertise and market a safety claim of 986,000 non-highway miles per minor collision. They are claiming, risking the lives of their customers and the public, that their objectively inferior product with objectively worse deployment controls is 1,700% better than their most advanced product under careful controls and scrutiny when there are no penalties for incorrect reporting.

jmcgough 8mo ago
Would be nice if we had a functioning legislative body that did more than pass a single "give billionaires more tax breaks" bill each term.

foxyv 8mo ago

It is kind of comparing apples to oranges. The more appropriate would be to compare it with other Taxis. https://www.rubensteinandrynecki.com/brooklyn/taxi-accident-lawyers/ https://www.rubensteinandrynecki.com/brooklyn/taxi-accident-... Generally about 1 accident per 217k miles. Which still means that Tesla is having accidents at a 4x rate. However, there may be underreporting and that could be the source of the difference. Also, the safety drivers may have prevented a lot of accidents too.

philistine 8mo ago
I'm sure insurers will love your arguments and simply insure Tesla at the exact same rate they insure everyone else. I think Tesla's egg is cooked. They need a full suite of sensors ASAP. Get rid of Elon and you'll see an announcement in weeks.
- harmmonica 8mo ago
  Always comes up but think it's worth repeating: if he's not there the stock will take a massive haircut and no Tesla investor wants that regardless of whether it would improve Tesla's car sales or its self-driving. Elon is the stock price for the most part. And just to muse on the current reason, it's not Optimus or self driving, but an eventual merger with SpaceX. My very-not-hot take is that they'll merge within months of the SpaceX IPO. A lot of folks say it ain't happening, but I think that's entirely dependent on how well Elon and Trump are getting along at the moment the merger is proposed (i.e., whether Trump gives his blessing in advance of any announcement).
  - foxyv 8mo ago
    Tesla's only chance at this point is government money. Consumers just aren't buying. It doesn't help that Elon was heavily involved with Epstein and is constantly spouting white nationalist propaganda on X. This is on top of his gaffe with "My Heart Goes Out to You". Only a certain type of consumer is going to buy from a company like that.
    - harmmonica 8mo ago
      What form would those funds take? I would agree that the government could pull one lever that would cause Tesla's sales to spike and that would be reintroducing the ev credit. To really juice them they'd have to reintroduce and increase it. I don't think there's another lever they have at their disposal that would do anything material. The government buying a bunch of vehicles for a single or multiple departments wouldn't move the needle. Basically you have to incentivize the masses to purchase. Of course none of that would happen with the current admin and congress. EV's are anathema to the platform. As an aside, the situation at Tesla sure is getting stranger. I don't know if it was yesterday or earlier in the week, but Elon saying that at least one Cybercab will be sold to a "consumer" before the end of '26 for under $30k makes no sense (yeah yeah promises promises). But wasn't the idea that Tesla would control the fleet? Why would they sell a person a Cybercab to operate as a taxi? That would mean that there's profit to be had by that buyer and so why the heck wouldn't Tesla just keep that profit for itself and run the entire operation? Some kind of balance sheet gimmick? Offloading the insurance risk to someone else? Maybe someone reading this long-ass reply will clue me in. And I get it the majority of the folks these days think it's all vaporware, but doesn't the vaporware at least have to make some sense?

flutas 8mo ago

Yup as context, in the same time Waymo had 101 collisions according to the same NHTSA dataset.

harmmonica 8mo ago
Is this the same time or the same miles driven? I think the former, and of course I get that's what you wrote, but I'm trying to understand what to take away from your comment.
ra7 8mo ago
Waymo drives 4 million miles every week (500k+ miles each day). Vast majority of those collisions are when Waymos were stationary (they don’t redact narrative in crash reports like Tesla does, so you know what happened). That is an incredible safety record.