Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fucking_tragedy 2625 days ago
> an auto-car that crashed at a rate 1/10th of humans

This is incredibly generous assumption, especially given the fact that cars with advertised Autopilot features, like Tesla's offerings, actually make accidents more likely[1][2]. Compared to the driver fatality rate in other luxury vehicles, Tesla's offerings nearly triple driver fatality[3].

This is like theorizing about a car that survives 99.9% of all impacts at any speed. It doesn't exist, nor is there any indication that it will exist, and it doesn't serve a purpose other than to prop up a contrived argument.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/02/in-2017-the-feds-said-t...

[2] https://driving.ca/tesla/model-s/auto-news/news/iihs-study-s...

[3] https://medium.com/@MidwesternHedgi/teslas-driver-fatality-r...

3 comments

No assumption, just a serious question. I agree no one is near that good yet. But it was a question that people should be thinking about. How good will be good enough to let the auto-vehicles operate on the roads?
> This is like theorizing about a car that survives 99.9% of all impacts at any speed. It doesn't exist, nor is there any indication that it will exist

now THIS is a strawman

quoting from your [1]

> So does that mean that Autosteer actually makes crashes 59 percent more likely? Probably not.