Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 327 posts

Re: NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

#141

Post by fmihaila »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #129
fmihaila wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it really reasonable to assume it's not less safe in this case? Yes, because this assumption is consistent with the null hypothesis. The negation of this statement is that it is strictly less safe, which is not consistent with the null hypothesis, and for which there is no evidence.

Okay so let me follow. We're fine assuming it's not less safe. So then we must be fine assuming it's not more safe. These two lead us to your null which is that it is as safe. When a new unproven technology comes out does it seem correct to automatically assume that it is as safe as the current standard? Would you not expect some proof?

> When a new unproven technology comes out does it seem correct to automatically assume that it is as safe as the current standard? Would you not expect some proof?

In the absence of any data or given priors whatsoever, we should give the three possibilities (less safe, as safe, more safe) equal weight. This means that there is a 33% chance it's less safe, which is too large to ignore. That's why we want more proof when we deploy new tech, introduce a new drug, etc.

But note that specifically in the context of TACC as it stands today, we are not in that situation. There has been plenty of data accumulated already, which constitutes the proof you are looking for (i.e., the data we do have doesn't show a decrease in safety.) That's why today it is reasonable to assume that TACC is not less safe than no TACC.

Re: NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

#142

Post by manicdee »

jfoutz wrote: post #54
up_and_up wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think peoples ability to behave/drive responsibly vs recklessly could be at all linked to their demographic profile? I am talking statistically, not looking for anecdotes...

Varying insurance rates based on age and gender seem to indicate that, yes, demographics play a role in driving responsibility. A Tesla is not a cheap car. I kind of suspect the average Tesla driver is more responsible than the average driver. It may be the case that the average Tesla driver is very well off, and treat the cars as expensive toys though, so it's tough to say without numbers. If i had to bet right now,…

I suspect the average Tesla driver is more irresponsible than the average driver, simply because they're rich and are used to getting their way.

If you study rich drivers I have no doubt that you would find that they cut people off more, overtake in more dangerous situations, use their indicators less, drive over the speed limit more, proceed through amber signals later, run red lights more often, and generally show less regard for the rules than other drivers.

This behaviour will also correlate to other areas of life where richer people simply care less for the rules. They're more likely to use social contacts or money (e.g.: "lawyer up") to get themselves out of any trouble they find themselves in.

Teslas are not cheap cars. Given that money is (social evidence of) power, the people buying Teslas (and other expensive cars in general) are likely to expect other drivers to respect their status as powerful people.

Re: NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

#143

Post by celticninja »

yohui wrote: post #113
Vik1ng wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just funny that the 40% from Autosteer seem to exactly match with the general AEB safety improvement rate also mentioned in the report... IIHS research shows that AEB systems meeting the commitment would reduce rear-end crashes[emphasis added] by 40 percent. IIHS estimates that by 2025 – the earliest NHTSA believes it could realistically implement a regulatory requirement for AEB – the commitment will prevent 28,000…

For those unaware, "AEB" stands for "Autonomous Emergency Braking". See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collision_avoidance_system Did Tesla cars have AEB prior to Autopilot installation? If not, then this suggests the 40% reduction in crashes may simply be due to the installation of an AEB system. What effect Autopilot's other features may have would remain uncertain.

I don't think it suggests it as much as it can be inferred from looking at both sets of data.

Re: NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

#144

Post by frgtpsswrdlame »

fmihaila wrote: post #141
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay so let me follow. We're fine assuming it's not less safe. So then we must be fine assuming it's not more safe. These two lead us to your null which is that it is as safe. When a new unproven technology comes out does it seem correct to automatically assume that it is as safe as the current standard? Would you not expect some proof?

> When a new unproven technology comes out does it seem correct to automatically assume that it is as safe as the current standard? Would you not expect some proof? In the absence of any data or given priors whatsoever, we should give the three possibilities (less safe, as safe, more safe) equal weight. This means that there is a 33% chance it's less safe, which is too large to ignore. That's why we want more proof w…

> There has been plenty of data accumulated already. That's why today it is reasonable to assume that TACC is not less safe.

Haha, well we could have totally sidestepped this whole thing then! Can you show me the data?

Re: NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

#145

Post by celticninja »

DonHopkins wrote: post #109
snewman wrote: post #2

Tesla comes off extremely well in this report. For one thing, the 40% statistic cited in the headline appears to be well supported by the NHTSA report (section 5.4) and actually manages to frame the incident in a very positive light: ODI analyzed mileage and airbag deployment data supplied by Tesla for all MY 2014 through 2016 Model S and 2016 Model X vehicles equipped with the Autopilot Technology Package, either in…

The car should immediately pull over and shut down if it detects any activity on the driver's Twitter or Facebook feeds: Social Media Strike Out!

Would require you to link your social media accounts to your car so easily avoided.

Re: NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

#146

Post by celticninja »

sfifs wrote: post #102
snewman wrote: post #2

Tesla comes off extremely well in this report. For one thing, the 40% statistic cited in the headline appears to be well supported by the NHTSA report (section 5.4) and actually manages to frame the incident in a very positive light: ODI analyzed mileage and airbag deployment data supplied by Tesla for all MY 2014 through 2016 Model S and 2016 Model X vehicles equipped with the Autopilot Technology Package, either in…

Is the base size and confidence levels reported anywhere? I get professionally suspicious when reports publish percentage figure comparisons of rare events.

What events do you consider rare? Car crashes?

Re: NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

#147

Post by celticninja »

pps43 wrote: post #138
vvanders wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same cars pre/post OTA. There was a ~6 month peroid where AP HW was out in the wild but not used.

Confounding factors. For example, crashes can be more likely after sunset or during inclement weather so seasonality can play a role. Or maybe the drivers who had Tesla longer got used to it.

Could this be accounted for if the sample period was large enough, ie over 12 months to cover seasonality and a few months for time of day.

Re: NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

#148

Post by [deleted] »

pps43 wrote: post #138
vvanders wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same cars pre/post OTA. There was a ~6 month peroid where AP HW was out in the wild but not used.

Confounding factors. For example, crashes can be more likely after sunset or during inclement weather so seasonality can play a role. Or maybe the drivers who had Tesla longer got used to it.

[deleted]

Re: NHTSA’s full investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot shows 40% crash rate reduction

#149

Post by celticninja »

lamontcg wrote: post #84
Roritharr wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really would like to know the absolute numbers for this reduction. It's really questionable if this would hold up with millions of Teslas on the road in the hands of less wealthy(probably better educated) drivers.

> wealthy (probably better educated) drivers. You mean drivers like the ones behind the wheel of all the BMWs and Audis that cut me off with no turn signals, speed, make aggressive lane changes, tailgate, and generally act like giant douches because a simple traffic ticket is nothing to their pocketbook while their time == money? Those people are going to be a hell of a lot safer behind the wheel of an autonomous (le…

He said less wealthy, better educated drivers.
Post reply on HN