This is one of those times you should realize how misleading statistics can be. Can you think of what might be a more informative measurement if we are actually after the truth?
Love it haha. I don’t care about Tesla at all, but including the share of miles driven on Autopilot versus other companies’ tech would be much more revealing. If 90% of miles driven were on Autopilot, they would be outperforming their competitors.
You’re being pedantic then. The issue is not the stats because the fundamental is they should not be beta testing this on public roads. Have you signed any waivers if one kills you or maims you? I know I haven’t.
It is relevant when your talking about the application of statistics when the statistics don’t matter because there should be 0 km tested on public roads without everyone signed on.
I understand what you’re saying. I’m telling you you’re wrong as is everyone else. The only statistic that should matter in this scenario is 0. Hence you’re being pedantic and hiding behind “hurr durr this is how you do statistics”.
Anyways, I’ve made my point. You bicker with others around breakdowns on highway vs construction vs city traffic and miles driven.
It’s just that what you’re saying is meaningless. There is no way to test things fully until you deploy them. If they did their best in private lots then said it is out of testing, then got in accidents, you would be saying they never tested functionality in the real world.
I mostly disagree with their pitch to the public and marketing. It should have been pitched as advanced cruise, the way many cars have. I think it has misled buyers into being entirely too trusting of the Autopilot for its current abilities.
It would be nice if the above statistic mentioned the ratio of Tesla’s compared to other cars. If 90% of cars with autopilot are trslas but they only account for 70% of crashes, that’s a good thing. There’s also the problem with wording, driving assist does includes a lot more than just a fully self driving car.
But the only important statistic is how likely a self driving car is to get into an accident compared to a human driver.
People really have to learn to seperate the tech from the man. Elon Musk is a piece of shit, that doesn’t mean everything he has his hand in is. Self driving cars are cool as fuck and if they aren’t safer than human drivers atm, they clearly quickly will be.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) cautioned against using the numbers to compare automakers, saying it did not weight them by the number of vehicles from each manufacturer or how many miles those vehicles traveled.
I’m trying to find the Tesla:others ratio, but that’s proving a bit difficult.
A bit of a moot point in my eyes as I consider all 400 accidents unacceptable, but you are right, I shouldn’t use stats just to shit on Tesla.
Close, but usage matters too. Just owning a car with driver assist doesn’t mean you use it at the same rate. Share of miles driven with assist features would be better.
Then if you want to get gritty, I guess we could try to quantify how complex the miles were. Dense city miles and construction zones should count more.
I guess accidents per thousand/million cars on road would be more representative.
Think of it like this, if ~70% of all autonomous driving cars were Teslas, and they have a ~70% contribution to the accident volume, then they’re as bad as the competition.
I’m not saying Tesla’s auto pilot doesn’t have problems, but this particular metric is not the best one to say how it is compared to the competition.
Personal opinion: No manufacturer has an auto pilot capable enough to be on the road.
Another point that rarely seems to be accounted for is what type of miles are being used for comparison.
Aggregate autopilot crash rates may look good compared to non-autopilot rates, but if autopilot cannot be used in inclement weather, challenging roads, or other risky situations, then the statistic is misleading. (Statistics??? Misleading??? Well, I never…)
This is one of those times you should realize how misleading statistics can be. Can you think of what might be a more informative measurement if we are actually after the truth?
The number of inches of Elon’s dick is in your throat?
Love it haha. I don’t care about Tesla at all, but including the share of miles driven on Autopilot versus other companies’ tech would be much more revealing. If 90% of miles driven were on Autopilot, they would be outperforming their competitors.
How does that make it any more “right” that they’re testing on public roads?
Will you bend over for Elon when one of his “tests” ram a minivan on a highway killing a family of 5?
“Oh but this was one accident out of 5000 test miles driven”
I am not defending him, just saying it’s wrong to use misleading stats even with a good point.
You’re being pedantic then. The issue is not the stats because the fundamental is they should not be beta testing this on public roads. Have you signed any waivers if one kills you or maims you? I know I haven’t.
You should go to another part of the comments, then, because over here we were discussing the application of the statistic.
It is relevant when your talking about the application of statistics when the statistics don’t matter because there should be 0 km tested on public roads without everyone signed on.
I understand what you’re saying. I’m telling you you’re wrong as is everyone else. The only statistic that should matter in this scenario is 0. Hence you’re being pedantic and hiding behind “hurr durr this is how you do statistics”.
Anyways, I’ve made my point. You bicker with others around breakdowns on highway vs construction vs city traffic and miles driven.
It’s just that what you’re saying is meaningless. There is no way to test things fully until you deploy them. If they did their best in private lots then said it is out of testing, then got in accidents, you would be saying they never tested functionality in the real world.
I mostly disagree with their pitch to the public and marketing. It should have been pitched as advanced cruise, the way many cars have. I think it has misled buyers into being entirely too trusting of the Autopilot for its current abilities.
Okay mate, why don’t you show us all what the “more informative measurement” is for this?
It would be nice if the above statistic mentioned the ratio of Tesla’s compared to other cars. If 90% of cars with autopilot are trslas but they only account for 70% of crashes, that’s a good thing. There’s also the problem with wording, driving assist does includes a lot more than just a fully self driving car.
But the only important statistic is how likely a self driving car is to get into an accident compared to a human driver.
People really have to learn to seperate the tech from the man. Elon Musk is a piece of shit, that doesn’t mean everything he has his hand in is. Self driving cars are cool as fuck and if they aren’t safer than human drivers atm, they clearly quickly will be.
Yes, you’re correct. From source:
I’m trying to find the Tesla:others ratio, but that’s proving a bit difficult.
A bit of a moot point in my eyes as I consider all 400 accidents unacceptable, but you are right, I shouldn’t use stats just to shit on Tesla.
Close, but usage matters too. Just owning a car with driver assist doesn’t mean you use it at the same rate. Share of miles driven with assist features would be better.
Then if you want to get gritty, I guess we could try to quantify how complex the miles were. Dense city miles and construction zones should count more.
I guess accidents per thousand/million cars on road would be more representative.
Think of it like this, if ~70% of all autonomous driving cars were Teslas, and they have a ~70% contribution to the accident volume, then they’re as bad as the competition.
I’m not saying Tesla’s auto pilot doesn’t have problems, but this particular metric is not the best one to say how it is compared to the competition.
Personal opinion: No manufacturer has an auto pilot capable enough to be on the road.
Another point that rarely seems to be accounted for is what type of miles are being used for comparison.
Aggregate autopilot crash rates may look good compared to non-autopilot rates, but if autopilot cannot be used in inclement weather, challenging roads, or other risky situations, then the statistic is misleading. (Statistics??? Misleading??? Well, I never…)
100% of the crashes in question were caused by autopilot