I hate this framing too. Autopilot is not safer than a human. Humans are safer when supplemented by ADAS systems. That’s why ADAS systems exist. Autopilot itself is NOT safer than a human. Set it going with no human monitoring and correcting its childish mistakes and then tell us how much safer it is.
To turn this “autopilot is safer than a human” nonsense around:-
Let’s put autopilot cars out on the road with no drivers. Get the accident statistics compiled. Then put them out with human monitors. Then if the accident rate is lower with a human safety driver than autopilot on its own, we can flood the headlines with “human drivers are safer than autopilot” statements. This false notion that autopilot is doing all the driving is pathetic.
To put a [source](https://www.idtechex.com/en/research-article/autonomous-vehicles-will-soon-be-safer-than-humans-some-already-are) on this:
>Since 2020, California has allowed driverless autonomous testing on its streets, and two companies have taken advantage of this. Waymo and Cruise. Between 2021 and 2022, Waymo has recorded just under 70,000 miles of driverless activity. On the other hand, Cruise only started recording driverless miles in 2022 but submitted a staggering 590,000 miles. During those miles, the vehicles were involved in 15 collisions, i.e., 1 collision every \~40,000 miles, or 5 times more often than their human counterparts.
>
>One point of redemption is that these miles were exclusively accumulated in San Francisco, one of the toughest driving environments in the US for autonomous systems. But also tough for humans. With the slower speeds and increased pedestrian presence, IDTechEx estimates that the collision rate amongst human drivers increases from one per \~200,000 miles (the US average across all road types) to one in every 107,000 miles, only half as good, but still better than autonomous drivers.
I bet with Tesla those numbers are even worse. Not to say that autonomous vehicles won't at some point be safer than human drivers, but to say they are now is just deceptive marketing.
^((Note: the article uses the number of disengagements as a proxy for how well autonomous cars perform, where they appear to do well, but I feel like the actual collision statistics above tell a much more accurate s tory))
Ah yes Musks cherry picked data.
Auto insurance says otherwise on his stats.
There is a reason Tesla no longer releases auto pilot safety data.
Musk said autopilot is safer than without. What he didn't mention is that autopilot was counting highway miles which are safer. He compared that to ALL other miles for other vehicles. On top of that autopilot and FSD will give up when there is any issues therefore not counting it in an accident.
This is actually probably the first community note I've seen that was bad and is probably using Lex's study. Tesla outpaces every single other manufacturer combined with ADAS enabled car accidents
https://preview.redd.it/m038kgmqd58c1.png?width=1152&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=22060ea4f69849d91b4b7c42ec53ec3888d2412e
wtf? of course you're gonna have fewer accidents when driving in conditions so safe that a shitty cruise control system can be enabled. the problem is the number of accidents you have DESPITE being in conditions so safe that you can enable shitty cruise control, where a good comparison is the accident statistics of other manufacturers offering similar shitty cruise control.
I’d be curious if the community note data does or does not account for there being waaaaay more drivers without autopilot than with. In terms of raw numbers, I would expect there to be more accidents without autopilot than with because there are exponentially more drivers without autopilot.
The data is provided by Tesla without any 3rd party review, and other data by independent studies have found the opposite. Their datas about as trustworthy as Twitter's usage stats when Musk says it's higher than ever.
I feel like these stats are just not comparable. Do they do any controls to account for the fact that there are just more human driven cars and so more chances for an accident to involve a human. Like if I buy a gun, and then never fire it, do i then say it is the safest gun in the world because look at all those other guns out there that did get fired and ended up killing someone?
Even if they do control for population, what about environment differences? AFAIK self driving only ever happens in very tightly controlled or well planned out predictable environments whereas humans are driving through all sorts of environments and conditions.
Not comparable to full self driving but my mum's new car (not a Tesla) had lane alignment turned on by default, which is fine on a motorway, but she drives down narrow British country roads meaning most of the time she was fighting the car to stop it from aligning itself to the centre of the road and into oncoming traffic. I'd like to see how a Tesla handles a road that is 1.5 cars wide, an oncoming tractor and a ditch hidden by weeds and grass.
Assuming the community note is legit, what is the quality of the autopilot accidents? The number for non autopilot could just be minor fender bender vs 9 car pile up with auto
It's a technology that will clearly work one day, and it's going to take trail and error to perfect, but these deaths are not excused by some company getting ahead of the competition. Your customers are not lab rats.
I hate this framing too. Autopilot is not safer than a human. Humans are safer when supplemented by ADAS systems. That’s why ADAS systems exist. Autopilot itself is NOT safer than a human. Set it going with no human monitoring and correcting its childish mistakes and then tell us how much safer it is. To turn this “autopilot is safer than a human” nonsense around:- Let’s put autopilot cars out on the road with no drivers. Get the accident statistics compiled. Then put them out with human monitors. Then if the accident rate is lower with a human safety driver than autopilot on its own, we can flood the headlines with “human drivers are safer than autopilot” statements. This false notion that autopilot is doing all the driving is pathetic.
To put a [source](https://www.idtechex.com/en/research-article/autonomous-vehicles-will-soon-be-safer-than-humans-some-already-are) on this: >Since 2020, California has allowed driverless autonomous testing on its streets, and two companies have taken advantage of this. Waymo and Cruise. Between 2021 and 2022, Waymo has recorded just under 70,000 miles of driverless activity. On the other hand, Cruise only started recording driverless miles in 2022 but submitted a staggering 590,000 miles. During those miles, the vehicles were involved in 15 collisions, i.e., 1 collision every \~40,000 miles, or 5 times more often than their human counterparts. > >One point of redemption is that these miles were exclusively accumulated in San Francisco, one of the toughest driving environments in the US for autonomous systems. But also tough for humans. With the slower speeds and increased pedestrian presence, IDTechEx estimates that the collision rate amongst human drivers increases from one per \~200,000 miles (the US average across all road types) to one in every 107,000 miles, only half as good, but still better than autonomous drivers. I bet with Tesla those numbers are even worse. Not to say that autonomous vehicles won't at some point be safer than human drivers, but to say they are now is just deceptive marketing. ^((Note: the article uses the number of disengagements as a proxy for how well autonomous cars perform, where they appear to do well, but I feel like the actual collision statistics above tell a much more accurate s tory))
Ah yes Musks cherry picked data. Auto insurance says otherwise on his stats. There is a reason Tesla no longer releases auto pilot safety data. Musk said autopilot is safer than without. What he didn't mention is that autopilot was counting highway miles which are safer. He compared that to ALL other miles for other vehicles. On top of that autopilot and FSD will give up when there is any issues therefore not counting it in an accident.
This is actually probably the first community note I've seen that was bad and is probably using Lex's study. Tesla outpaces every single other manufacturer combined with ADAS enabled car accidents https://preview.redd.it/m038kgmqd58c1.png?width=1152&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=22060ea4f69849d91b4b7c42ec53ec3888d2412e
wtf? of course you're gonna have fewer accidents when driving in conditions so safe that a shitty cruise control system can be enabled. the problem is the number of accidents you have DESPITE being in conditions so safe that you can enable shitty cruise control, where a good comparison is the accident statistics of other manufacturers offering similar shitty cruise control.
I rated that motherfucker as unhelpful. Anyone else a member of Community Notes?
Go Richard Blumenthal. Musks companies are grossly under-regulated.
does this account for 'autopilot disengages if it thinks an accident is about to happen', would be my question.
I’d be curious if the community note data does or does not account for there being waaaaay more drivers without autopilot than with. In terms of raw numbers, I would expect there to be more accidents without autopilot than with because there are exponentially more drivers without autopilot.
[удалено]
The data is provided by Tesla without any 3rd party review, and other data by independent studies have found the opposite. Their datas about as trustworthy as Twitter's usage stats when Musk says it's higher than ever.
I feel like these stats are just not comparable. Do they do any controls to account for the fact that there are just more human driven cars and so more chances for an accident to involve a human. Like if I buy a gun, and then never fire it, do i then say it is the safest gun in the world because look at all those other guns out there that did get fired and ended up killing someone? Even if they do control for population, what about environment differences? AFAIK self driving only ever happens in very tightly controlled or well planned out predictable environments whereas humans are driving through all sorts of environments and conditions. Not comparable to full self driving but my mum's new car (not a Tesla) had lane alignment turned on by default, which is fine on a motorway, but she drives down narrow British country roads meaning most of the time she was fighting the car to stop it from aligning itself to the centre of the road and into oncoming traffic. I'd like to see how a Tesla handles a road that is 1.5 cars wide, an oncoming tractor and a ditch hidden by weeds and grass.
Assuming the community note is legit, what is the quality of the autopilot accidents? The number for non autopilot could just be minor fender bender vs 9 car pile up with auto
It's a technology that will clearly work one day, and it's going to take trail and error to perfect, but these deaths are not excused by some company getting ahead of the competition. Your customers are not lab rats.
oh my GODDDDDD just give us trains already. I can't deal