[ixfo]

Because we do take people's licenses away if they repeatedly cause accidents?

Treat the Tesla FSD as a human driver and it would've had its license revoked many years ago. It's only through close supervision by humans that accidents have been as infrequent as they have been.

The clip in question, if a human hadn't been paying attention, FSD would've knocked a cyclist over - at best. Do that enough times as a human - not many - and you'll be disqualified from driving pretty promptly in most civilised countries.

[boardwaalk]

Interesting to treat FSD a single driver, when it’s driven further than any human driver has many times over. Objectively, that is a bit of a double standard.

[zardo]

In my state vehicular manslaughter is still vehicular manslaughter, no matter how many miles you drive.

[ummonk]

It’s arguably an inappropriate standard, but not a double standard. If as a human driver you drive a bunch but get into accidents frequently, they won’t make any allowances for the fact that you drive a lot when deciding whether to suspend your license.

[plutonorm]

but they obviously should.

[whiddershins]

That’s not true multiplied across the hours and miles it has driven.

No single human driver could do this amount of driving, so comparing all FSD mistakes to a single human is an error.

[klyrs]

Do we apply the same logic to the 737MAX?

[ummonk]

The 737 MAX actually had a really bad rate of fatal accidents per hour of flight. Like if you flew a certain number of hours per year on the 737 MAX prior to the MCAS fix you’d be more likely to die than if you drove for the same number of hours.