Live data from Hacker News

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

twitter.com

421–430 of 462 posts

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

#421
post #234
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.

[deleted]

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

#422

As a Tesla driver, I do not trust the autopilot yet and think it is years away (if ever achievable) from level 5... The reason this study has this outcome can be because of the survivorship bias - people are letting autopilot drive only in easiest road conditions where chance for something to go wrong is smaller to begin with. I would have hard time imagining people are letting autopilot drive regularly in a tight, w…

I agree with the premise. However, this isn't survivorship bias, it's just a selection bias.

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

#423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So to summarize: - Freeways account for 93% of distance travelled with Autopilot - Freeways account for 28% of the distance travelled by regular drivers. - "vehicles on non-freeways crashed 2.01 times more often per mile" a quick back of the envelop calculation suggests merely driving on the freeway lowers accidents per mile by ~40%, which accounts for most of the difference between Autopilot and regular drivers.

There are additional factors. Teslas are on average substantially newer than the average US passenger car fleet and thus have significantly more safety features and driver assistance tech, are better maintained, etc. If Tesla compared only to vehicles of similar age and class (Audi/BMW/Mercedes etc) their stats would be much less favorable.

I've driven someone's new Tesla. The rear right door didn't align with the body. New, fresh from the factory.

Please don't compare it to high end german cars.

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

#424

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.

All other people need non fungible cars.

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

#425
post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does that mean that expectation is all automated cars will go exactly the speed limit on the left lane of North American superhighways? It’s already against road rules to stay in the passing lane when cars behind wish to pass, regardless of the speed limit, or if you’re already driving at it. If cars behind desire to overtake, give way. This is already codified. No need to blame the cars or the self-driving tech. I…

Not in California. Left lane fast, right lane slow isn't the law, and you can pass in whatever lane you'd like. Studies show that, adjusted for congestion and weather, SF Bay Area drivers have some of the highest accidents per mile in the country.

Seriously? That feels unpredictable and stressful, whereas I feel driving should be as predictable as possible.

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

#426
post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are additional factors. Teslas are on average substantially newer than the average US passenger car fleet and thus have significantly more safety features and driver assistance tech, are better maintained, etc. If Tesla compared only to vehicles of similar age and class (Audi/BMW/Mercedes etc) their stats would be much less favorable.

> are better maintained, etc. Recent statistics released by TüV^1 show that among relatively new cars Tesla competes with Dacia for the highest failure rate among all cars that go through Germanies mandatory road worthiness tests. ^1 https://www.pcwelt.de/news/TUeV-warnt-vor-typischer-Schwachs...

Go find the HN discussion on this report. German processes and bureaucracy surrounding road worthiness checks is not favourable towards non-established car brands like Tesla.

In short: big car brands' cars go through a preliminary check at manufacturers' licensed dealerships, and only after that get sent to the government's checks. It enables manufacturers to fix cars before independent verification so their safety numbers look great. Tesla doesn't have this kind of extensive network for "pre-checks".

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

#427
post #44

I was just watching this video of a Tesla trying and miserably failing to drive itself through the streets of Boston: https://twitter.com/TaylorOgan/status/1488555256162172928 A number of these near-crashes seem to be pretty odd errors (a couple of times it just decided to drive on the wrong side of the street?) -- albeit ones that one _could_ see drivers unfamiliar with the area making. If a human driver started dri…

In those interventions it's not 100% clear the car would have generated an accident. They get very "close" so the driver intervenes. And of course this is the safe thing to do. But highly sensitive AI driving should be able to come much closer to crashing than the average human, without issue. Perhaps it's the drivers that will need to adapt. Is Tesla accounting for this fear factor already?

I see what you’re getting at but no I don’t think AI driving is meant to get much closer than the average driver. I think in some cases driving on the wrong side of the road and drifting or not detecting objects is certainly 100% failure without need to experience a crash. An AI needs to drive at safe distances just like humans until and only when there are no more humans behind the wheel.

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

#428

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...

Even after adjusting, it does look like autopilot is slightly safer (although not a strong enough effect to say for sure). It doesn't appear to be worse , so good enough to allow it, IMHO. I actually wonder if there's another effect: Drivers only eligible for beta FSD if they meet a super high safety score (which isn't a perfect metric, but probably better than nothing). That incentivizes good driving even when FSD n…

After correcting for age, it becomes less safe

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

#429
post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are better maintained, etc. Recent statistics released by TüV^1 show that among relatively new cars Tesla competes with Dacia for the highest failure rate among all cars that go through Germanies mandatory road worthiness tests. ^1 https://www.pcwelt.de/news/TUeV-warnt-vor-typischer-Schwachs...

Go find the HN discussion on this report. German processes and bureaucracy surrounding road worthiness checks is not favourable towards non-established car brands like Tesla. In short: big car brands' cars go through a preliminary check at manufacturers' licensed dealerships, and only after that get sent to the government's checks. It enables manufacturers to fix cars before independent verification so their safety n…

You're explaining (one of) the reasons Tesla is failing at the metric. Far from showing the metric is flawed, you're exposing the value of a dealer system and what Tesla's customers are losing because there isn't one.

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

#430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it sounds like it's Simpson's paradox [1] at work. I had always wondered why many people are slow to accept self-driving cars despite the claims of them being statistically safer. I think that explains it --- to make consumers confident about the self-driving technologies, it is not enough for them to be able to handle the "easy" kind of driving (e.g. on highway and under relatively good visibility conditions) bet…

> it is not enough for them to be able to handle the "easy" kind of driving (e.g. on highway and under relatively good visibility conditions) better than humans Is there any evidence that they actually do the easy stuff better than humans? I would want to see it compared with cars of similar age and cost driving on similar roads with similar aged people in control of the vehicle. I'm pretty skeptical that such a comp…

robots are better at reaction times, spatial awareness, impulse control. There are obvious advantages that are capable of making up for the short-comings of the NN implementation. Essentially, a lot of hard decision making is avoidable with proper awareness and caution.

I don't know what else to advise people who want evidence. The cars are real things you can experience...

Post reply on HN