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.
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…)
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
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…)