211–220 of 286 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely. Let's examine the Elektrek editor's feed, to understand how "impartial" he is about Tesla: https://x.com/FredLambert
Yup. Btw, do you happen to know, why electrek.co changed their tune in such a way? I was commenting on a similarly negative story by the same site, and said that they are always anti-Tesla. But then somebody pointed out that this wasn't always the case, that they were actually supportive, but then suddenly turned.
I am so tired of people defending Tesla. I’ve wrote off Tesla long time ago but what gets me are the people defending their tech. We all can go see the products and experience them. The tech needs to be at least 100x more error free vs humans. It cannot be on par with human error rate.
We tend to defend companies that push the frontiers of self-driving cars, because the technology has the potential to save lives and make life easier and cheaper for everyone. As engineers, we understand that the technology will go from unsafe, to par-with-humans, to safer-than-humans, but in order for it to get to the latter, it requires much validation and training in an intermediate state, with appropriate safegua…
The problem is, they lost their drive. The competition has caught up - Mercedes Benz has an actually certified Level 4 Autonomous Driving system, on the high-class end pretty much every major manufacturer has something competitive with Tesla, the low budget end has something like the Dacia Spring starting at 12.000€, and the actual long-haul truck (i.e. not the fake "truck" aka Cybertruck) segment has (at least) Volvo, MAN and DAF making full-size trucks.
Where is the actual unique selling point that Tesla has now?
this is not good but the point is this can be improved much easier than improving human accidents rate. Both are very difficult problems, but one is certainly harder.
The comparison isn't really like-for-like. NHTSA SGO AV reports can include very minor, low-speed contact events that would often never show up as police-reported crashes for human drivers, meaning the Tesla crash count may be drawing from a broader category than the human baseline it's being compared to. There's also a denominator problem. The mileage figure appears to be cumulative miles "as of November," while the…
Good analysis. Just over a month ago, Electrek was posted here claiming that Teslas with humans were crashing 10x more than with humans alone. That was based on a sample size of 9 crashes. In the month following that, they've added one more crash while also increasing the miles driven per month. The headline could just as easily be about the dramatic decline in their crash rate! Or perhaps the data is just too small…
Previous article: Tesla with human supervisor at wheel: 10x worse than human alone.
Current article: Tesla with remote supervisor: 3-9x worse than human alone.
Given the small sample sizes, this shows a clear trend: Tesla's autopilot stuff (or perhaps vehicle design) is causing a ton of accidents, regardless of whether it's being operated locally by customers or remotely by professionals.
I'd like to see similar studies broken down by vehicle manufacturer.
The ADAS in one of our cars is great, but occasionally beeps when it shouldn't.
The ADAS in our other car cannot be disabled and false positives every 10-20 miles. Every week or so it forces the vehicle out of lane (either left of double yellow line center, or into another car's lane).
If the data on crash rates for those two models were public, I guarantee the latter car would have been recalled by now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm skeptical. If someone really wants a Tesla, my guess is that they'll rationalize Musk's actions or least compartmentalize them.
I think Facebook is even more universally thought of as a bad company, and everyone still engages there, too.
The comparison isn't really like-for-like. NHTSA SGO AV reports can include very minor, low-speed contact events that would often never show up as police-reported crashes for human drivers, meaning the Tesla crash count may be drawing from a broader category than the human baseline it's being compared to. There's also a denominator problem. The mileage figure appears to be cumulative miles "as of November," while the…
Good analysis. Just over a month ago, Electrek was posted here claiming that Teslas with humans were crashing 10x more than with humans alone. That was based on a sample size of 9 crashes. In the month following that, they've added one more crash while also increasing the miles driven per month. The headline could just as easily be about the dramatic decline in their crash rate! Or perhaps the data is just too small…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All of your arguments are expounded upon in the article itself, and their conclusions still hold, based on the publicly available data. The 3x figure in the title is based on a comparison of the Tesla reports with estimated average human driver miles without an incident, not based on police report data. The comparison with police-report data would lead to a 9x figure instead, which the article presents but quickly di…
I agree with most of your points and your conclusion, but to be fair OP was asserting that human drivers under-report incidents, which I believe. Super minor bumps where the drivers get out, determine there’s barely a scratch, and go on. Or solo low speed collisions with walls in garage or trees. I don’t think it invalidates the conclusion, but it seems like one fair point in an otherwise off-target defense.
The comparison isn't really like-for-like. NHTSA SGO AV reports can include very minor, low-speed contact events that would often never show up as police-reported crashes for human drivers, meaning the Tesla crash count may be drawing from a broader category than the human baseline it's being compared to. There's also a denominator problem. The mileage figure appears to be cumulative miles "as of November," while the…
I find it interesting the Lemonade insurance just began offering a 50% discount for Tesla with FSD. Insurance companies are known for analytics and don't survive if they use bad data. This points to your comment being correct.
The comparison isn't really like-for-like. NHTSA SGO AV reports can include very minor, low-speed contact events that would often never show up as police-reported crashes for human drivers, meaning the Tesla crash count may be drawing from a broader category than the human baseline it's being compared to. There's also a denominator problem. The mileage figure appears to be cumulative miles "as of November," while the…
Good analysis. Just over a month ago, Electrek was posted here claiming that Teslas with humans were crashing 10x more than with humans alone. That was based on a sample size of 9 crashes. In the month following that, they've added one more crash while also increasing the miles driven per month. The headline could just as easily be about the dramatic decline in their crash rate! Or perhaps the data is just too small…