Tesla Slashes Prices

[Ghost Ryder]

Of course all of us at the end of the day decide to take on measured risk.

You and I just disagree on the level that’s acceptable.

Even if “as a whole” autopilot is several times safer than the average driver, are you going to accept it if there’s still a moderate chance it’ll try to kill you at some point?

It is interesting that Tesla is sharing the crash data, seems somewhat transparent…….. until you realize that they also claim to not be able to link your data with your car, and they don’t really detail what data they’re comparing to.

Without the second part, it’s very easy to make things look better than they actually are. For sure would rather some 3rd party data to back it up.

quick google search just proves that point:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/08/technology/tesla-autopilot-safety-data.html

“
Every three months, Tesla publishes a safety report that provides the number of miles between crashes when drivers use the company’s driver-assistance system, Autopilot, and the number of miles between crashes when they do not.
These figures always show that accidents are less frequent with Autopilot, a collection of technologies that can steer, brake and accelerate Tesla vehicles on its own.
But the numbers are misleading. Autopilot is used mainly for highway driving, which is generally twice as safe as driving on city streets, according to the Department of Transportation. Fewer crashes may occur with Autopilot merely because it is typically used in safer situations.”





But yeah, I want any computer driven vehicles to be damn near perfect. Because I can accept that I am not a perfect driver, but I definitely won’t accept my car trying to kill me.

It's not a moderate chance that it will kill you. It's in fact really small percent, smaller than if you're driving yourself. People have the same fear when they're not in control. This is seen when people have fear of flying. Even though flying is much safer than driving based on miles traveled, some people still will not fly because they have to give up some form of control. All things being equal, if data show that AP/FSD or any other new automated driving system out there is 5-7x safer in similar conditions, then yeah, I would rather the computer drive.

As far as the last quote from NYT article. If taken at whole value, it says that driving on highway is 2x as safe as city street. So to extrapolate, base on the most recent data, for all cars in the US, there is one accident every 650k miles. Assuming that this is all on city street, which it's not, but let's assume worse case scenario, than that means that on the highway, it would equate to 1 crash every 1.3 million miles. This is still much more frequent than tesla autopilot that has one crash for every 4.8million miles. So about 3.5x less frequent. I call that a win.

Sponsored

 

[Ghost Ryder]

This was musks personal decision against his engineers. So Tesla was not confident, Musk was. It was a choice on ego, similar to his over-hype of what's available now vs what's coming. And yes it is coming, AI in cities and once national highway and safety oversight signs off by all means let it loose. For now keep it in regulated zones.

From what I read, the radar at the time was adding noise and making autopilot and FSD less reliable.

Apparently they have developed a new high resolution radar that may be going in new models now. We'll see.

What are regulated zones? the city of SF or Phoenix are pretty congested urban areas. How is that more regulated than any other city? At some point you have to release it to the general pubic. BC and and all other lane centering driver assistance are just released in the wild too.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

You can't win with the 'stans.

Nice counterpoint. Great way to shut down any conversation. Just call your opponent a name, that will show them that you're right.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

Also Tesla has no radar, competitors do, so tell me again about how Tesla has more potential capability.

There's more than way to achieve assisted, self driving. Tesla initially had radar and vision, then went vision only when there data found that radar added noise and made self driving less reliable. Rumor has it that they now have developed a high resolution radar which may be implemented back into their new cars. we'll see.

But as far has how they have more potential. Well, to start of with, they their cars have much higher computer processing power which is needed for automated driving. They have more cameras and better placed cameras. I don't know if there cameras are of higher quality or resolution than the MME, but it appears clearer on the screen. Further more they have much more data, of orders of magnitude than Ford or GM which is used to program their self driving suite.

in its current iteration, FSD is able to navigate city streets, make turns at intersection. etc. Is is as good as an avg driver? No, not yet. But getting better with each OTA release. the MME can not do any of that, nor will it be able to with the current hardware.

 

[SWO]

It's not a moderate chance that it will kill you. It's in fact really small percent, smaller than if you're driving yourself.

Watch this video (Iatest software) and tell us this is safer than driving yourself:

 

[Ghost Ryder]

Watch this video (Iatest software) and tell us this is safer than driving yourself:

If you read my response, I never claimed that FSD was safer than driving yourself. In fact I clearly said that FSD was NOT safer than the avg driver. I argued that AP and BC is safer than the avg driver. Big difference.

 

[SWO]

If you read my response, I never claimed that FSD was safer than driving yourself. In fact I clearly said that FSD was NOT safer than the avg driver. I argued that AP and BC is safer than the avg driver. Big difference.

I literally quoted you saying there was a smaller chance of death than driving yourself, but ok.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

I literally quoted you saying there was a smaller chance of death than driving yourself, but ok.

This is what I wrote:

It's not a moderate chance that it will kill you. It's in fact really small percent, smaller than if you're driving yourself. People have the same fear when they're not in control. This is seen when people have fear of flying. Even though flying is much safer than driving based on miles traveled, some people still will not fly because they have to give up some form of control. All things being equal, if data show that AP/FSD or any other new automated driving system out there is 5-7x safer in similar conditions, then yeah, I would rather the computer drive.


the IF is important in that statement. So Detail does matter. On the following quotes, I clearly stated that FSD currently is not safer than the avg driver.

 

[SWO]

This is what I wrote:

It's not a moderate chance that it will kill you. It's in fact really small percent, smaller than if you're driving yourself. People have the same fear when they're not in control. This is seen when people have fear of flying. Even though flying is much safer than driving based on miles traveled, some people still will not fly because they have to give up some form of control. All things being equal, if data show that AP/FSD or any other new automated driving system out there is 5-7x safer in similar conditions, then yeah, I would rather the computer drive.


the IF is important in that statement. So Detail does matter. On the following quotes, I clearly stated that FSD currently is not safer than the avg driver.

I think my understanding of your quote is pretty clear, but ok. Regardless, glad we agree now that FSD has major problems.

 

[Billyk24]

There's a lot of arguments you can make on why the MME is better than the MY, but you can't seriously equate Blue Cruise with FSD. By they way, autopilot is included in the base price of the car, and it's essentially blue cruise. FSD is what 15k buys you. If you don't know the difference you should check it out. It's always updating, the the most recent update is pretty impressive. Still not there yet in term of full autonomous driving, but impressive none the less.

I suggest watch youtube videos that include the whole drive vs click bait snap shots. You'll get a better more realistic impression of FSD, vs the agenda that people want to push, either for or against tesla.

Until Tesla's own legal team states FSD is not level 2 to the California DOT then we can discuss whether that $15k fee is a cash cow for the company.

 

[Mach1E]

It's not a moderate chance that it will kill you. It's in fact really small percent, smaller than if you're driving yourself. People have the same fear when they're not in control. This is seen when people have fear of flying. Even though flying is much safer than driving based on miles traveled, some people still will not fly because they have to give up some form of control. All things being equal, if data show that AP/FSD or any other new automated driving system out there is 5-7x safer in similar conditions, then yeah, I would rather the computer drive.

As far as the last quote from NYT article. If taken at whole value, it says that driving on highway is 2x as safe as city street. So to extrapolate, base on the most recent data, for all cars in the US, there is one accident every 650k miles. Assuming that this is all on city street, which it's not, but let's assume worse case scenario, than that means that on the highway, it would equate to 1 crash every 1.3 million miles. This is still much more frequent than tesla autopilot that has one crash for every 4.8million miles. So about 3.5x less frequent. I call that a win.

The important part about the NYT article is that “we don’t know” if it’s any safer than the average driver.

And at the very least, Tesla is being dishonest about the data they’re using to say it is safer.

We need a real 3rd party source to give us honest data. We can’t trust Musk to do so.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

Until Tesla's own legal team states FSD is not level 2 to the California DOT then we can discuss whether that $15k fee is a cash cow for the company.

You guys are fixated on the name, and not what it can do. I agree that FSD is not a great name for the current capabilities. But I would hope that someone ready to plunk down 15k would actually read the description and do the minimum research into its capabilities.

As far as being a cash cow, Tesla is allowed to make money and reinvest it as it sees fit. Nothing wrong will being profitable.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

The important part about the NYT article is that “we don’t know” if it’s any safer than the average driver.

And at the very least, Tesla is being dishonest about the data they’re using to say it is safer.

We need a real 3rd party source to give us honest data. We can’t trust Musk to do so.

How is tesla being dishonest? They put their data out there. Its up to the reader to interpret it. If theres no data for NHTSA regarding accidents on the highway and miles driven, then how is that Tesla's fault? If there was that data, then it would be pretty easy to compare to Tesla's autopilot data.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

I think my understanding of your quote is pretty clear, but ok. Regardless, glad we agree now that FSD has major problems.

You're understanding is incorrect based on my quote. And notice in my quote I also included non Tesla automated systems. We always agreed on FSD, that in it's current form, it's not safer than the avg driver. But I believe that it is improving with each OTA update, and it may be on par one day. It has shown significant improvement with every update.

Regardless, the driver will always have to pay attention and be ready to intervene. Just like BC and AP or Supercruise now.

 

[Mach1E]

How is tesla being dishonest? They put their data out there. Its up to the reader to interpret it. If theres no data for NHTSA regarding accidents on the highway and miles driven, then how is that Tesla's fault? If there was that data, then it would be pretty easy to compare to Tesla's autopilot data.

Because it’s dishonest.

It’s not a fair comparison and Tesla knows it.

Would it be fair to compare Tesla autopilot miles per crash to miles per crash at a NASCAR track? Of course not. While it could be accurate, it’s purposefully misleading.

“It’s up to the reader to interpret?” Sounds like a scammer saying “buyer beware……”

And guess what? There IS that data. NHTSA knows exactly how many crashes happened on the highway. But Tesla chose to use the data that makes themselves look better instead. That’s what the NYT article was about.

Sponsored