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

Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 462 posts

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#301

Post by rurp »

maxdo wrote: post #179
andrepd wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I am not a Tesla-hater though — I just thought it was odd that the company was playing quite so fast and loose with their safety claims. If you're still surprised by this you've not been paying attention to how Telsa operates.

Quoted post unavailable.

> Tesla was first to introduce over the air updates of software and firmware.

I want the controls on my car to constantly change out from under me as much as I want my miter saw and power drill to startle me with a new interface. Screwing with safety critical controls does NOT make people safer.

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#302

Post by dmitriid »

maxdo wrote: post #281
FireBeyond wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automatic emergency braking is a required standard feature in the US. Forward collision warning became standard in 2016 by at least ten manufacturers: Audi, BMW, Ford, General Motors, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Tesla, Toyota, Volkswagen, and Volvo. Without speaking to Blind Spot, my Audi does similar intelligent things. If you change lanes next to a vehicle or just in front of it, but you have a positive speed differentia…

It's not about how to calculate it. It' about how can you understand what's around. And Audi is not super good about it. Tesla is far better at understanding the context. This year they will switch to FSD stack. The car will not drive me itself. But security features while driver engaged will have a huge boost. And that will be available for any car that was released from 2015-17 with some minor exceptions. That's ho…

> And Audi is not super good about it.

You have proof for that statement?

I drive a 2021 Audi A1, the most basic version. From Tesla's safety page, this Audi has:

- Impact protection

- Structural integrity

- Crumple zones

- Lane departure warning/prevention

- Collision detection

- Emergency braking

The only thing it doesn't have is the blind spot sensor. But, again, it's on an entry-level car that costs easily 10 thousand dollars less than the cheapest Tesla.

Ah yeah, and all that works in Swedish conditions where Tesla's would be blind for a significant amount of time (the sun hanging just above the horizon for a prolonged time, an reflecting from a snowy/wet road).

But sure. As maxdo would have us believe, "it's hard to match what Tesla offers".

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#303

Post by dmitriid »

oblio wrote: post #234
maxdo wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, https://www.tesla.com/safety https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KR2N_Q8ep8 Tesla roll out cars in generations. So just take a $40k Model 3/Y platform was introduced in 2017 and compare it with any car been introduced that year. My friend bought a BMW in 2019 for similar money, it doesn't have half of that. Maybe you can have them but you have to buy extra packages for extra money. Tesla don't sell safety features…

> My friend bought a BMW in 2019 for similar money, it doesn't have half of that. Maybe you can have them but you have to buy extra packages for extra money. #1 lesson of buying cars is: 1. Don't buy German cars if you don't have to (or if you buy them, never complain about the price of their optional equipment). The corollary is: 1". Buy Korean or Japanese cars.

Or buy Škoda which is usually "last year's VW with everything included, for a lower price" :)

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#304

Post by wzdd »

FireBeyond wrote: post #190
bambax wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes it's legal IDK about the US, but in France the speed limit is a target speed; if conditions are good (weather, visibility, traffic) you're supposed to drive at or near maximum speed. It's illegal to drive too slow, and there's a specific fine for this. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI0000... [in French]

In Australia (I left 15 years ago) it was stated that you were required to drive at the _maximum_ speed that met the conditions: - not exceeding posted speed limit - appropriate for environmental conditions - your ability to safely control the vehicle And failure to do so could be fined.

This is incorrect (which is lucky, because it would both be extremely unreasonable and impossible to enforce). You can only be fined if you are driving so slowly that you are causing an obstruction.

Citations:

NRMA: https://www.mynrma.com.au/cars-and-driving/driver-training-a...

Australian road rules: http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/consol_reg/arr210/s12... -- key paragraph: "a driver does not unreasonably obstruct the path of another driver or a pedestrian only because [...] (b) the driver is driving more slowly than other vehicles (unless the driver is driving abnormally slowly in the circumstances)." (Note that these rules form guidance for the States, so there will be per-state differences -- see below)

Western Australia is the only state which explicitly defines "too slowly", it's 20km/h below the limit, and it only applies to freeways. https://www.whichcar.com.au/car-advice/is-driving-slow-illeg...

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#305

Post by dsl »

ricardobeat wrote: post #291
gnicholas wrote: post #2

Underlying study is here. [1] Full disclosure, I co-wrote the piece for The Daily Beast [2] that originally suggested that Tesla's methodology was seriously flawed. I am not a Tesla-hater though — I just thought it was odd that the company was playing quite so fast and loose with their safety claims. 1: https://engrxiv.org/preprint/view/1973/3986 2: https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-tesla-and-elon-musk-exagge...

> naturalistic driving study of 28 vehicles The study seems to extrapolate from this. Tesla has something like 10 billion miles total driven on Autopilot, on a fleet of a million cars.

This is the dataset: https://insight.shrp2nds.us/documents/shrp2_background.pdf

It covers 5.4 million trips in 3,400 vehicles with digitally collected records and vehicle data and has been independently validated by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and Department of Transportation.

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#306

Post by FireBeyond »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #283
FireBeyond wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps pedantic, but also genuine curiosity, thinking about it: > how to stop on ice without ABS My understanding is that ABS won't do anything to help you stopping on ice, anyway. On ice, braking is hampered by lack of traction on tires, whereas ABS is trying to avoid the challenges of tires locking up, so you can maintain (some semblance of) directionality.

ABS absolutely does help you stop on ice. Locking up on ice makes traction even worse; you get a miserable coefficient of dynamic friction and a film of liquid water instead of the already poor coefficient of approximately static friction you get while there's limited relative motion between the tire and the road. It's not a panacea, but ABS definitely reduces the distance you slide compared to if you lock your tires…

That totally makes sense. I appreciate it!

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#307

Post by simplyaccont »

maxdo wrote: post #179
andrepd wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I am not a Tesla-hater though — I just thought it was odd that the company was playing quite so fast and loose with their safety claims. If you're still surprised by this you've not been paying attention to how Telsa operates.

Quoted post unavailable.

>Facts: Tesla was the first to introduce such wide range of safety features in every car they sold. They don't make safety a premium feature. They invest in own crash test facilities. Only Volvo is kind of on par.

Volvo built their crash test facilities before Tesla came to existence.

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#308

Post by gnicholas »

rurp wrote: post #301
maxdo wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> Tesla was first to introduce over the air updates of software and firmware. I want the controls on my car to constantly change out from under me as much as I want my miter saw and power drill to startle me with a new interface. Screwing with safety critical controls does NOT make people safer.

I would like OTA updates that are opt-in. That would be a happy medium between Tesla and traditional automakers.

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#309

Post by FireBeyond »

maxdo wrote: post #281
FireBeyond wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automatic emergency braking is a required standard feature in the US. Forward collision warning became standard in 2016 by at least ten manufacturers: Audi, BMW, Ford, General Motors, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Tesla, Toyota, Volkswagen, and Volvo. Without speaking to Blind Spot, my Audi does similar intelligent things. If you change lanes next to a vehicle or just in front of it, but you have a positive speed differentia…

It's not about how to calculate it. It' about how can you understand what's around. And Audi is not super good about it. Tesla is far better at understanding the context. This year they will switch to FSD stack. The car will not drive me itself. But security features while driver engaged will have a huge boost. And that will be available for any car that was released from 2015-17 with some minor exceptions. That's ho…

> And Audi is not super good about it.

Based on what? "Understanding what is around", and "Tesla is far better at understanding the context" - my Audi has never attempted to drive into stopped traffic.

Your vision (and not just about Audi) that all other manufacturers have these dumb, simple systems and no context of what's going on around is simply, and factually, wrong.

My Audi (and I'm not saying they are the leader, I'm just speaking on them because of my experience) has no fewer than 13 radar sensors around the vehicle and will tell me of incursions into the vehicle's "space". It will recognize that some incursions are more "concerning" than others and alert appropriately.

I really have no idea what you mean by "Audi is not super good" about safety systems.

Re: Normalized crash data shows Autopilot is much less safe than Tesla claims

#310

Post by dsl »

macintux wrote: post #270
FireBeyond wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automatic emergency braking is a required standard feature in the US. Forward collision warning became standard in 2016 by at least ten manufacturers: Audi, BMW, Ford, General Motors, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Tesla, Toyota, Volkswagen, and Volvo. Without speaking to Blind Spot, my Audi does similar intelligent things. If you change lanes next to a vehicle or just in front of it, but you have a positive speed differentia…

> Automatic emergency braking is a required standard feature in the US. Not currently; I just bought a 2022 Jeep Wrangler that doesn’t have anything of the sort.

It is standard on the Cherokee and Compass. On the Wrangler it is part of the Advanced Safety Group with adaptive cruise control. I think it might have to do with false positives when off-road.
Post reply on HN