[IshKebab]

Paying attention while a computer does a task for you automatically and correctly 99.9% of the time is basically impossible though. That point has been made many times before.

I wonder if this will paradoxically lead to Tesla's becoming less safe overall as the software improves, because errors will start to become uncommon enough that people really stop paying attention.

From the sound of it it is currently unreliable enough that most people know that they really do have to pay attention.

[panick21_]

> That point has been made many times before.

It has been assert many times without much actual evidence.

> I wonder if this will paradoxically lead to Tesla's becoming less safe overall as the software improves

Again, something that people on HN are often totally sure is true but I have never seen any actual evidence that is true.

The believe in this is based on some specific cases in the airline industry that I am not sure necessarily translate to driving.

[LightG]

The bottom line is that FSD as sold is nowhere near ready for prime time, still. As in, you always have to supervise it.

Who's wants to be their cars supervisor?

For me, it's either fully drive and enjoy your driving ... or full FSD and relax ... if it's somewhere in between, per Tesla, it's pointless (and don't get me wrong, lane assist and cruise control are handy, but they've been around for eons).

[panick21_]

Well that's moving the goal post.

Fact is tons of people use lots of driver assistance.

[LightG]

No, not really. I mean, I'll use lane-assist and cruise control for very simple situations on a motorway. That's it. I know what the car is going to do, but I'm still driving and that's fine.

It would drive me nuts to have to supervise an FSD car through a city or any situation beyond the above simple motorway situation.

You'll never convince me otherwise. I don't want to be my cars manager.

[IshKebab]

> It has been assert many times without much actual evidence.

Probably because it is so obviously true surely? Do you really doubt it?

We've already seen Teslas crash due to autopilot failures in ways that definitely wouldn't have happened if people were actually paying attention (e.g. driving into the side of lorries) so there is at least some evidence anyway.

[panick21_]

> Probably because it is so obviously true surely? Do you really doubt it?

Yeah. I do doubt it. The question is about if the fall off of attention is larger then fall of of amount incidents. And then how many of those incidents are of a critically where you can not overcome the not paying attention part.

Its not at all clear to me if its a net negative in security, in fact I would suspect the opposite.

> We've already seen Teslas crash due to autopilot failures in ways that definitely wouldn't have happened if people were actually paying attention

Not really. We have seen Tesla crash mostly in situation where they crash all the time already. And that analysis is prove of existence, not prove of significance and net negative security. You need to actually show that this happens MORE often if Autopilot is engaged.

I have seen 100s of videos were Autopilot avoids a vehicle cutting Tesla off for example. In many of those cases even a human driver would not have react so quickly. Most of those cases would not result in death but some could. You need to actually take all of that into account.

[kwizzt]

That’s a good point. I think that’s a phase that we’ll go through during the development and it’s inevitable, but that’s just my opinion.