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

391–400 of 462 posts

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

#391

Post by nikau »

ummonk wrote: post #236
maxdo wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author is projecting his assumptions based on 400 people questioned. Is it fair. Most Cars volvo produced is not as safe simply because Volvo is still making most of the money on Gasoline car, and they are less safe vs electric. Do we need to create a screaming article "Vovlo is deliberately making money on old tech that kills people"? Again volvo is a premium brand, so they don't want to invest more in EV to mak…

What makes you say gasoline cars are much less safe than electric?

Hollywood movie explosions

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

#392

Post by darkwater »

flarg wrote: post #383
AtlasBarfed wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll answer that with another piece of prognostication: good highway self-driving will cause massive disruption to the airline industry. Would you rather do this for a business trip to a 400-500 mile away city: - fixed time to depart (and fixed for leaving your destination!) - have to book ticket weeks in advance for a reasonable flight - no flexiblity if plans change - pack a small bag - transit to an airport (parki…

Both trains and planes centralise assets, services and pathways, allowing for rent seeking and anti competitive behaviour, government and regulatory capture, and by their very nature are anti consumer and pro big business. Hence their dominance and the increasing pressure on self driving EVs.

But cars need infrastructure (roads) which tend to create the same exact thing (big construction corps getting all the cake, thanks to political connections). The scale is for sure smaller but still...

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

#393

Post by zzt123 »

dawnerd wrote: post #325
sakopov wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is interesting. I have seen similar videos of Tesla self-driving successfully on similar type of streets in Seattle. I wonder if the quality of FSD changes from city to city based on how much data Tesla receives from other drives in that city. I guess I'm suggesting that Seattle could have more Tesla drivers than Boston. I have no idea if any of this is true. Just a thought.

It for sure does. Where I live, Oxnard it fails so badly I don't know how I was allowed into the beta. But if I drive down a few cities over it works well enough that if I didn't know better I'd say it's ready for public. It's just wild.

I will have to stop by Oxnard and check it out. I’d been thinking that I must have an atypical experience since FSD is quite wonderful for me. But if a few dozen miles over and you get a city where FSD becomes awful…

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

#394

Post by secult »

waffle_maniac wrote: post #349
dmitriid wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It looks like most of their cars have ~110 horsepower? Seems weak.

Usually there is this thing called transmission in a car that effectively make the car able to accelerate enough for most of the situations. The only problem with having less horsepower than other cars is that the maximal achievable speed is lower. But for sure riding above 100mph is much more comfortable in other brands.

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

#395

Post by bildung »

robbiepapiere wrote: post #389
kaba0 wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, I think the biggest flaw in tesla’s statistics is that people will turn of autopilot when they see a dangerous situation ahead - it is pretty much as self-selecting “good” samples as it gets.

That seems irrelevant for the statistics, though? It doesn‘t give the Tesla driver an advantage.

It does? Those drivers remove a small portion of the autopilot miles driven, but a large portion of the challenging/dangerous miles. The result are stats with a low accident per mile ratio.

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

#396

Post by buran77 »

runarberg wrote: post #260
buran77 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Student drivers (with an instructor in the car, and secondary controls) have very few accidents, if any, not because of their safety record but because every mistake is saved by the instructor. A car can be considered as driving "safer than a human" when it can match the average human in any conditions the average human drives. Everything else is just squinting at the data and choosing an interpretation that fits you…

> Student drivers (with an instructor in the car, and secondary controls) have very few accidents [...] because every mistake is saved by the instructor Is that the only reason? I suspect that many (most) student drivers are also in general more alert, drive slower, and follow each rule/guideline to an extreme. If they don’t the instructor will probably end the lesson and remove a dangerous driver of the road.

All student drivers particularly at the beginning are "dangerous drivers" because they aren't drivers but they're asked to drive. In their first half of driving school most students would probably cause an accident within minutes if not for the instructor. I live on a quiet street where most driving schools take their students due to the almost non-existing traffic. I can't count how many times I see the instructor having to intervene to avoid a crash even at simple things like keeping a straight line or a right turn (too tight or too wide).

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

#397

Post by ohgodplsno »

flarg wrote: post #383
AtlasBarfed wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll answer that with another piece of prognostication: good highway self-driving will cause massive disruption to the airline industry. Would you rather do this for a business trip to a 400-500 mile away city: - fixed time to depart (and fixed for leaving your destination!) - have to book ticket weeks in advance for a reasonable flight - no flexiblity if plans change - pack a small bag - transit to an airport (parki…

Both trains and planes centralise assets, services and pathways, allowing for rent seeking and anti competitive behaviour, government and regulatory capture, and by their very nature are anti consumer and pro big business. Hence their dominance and the increasing pressure on self driving EVs.

>allowing for rent seeking

You are saying this in a thread about a company that regularly sells features as a subscription and revokes them upon resell, as well as voids warranty if you get it repaired anywhere that's not a Tesla shop. Tesla have entrenched themselves as rent seekers from the beginning.

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

#398

Post by RyEgswuCsn »

kergonath wrote: post #372
RyEgswuCsn wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For sure. Though even non-tech people are well aware that adaptive cruise control cannot get us to true self driving but "AI" allegedly can.

What they really need is a blockchain. In Rust.

I like the idea. Introducing teslacoin, also crypto-powered climate control, and also real-time right of way auctioning.

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

#399

Post by contravariant »

robbiepapiere wrote: post #389
kaba0 wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, I think the biggest flaw in tesla’s statistics is that people will turn of autopilot when they see a dangerous situation ahead - it is pretty much as self-selecting “good” samples as it gets.

That seems irrelevant for the statistics, though? It doesn‘t give the Tesla driver an advantage.

Sure, but the important question is the capability of the Autopilot, not the Tesla driver.

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

#400

Post by OsmMapper »

jlmorton wrote: post #284
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The driving public knows when it can't take such calculated risks. Does the ML classifier know what it isn't seeing?

I think there are two arguments here: legality, and actual safety. I would argue that the slow rolling stop is perfectly safe in all cases, but the law exists as it is only to reduce ambiguity for enforcement. It's not a calculated risk - there is no circumstance where it's unsafe.

In the UK stop signs are rarely used, they are in places where visibility is so poor approaching the junction that it wouldn't be safe not to stop.

There are definitely places where it isn't safe to roll through a stop sign, unfortunately in the US the system uses stop signs as a kind of traffic calming measure so then there isn't a clear way to mark the places where stopping is absolutely needed for safety. Of course in theory drivers should be able to notice the lack of visibility and drive accordingly but in practice the hazards can be somewhat subtle and many drivers have poor judgement.

Post reply on HN