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

51–60 of 462 posts

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

#51

Post by andrepd »

gnicholas wrote: post #2

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...

>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.

If you're still surprised by this you've not been paying attention to how Telsa operates.

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

#52

Post by jeffbee »

djanogo wrote: post #35
Xylakant wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's fair to compare to the average driver. You may be not average by virtue of not being a teenager and not driving drunk, but you're not magically immune to being run over or crashed into by one of those. So even if a hypothetical FSD capable car would not drive one yota better than you do, it cwould still make you safer by virtue of making the surrounding environment safer.

It can't be just any "average driver", they should be compared against "average driver" who just bought $40-50K NEW car.

Exactly right. The population has to be compared to people driving new Volvo S90 or M-B C300, cars that have IIHS fatality rates of zero.

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

#53

Post by user123abc »

yrral wrote: post #37
gnicholas wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good question! According to one study in LA, [1] men cause 60% of accidents. I do wonder, however, the extent to which this gap fades with age. Given that most Tesla owners are not super young, it might not make as much of a difference as the 60% number (assuming it is nationally representative) would indicate. 1: https://xtown.la/2019/12/12/women-drivers-maybe-we-need-more...

Note when looking at 40% vs 60% of accidents (assuming males and females drive the same amount) the % difference seems small, only 20%, but actually this means males cause 50% more accidents than females do (60/40=1.5).

[flagged]

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

#54

Post by shihab »

dahfizz wrote: post #29
rurp wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It also raises questions about companies producing their own stats Companies saying "trust us, we have the data to prove it" while keeping that data secret should be ignored. Especially if their CEO has a long history of blatant dishonesty! I'm most annoyed that people gave any weight to Tesla's safety statistics claims in the first place.

> Companies saying "trust us, we have the data to prove it" while keeping that data secret should be ignored. While true, I do not think this is a great heuristic. How would the average person know whether the "data" is available? Most people don't even know what "data" really is. They have never heard of CSVs or SQL. We need a better signal for consumers to know what they can and can't trust.

An average person doesn't need to directly access the data. As long as journalists or researchers can, an avg person could rely on their analysis/opinion instead.

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

#55

Post by sandworm101 »

NikolaNovak wrote: post #49
sandworm101 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And because it's Tesla, not Honda. Every car company does marketing. Few make over-the-top safety claims about their products. This is the company that decided to have its cars not stop at stop signs. Normal rules don't apply to Tesla. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60230072 "In recall documents, the electric vehicle maker notes that if certain conditions are met, the "rolling stop" feature is designed to allow…

I mean... I am "Tesla Hater" in that I don't like the direction they're proceeding in; but every human being I ever met in real actual life does rolling stops under some conditions. Last time I can confidently state that "I never rolled through a stop at very slow speed" is when I was 17, and only NOW do I realize how much of an annoying bum I was :P. So if a car does a rolling stop through a stop sign when there are…

It is one thing to note that humans regularly break the law. It is another thing to task people with programing a robot to break that law. I'm very sure that many people break the speed limit regularly. But I would never expect to get away with programing a car to break that limit. No sane person would ever tell an employee or customer that rolling stops are OK, not in writing.

And 5.6mph isn't rolling. That's beyond a walking pace. That's jogging territory. Any cop watching an intersection would ticket this.

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

#56

Post by cma »

Xylakant wrote: post #31
paxys wrote: post #22

I have felt since day 1 that "autopilot is better than the average driver!" is the most misleading fact/statistic in the industry. The "average driver" involved in an accident includes drunk drivers, road ragers, habitual speeders, teenagers, people driving in bad conditions (rain, snow), people driving without sleep and several other risky groups that most people buying Teslas aren't part of. To be worth it, the car…

I think it's fair to compare to the average driver. You may be not average by virtue of not being a teenager and not driving drunk, but you're not magically immune to being run over or crashed into by one of those. So even if a hypothetical FSD capable car would not drive one yota better than you do, it cwould still make you safer by virtue of making the surrounding environment safer.

Tesla's claim relied on inclusion of motorcycles one time, which seems super misleading and unfair.

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

#57

Post by pengaru »

Cruise-control (including Autopilot) is only applicable to a subset of ideal driving conditions anyways.

You'd make the comparison of cruise-control crash rates vs. general driving in all conditions if you were trying to abuse statistics for marketing your gimmick cruise-control feature.

It's unclear to me how you'd even attempt to normalize the data when you don't have national crash rates for cruise-control only miles in non-Tesla vehicles.

I saw mention that one of the TLA's investigating Teslas crashing into emergency vehicles subpoenaed all manufacturers of vehicles sold w/L2 cruise-control features for their safety data. Maybe that will produce some normalized-enough data for making a meaningful comparison.

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

#58

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #8
gnicholas wrote: post #2

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...

> I just thought it was odd that the company was playing quite so fast and loose with their safety claims. That's because it's marketing, not science.

[deleted]

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

#60

Post by somethoughts »

sandworm101 wrote: post #20
jacquesm wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just thought it was odd that the company was playing quite so fast and loose with their safety claims. That's because it's marketing, not science.

And because it's Tesla, not Honda. Every car company does marketing. Few make over-the-top safety claims about their products. This is the company that decided to have its cars not stop at stop signs. Normal rules don't apply to Tesla. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60230072 "In recall documents, the electric vehicle maker notes that if certain conditions are met, the "rolling stop" feature is designed to allow…

It could also be that being slightly controversial and possibly factually incorrect is by design in the "any press is good press"/"it's better to ask forgiveness than permission" kind of way. When you are a relative newcomer going against legacy incumbents with much larger ad budgets and fighting to live another day such guerrilla marketing style tactics can be advantageous.

The trick is to realize when you've jumped the shark and are now the established brand and wean yourself of the "fast and loose" approach.

Post reply on HN