3 ms·
Nah the relevant factor, which has been obvious to anyone who cared to think about this stuff honestly for years, is that Tesla's safety claims on FSD are meani
by estearum 9mo ago
Nah the relevant factor, which has been obvious to anyone who cared to think about this stuff honestly for years, is that Tesla's safety claims on FSD are meaningless.
Accident rates under traditional cruise control are also extremely below average.
Why?
Because people use cruise control (and FSD) under specific conditions. Namely: good ones! Ones where accidents already happen at a way below-average rate!
Tesla has always been able to publish the data required to really understand performance, which would be normalized by age of vehicle and driving conditions. But they have not, for reasons that have always been obvious but are absolutely undeniable now.
- ToucanLoucan 9mo agoAlso, if it actually worked, Tesla's marketing would literally never shut up about it because they have a working fully self-driving car. That would be the first, second, and third bullet point in all their marketing, and they would be right to do that. It's an incredible feature differentiator from all their competition. The only problem is, it doesn't work.
- bluGill 9mo agoMore importantly, we would have independent researchers looking at the data and commenting. I know this data exists, but I've never seen anyone who has the data and ability to understand it who doesn't also have a conflict of interest.
- abtinf 9mo agoIf it actually worked, Tesla would include an indemnity clause for all accidents while it’s active.
- abtinf 9mo agoYup, after getting a Tesla with a free FSD trial period, it was obviously a death trap if used in any kind of slightly complex situation (like the highway on-ramp that was under construction for a year). At least once every few days, it would do something extremely dangerous, like try to drive straight into a concrete median at 40mph. The way I describe it is: yeah, it’s self-driving and doesn’t quite require the full attention of normal driving, but it still requires the same amount of attention as supervising a teenager in the first week of their learning permit. If Tesla were serious about FSD safety claims, they would release data on driver interventions per mile. Also, the language when turning on FSD in vehicle is just insulting—the whole thing about how if it were an iPhone app but shucks the lawyers are just so silly and conservative we have to call it beta.
- drob518 9mo ago> the same amount of attention as supervising a teenager in the first week of their learning permit. Yikes! I’d be a nervous wreck after just a couple of days.
- abtinf 9mo agoYou learn when it’s good and bad. It definitely has a “personality”. It is awesome in certain situations, like bumper to bumper traffic. I kept it for a couple months after the trial, but canceled because the situations it’s good at aren’t the situations I usually face when driving.
- daveguy 9mo agoThe most basic adaptive cruise control is "awesome" in bumper to bumper traffic.
- nothercastle 9mo agoFor some reason many manufacturers intentionally disable it at low speeds or won’t let it restart from stop. Super annoying and entirely unnecessary
- techjamie 9mo agoI understand not restarting from a stop unprompted. There are simply too many situations on the road where automatically moving from a stop may be undesirable in case the driver isn't paying attention. Stop signs, four way stops, yield situations, probably more. Safer overall to make it an intentioned action by the driver.
- nothercastle 9mo agoI kind of get it but it reality sucks in bumper to bumper. But why cut off at 25mph? Like I can’t use it in a camera zone to maintain snail speed below the camera threshold