The other comment pointing this out has been (ridiculously) flagged, so I'll repeat the point that was made: The analysis is useless if it doesn't account for the base rate fallacy ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy ) The first thing I thought before even reading the analysis was "Does the author account for it?" And indeed he makes no mention that he did. So after reading the whole article I have no…
The base rate was discussed early in the article, but not by that name: > It’s not just that self-driving cars in general are dangerous for motorcycles, either: this problem is unique to Tesla. Not a single other automobile manufacturer or ADAS self-driving technology provider reported a single motorcycle fatality in the same time frame.
Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
371–380 of 449 posts
Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
#372Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
#373Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is not addressing the base rate. To take a hypothetical extreme: If all cars but one on the road were Teslas, it would not be meaningful to point out that there have been far more fatalities with Teslas. Even more illustrative, if 10 people on motorcycles had died from Teslas, and 1 person had died from that sole non-Tesla, then that non-Tesla would be deemed much, much more dangerous than Tesla.
> To take a hypothetical extreme: If all cars but one on the road were Teslas, it would not be meaningful to point out that there have been far more fatalities with Teslas. However, in such a case, “base rate fallacy” would prevent you from blaming Tesla even if it had a 98% fatality rate. How do you square that? What happens if other companies aren’t putting self driving cars out yet because they aren’t happy with t…
You handle it the same way any new technology is introduced. Standards and regulations, and these evolve over time.
When the first motor car company started selling cars, pedestrians died. The response wasn't to ban cars altogether.
The appropriate response would be to set some rules, examine the incidents, see if any useful information can be gleaned.
And of course, once more models are out there with self driving abilities, we compare between them as well.
Here, we can get better data than what's in the article: What is the motorcycle death rate with cars with no automated driving? If, per mile, it's higher than with Teslas with automated driving, then Tesla is already ahead. The article is biased right from the get go: It compares only cars with "self-driving" (whatever that means) capabilities, and inappropriately frames the conversation.
If I'm a motorcyclist, I want to know two things:
1. If all cars were replaced with Teslas with self driving capabilities, am I safer than the status quo?
2. If all self driving cars were replaced with other cars with self driving capabilities, am I safer than the status quo?
The article fails to answer these basic questions.
Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
The base rate was discussed early in the article, but not by that name: > It’s not just that self-driving cars in general are dangerous for motorcycles, either: this problem is unique to Tesla. Not a single other automobile manufacturer or ADAS self-driving technology provider reported a single motorcycle fatality in the same time frame.
Another part of the problem: Waymo, for example, doesn't provide motorcycle specific stats. They only provide collisions with vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. There's no breakdown of vehicle type. So the basis of this article is already bullshit and likely done just for "space man bad" reasons
Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t know why everyone says “just cameras.” Are people imagining they are using some algorithm to detect some object and come up with a distance measure? I’m imagining they are just having the cameras autofocus and determining the focal distance which seems about the same as banking on a good lidar reflection to me.
Consider how long it takes your camera to autofocus, and how sometimes it gets it wrong. Then consider how fast your car moves. In the time it takes your camera to autofocus, how far do you think a car can travel, and what happens to all the blurry things in its path that it can't see?
Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean what does lidar do but tell you distance? A rangefinder optic from 1940 can also tell you distance with two little offset windows purely optically and accurately. Millions of rolls of films shot on this principle of optical distance finding. And yet, this is no good now, because IMO its musks idea and thats enough to poison it among the armchair engineers than any other reason. Telling to this point is how eve…
There is a huge difference between measuring the distance to a single target a few miles away, and measuring the distance to dozens of moving, accelerating, and overlapping objects in close proximity to each other and to the reference point. Besides, rangefinding optics weren't exactly amazing in the 1940s either. It's why the introduction of radar made such a massive difference in naval warfare.
Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
#377This does not bode well for the Tesla robotaxi pilot launching soon. Depending on how that goes, Q2/Q3 could be a bloodbath for Tesla and I'm sure he knows it.
Won't happen soon. Previous Tesla's promises turned out to be hype to prop up the stock price. You should not put faith in this one.
Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
> instead he is a fraud/charlatan and... Just see him talking about things at NeuraLink. Musk wouldn't exist if it weren't for the people working for him. It's a clown that made it to the top in a very dubious way.
What's wrong with him talking about things at Neuralink?
Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
> instead he is a fraud/charlatan and... Just see him talking about things at NeuraLink. Musk wouldn't exist if it weren't for the people working for him. It's a clown that made it to the top in a very dubious way.
I see this get thrown around once in a while and I really don't get it. Isn't this true of basically every leader? Gates, Jobs, Buffet, Obama, they all wouldn't existing without their teams. Isn't that just obvious? Isn't one of the important markers of a good leader to be able to build a good team?
Re: Self-Driving Teslas Are Fatally Rear-Ending Motorcyclists More Than Any Other
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
let's experiment. i'll reduce your vision quality, then you try driving
It's pretty obvious from the context of the thread that "vision quality" refers to LIDAR vs cameras, and that human vision is good enough, not that being legally blind doesn't somehow doesn't affect driving quality.
Driving requirements in many states demand 20/40 vision in at least one eye [1]. 20/20 visual acuity is a arc-resolution of approximately 1 arc-minute [2] thus 20/40 vision is approximately a arc-resolution of 2 arc-minutes or 30 pixels per degree of field of view. Legally blind is usually cited as approximately 20/200 which is approximately 10 arc-minutes or 6 pixels per degree of field of view.
Tesla Vision HW3 contains 3 adjacent forward cameras at different focal lengths and Tesla Vision HW4 contains 2 adjacent forward cameras of different focal lengths and as such those cameras can not be used in conjunction to establish binocular vision [3]. As such, we should view each camera is a zero-redundancy single-sensor and is thus a "single-eye" case.
We observe that Tesla Vision HW3 has a 35 degree camera for 250m, 50 degree camera for 150m, and 120 degree camera for 60m [4]. The Tesla Vision HW4 has a 50 degree camera for 150m, and 120 degree camera for 60m [4]. A speed of 100 km/h corresponds to ~28 m/s as such the cameras trailing times of ~10s, ~6s, ~2s. Standard safe driving practices dictates a 2-3 second follow, so most maneuvers would be dictated by the 60m camera and predictive maneuvers would be dictated by the 150m camera.
We observe that the HW3 forward cameras have a horizontal resolution of 1280 pixels resulting in a arc-resolution of ~25.6 pixels per degree for the 150m camera and ~11 pixels per degree for the 60m camera, the camera used for the majority of actions. Both values are below minimum vision requirements for driving with most states with the wide angle view within a factor of two of being considered legally blind.
We observe that the HW4 forward cameras have a horizontal resolution of 2896 pixels resulting in a arc-resolution of ~58 pixels per degree for the 150m camera and ~24 pixels per degree for the 60m camera. The 60m camera, which should be the primary camera for most maneuvers, fails to meet minimum vision requirements in most states.
It is important to note that there are literally hundreds of thousands if not millions of HW3 vehicles on the road using sensors that fail to meet minimum vision requirements. Tesla determined that a product that fails to meet minimum vision requirements is fit for use and sold it for their own enrichment. The same company that convinced customers to purchase systems when they promised: "We are excited to announce that, as of today, all Tesla vehicles produced in our factory – including Model 3 – will have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver."[5] in 2016 when they were delivering HW2. Despite the systems being delivered clearly not reaching even minimum vision requirements and, in fact, being nearly legally blind.
[1] https://eyewiki.org/Driving_Restrictions_per_State
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_acuity
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Autopilot_hardware
[4] https://www.blogordie.com/2023/09/hw4-tesla-new-self-driving...
[5] https://web.archive.org/web/20240730071548/https://tesla.com...