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

DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 106 posts

Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

#11

Post by anonporridge »

foepys wrote: post #3
anonporridge wrote: post #2

Does anyone have good data on comparing deaths per mile driven between various auto brands? This data, https://www.tesladeaths.com/ , doesn't tell us much if accurate, other than Tesla crashes don't seem to be any kind of real problem in an absolute sense.

Since Tesla is a very young and upscale brand deaths per mile would be very misleading. You need to also account for price range, car type, and age of the vehicle. There is quite the difference getting into an accident with a 20 year old Honda Accord and a 3 year old Model 3.

Ok, still, try to compare it to equivalent brands and socio-economic groups.

My point is that anti Tesla self driving sentiment is almost exclusively driven by emotion, not hard data.

Show me the data that justifies why I need to be afraid of public FSD.

Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

#13

Post by klyrs »

anonporridge wrote: post #8
klyrs wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> Does human life have intrinsic value? Yes? I don't understand your point. We have limited problem solving resources, which means we need to be smart about how we use those resources to solve the problems that legitimately have the biggest impact on human suffering. Getting bogged down on issues that are negligible in a relativistic sense, but trigger greater emotional response, is a recipe for failure. See the anti…

> We have limited problem solving resources, which means we need to be smart about how we use those resources to solve the problems that legitimately have the biggest impact on human suffering.

Sounds great in principle, but how do self-driving cars fit into that picture?

Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

#14

Post by marricks »

anonporridge wrote: post #11
foepys wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since Tesla is a very young and upscale brand deaths per mile would be very misleading. You need to also account for price range, car type, and age of the vehicle. There is quite the difference getting into an accident with a 20 year old Honda Accord and a 3 year old Model 3.

Ok, still, try to compare it to equivalent brands and socio-economic groups. My point is that anti Tesla self driving sentiment is almost exclusively driven by emotion, not hard data. Show me the data that justifies why I need to be afraid of public FSD.

It’s a new technology which no one else is testing in the real world with actual drivers at such a scale. Onus is on Tesla to provide data for others to verify the claim that it’s safe.

Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

#15

Post by anonporridge »

klyrs wrote: post #13
anonporridge wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does human life have intrinsic value? Yes? I don't understand your point. We have limited problem solving resources, which means we need to be smart about how we use those resources to solve the problems that legitimately have the biggest impact on human suffering. Getting bogged down on issues that are negligible in a relativistic sense, but trigger greater emotional response, is a recipe for failure. See the anti…

> We have limited problem solving resources, which means we need to be smart about how we use those resources to solve the problems that legitimately have the biggest impact on human suffering. Sounds great in principle, but how do self-driving cars fit into that picture?

It fits because humans are objectively shit drives who cause massive amounts of death, suffering, and property damage through car crashes all the time.

Unless there's hard data that FSD is worse than the status quo, attempts to curtail it's use is not only a waste of time, but potentially actively contributing to unnecessary suffering if in fact it's contributing to fewer accidents.

Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

#16

Post by thereisnospork »

In other news, coming to your local bar, high school, and nursing home parking lots: The 2022 Hummer EV with 1,000hp capable of propelling its 9,000+ pounds to 60 mph in 3 seconds or less. Legally operable by anyone with a pulse[0].

I'm not sure its the AI drivers of the future that worry me.

[0]Just about. https://www.gmc.com/electric/hummer-ev

Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

#17

Post by seoaeu »

klyrs wrote: post #13
anonporridge wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does human life have intrinsic value? Yes? I don't understand your point. We have limited problem solving resources, which means we need to be smart about how we use those resources to solve the problems that legitimately have the biggest impact on human suffering. Getting bogged down on issues that are negligible in a relativistic sense, but trigger greater emotional response, is a recipe for failure. See the anti…

> We have limited problem solving resources, which means we need to be smart about how we use those resources to solve the problems that legitimately have the biggest impact on human suffering. Sounds great in principle, but how do self-driving cars fit into that picture?

Cars are the primary cause of death for certain age groups! Technologies that meaningfully change the fatality rate (up or down) are of extreme importance to reducing human suffering

Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

#18

Post by [deleted] »

thereisnospork wrote: post #16

In other news, coming to your local bar, high school, and nursing home parking lots: The 2022 Hummer EV with 1,000hp capable of propelling its 9,000+ pounds to 60 mph in 3 seconds or less. Legally operable by anyone with a pulse[0]. I'm not sure its the AI drivers of the future that worry me. [0]Just about. https://www.gmc.com/electric/hummer-ev

[deleted]

Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

#19

Post by seoaeu »

anonporridge wrote: post #15
klyrs wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have limited problem solving resources, which means we need to be smart about how we use those resources to solve the problems that legitimately have the biggest impact on human suffering. Sounds great in principle, but how do self-driving cars fit into that picture?

It fits because humans are objectively shit drives who cause massive amounts of death, suffering, and property damage through car crashes all the time. Unless there's hard data that FSD is worse than the status quo, attempts to curtail it's use is not only a waste of time, but potentially actively contributing to unnecessary suffering if in fact it's contributing to fewer accidents.

Why should the burden of proof be on the critics? Carmakers shouldn't be able to unleash experimental technology that jeopardizes the lives of pedestrians without credible evidence that it is at least as safe as human drivers

Re: DMV ‘revisiting’ its approach to regulating Tesla’s public self-driving test

#20

Post by gamblor956 »

anonporridge wrote: post #11
foepys wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since Tesla is a very young and upscale brand deaths per mile would be very misleading. You need to also account for price range, car type, and age of the vehicle. There is quite the difference getting into an accident with a 20 year old Honda Accord and a 3 year old Model 3.

Ok, still, try to compare it to equivalent brands and socio-economic groups. My point is that anti Tesla self driving sentiment is almost exclusively driven by emotion, not hard data. Show me the data that justifies why I need to be afraid of public FSD.

On an absolute basis, Tesla has more self-driving-related deaths than every other automaker in the world, combined. That doesn't scare you?

On a relative basis, it's even scarier: scaled up to Toyota or GM numbers (in terms of vehicles sold), hundreds of people would be dying each year from self-driving crashes.

Post reply on HN