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

Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–286 of 286 posts

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#281

Post by andrewaylett »

andsoitis wrote: post #77
andrewaylett wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two layers, both relating to concentration. Driving a car takes effort. ADAS features (or even just plain regular "driving systems") can reduce the cognitive load, which makes for safer driving. As much as I enjoy driving with a manual transmission, an automatic is less tiring for long journeys. Not having to occupy my mind with gear changes frees me up to pay more attention to my surroundings. Adaptive cru…

What about lane assist and follow technology in other cars? Do they also fall in the category of thing that replace attention?

IMNSHO yes. But not necessarily so drastically -- a VW (to pick an example I've seen evidence of: https://www.thedrive.com/article/10131/the-volkswagen-arteon...) will ping at you if you stop touching the steering wheel for ten seconds or so, and will actively monitor to make sure your attention is on the road. A Tesla won't, or at least wouldn't in 2018, to the point where someone was convicted of dangerous driving having climbed into the passenger seat while driving along the M1: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-43934...

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#282

Post by shushpanchik »

z7 wrote: post #7

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…

To add to that, most of the events described in the article - hitting cyclist, hit when reversing, hit stationary item on parking etc - happen during low speed city driving, but most miles for average driver are driven on highways. So, taxis, that are driven most of the time in city, would definitely get more crashes per mile than average driver. So 500,000/200,000 miles number could not be really applied to a taxi. I exect that number for taxis could be much lower.

Also, even for a non-taxi, 200,000 miles between minor hits on average seems incredibly high - that would mean that an average car in US does not hit anything in a car's lifetime. I'm not sure where that number is coming from, if that's non-reportable events.

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#283

Post by jjav »

giorgioz wrote: post #100

Yes on one side Tesla is not transparent but on the other side the author of the article is an hypocrite given they went with the click-bait title "Tesla’s own Robotaxi data confirms crash rate 3x worse than humans even with monitor" Tesla secrecy is likely due to avoid journalists taking any chance they can to sell more news by writing an autonomous vehicles horror story. Given the secrecy we don't know what happene…

> Tesla secrecy is likely due to avoid journalists taking any chance they can to sell more news by writing an autonomous vehicles horror story

That would mean their secret data, if published, supports writing horror stories about it.

OTOH if the data turned out to show spectacularly safe operations, that would shut off any possible negative articles.

Of all people, how likely is it that Musk is intentionally avoiding good publicity by keeping a lot of data secret?

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#284

Post by gamblor956 »

jraby3 wrote: post #277
gamblor956 wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's not what happened... Lemonade announced an entirely new product for FSD driving, which it says should cut rates for FSD vehicles And importantly, FSD driving is no longer covered by the regular policy, so FSD drivers now need two separate insurance policies if using Lemonade: the regular insurance policy, and another one just for when using FSD. The actual combined cost of the two insurance policies is mor…

Yes but they charge per mile, so the net change in price should be a substantial reduction.

Unless Tesla drivers were already paying obscene rates for car insurance, the per mile-based charge will still be as much as most people with ICE vehicles pay for their insurance coverage...and for Tesla owners this will still be an additional insurance cost on top of their original car insurance cost.

Also, important to note: Lemonade isn't actually available in the states with the largest population of Tesla owners, like California. So...basically this is a big nothingburger.

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#285

Post by razingeden »

simiones wrote: post #140
jacquesm wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One crash in 500,000 miles would merely put them on par with a human driver. > One crash every 50,000 miles would be more like having my sister behind the wheel. I'm not sure if that leads to the conclusion that you want it to.

From the tone, it seems that the poster's sister is a particularly bad driver (or at least they believe her to be). While having an autonomous car that can drive as well as even a bad human driver is definitely a major accomplishment technologically, we all know that threshold was passed a long time ago. However, if Tesla's robotaxis (with human monitors on board, let's not forget - these are not fully autonomous car…

> Remember that human drivers can also lose their license if [caught] driving too poorly.

Thank you, yes, I could have said that better. But yeah as a new human driver if I’m too sloppy and get into too many incidents , the penalty is harsh and I’d say that “none of the autonomous companies are held to the same standard” but that’s not 100% true: we do have cities and states refusing to play ball or issue permits here.

But that’s exactly right. my opinion was/is that there should be a probationary period for the first year of new autonomous technology — or major deviations from existing and proven technologies — too. And if it causes too many accidents or violations, then, it should be held to the same standard I am

Re: Tesla’s autonomous vehicles are crashing at a rate much higher tha human drivers

#286

Post by melagonster »

Spooky23 wrote: post #26
melagonster wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is why people bought Tesla. Musk promised that the car is automatic.

Don’t be silly. Why would a reasonable person think “Full Self Driving” meant that a car would fully drive itself?

At least some jury [1].

1. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...

Post reply on HN