Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

FUD I believe in. There is an enormous leap from a safe Level 2 system to a safe Level 3-5 system.

this stuff? or another flavor
IMG_2260.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2260.JPG
    IMG_2260.JPG
    554.2 KB · Views: 15
  • IMG_2260.JPG
    IMG_2260.JPG
    554.2 KB · Views: 15
  • Informative
Reactions: powertoold
I believe in the Neural Net!

And really, you have to believe in Elon. Guy has a great track record, for the most part.
Well, Elon is promising robotaxis which are by definition Level 4-5 and I think those will be safe. My concern is with Level 2 systems that are advanced enough to cause driver complacency (like what Google tested and abandoned). I think the current implementation of Autopilot is right at the limit of what a Level 2 system can be. It's just bad enough to keep you on your toes and keep sane people from texting, falling asleep, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pilotSteve

Tam

Well-Known Member
Nov 25, 2012
11,829
10,866
Visalia, CA
...like what Google tested and abandoned...

I think Google's logic is faulty, emotional and not based on facts.

It's just like thinking all immigrants are rapists but the statistic doesn't support that.

Google needs to look at the statistics that when people misused and abused their system, how many got into accidents?

Whether people use their system or not, accidents still occurred.

It's a disservice to the public that they abandoned this L-2 project.
 

jordanair45

2019 Model 3 SR+ w/ FSD
Mar 28, 2012
238
186
Bay Area
Well, Elon is promising robotaxis which are by definition Level 4-5 and I think those will be safe. My concern is with Level 2 systems that are advanced enough to cause driver complacency (like what Google tested and abandoned). I think the current implementation of Autopilot is right at the limit of what a Level 2 system can be. It's just bad enough to keep you on your toes and keep sane people from texting, falling asleep, etc.

I see people doing that without any autonomy. As a matter of fact, I was on the 101 with autopilot on and some girl swerved into my lane while doing her make up, and autopilot avoided any contact.

Hell, even if everyone just had autopilot/NOA, and electric cars, I'm 100% for it!!
 
Tesla isn't the only company offering level 2, pretty much all car mfgs have some form of lane and traffic assist.
Yep. Most other companies could easily implement the type of lane keeping that Tesla has (after all AP1 used Mobileye tech which is what most other manufacturers are using). Instead they choose to have a drunk driver mode where the car will bounce between lane lines. Tesla's statistics on safety are misleading since they don't take into account when and where autopilot is being used. For example, maybe users aren't using autopilot during snow storms and maybe accident rates go up during snow storms. It seems like that could skew the results.
My real concern is about what happens when the systems become advanced enough to require very infrequent user intervention, say once every 10,000 miles? Will people still be alert if they haven't had to touch the steering wheel in 10,000 miles? I'm skeptical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Firedog7881

Tam

Well-Known Member
Nov 25, 2012
11,829
10,866
Visalia, CA
...what happens when the systems become advanced enough to require very infrequent user intervention, say once every 10,000 miles? Will people still be alert if they haven't had to touch the steering wheel in 10,000 miles? I'm skeptical.

At this rate, that day will be decades from now.

Robotaxi will be here but I expect the nagging system will still be enforced until the system will be graduated from the current "beta" level.
 

Tam

Well-Known Member
Nov 25, 2012
11,829
10,866
Visalia, CA
  • Informative
Reactions: Daniel in SD

AlanSubie4Life

Efficiency Obsessed Member
Oct 22, 2018
14,274
18,406
San Diego
Google needs to look at the statistics that when people misused and abused their system, how many got into accidents?

Whether people use their system or not, accidents still occurred.

It's possible what you're saying is true. It's too bad we don't have statistics published by Tesla, the manufacturer that probably has the most level 2 miles, and an appropriate control group to compare to...

It may be safer than without, but unfortunately we just don't know, and Tesla hasn't published the data so that it can be parsed.
 
I think Google's logic is faulty, emotional and not based on facts.

It's just like thinking all immigrants are rapists but the statistic doesn't support that.

Google needs to look at the statistics that when people misused and abused their system, how many got into accidents?

Whether people use their system or not, accidents still occurred.

It's a disservice to the public that they abandoned this L-2 project.

The difference between you and Google is that you accept that some people will die during this development stage. One thing you don't realize that it can happen to you as well. You can't escape from human nature. This is not intentional misuse. Your mind tricks you.

Just think about how many people report here that they hit or nearly hit something because they thought they were on autopilot while it was just cruise control.

And if some thing turns up good 99% of the time, humans have a hard time catching that 1%.
 
Last edited:

Tam

Well-Known Member
Nov 25, 2012
11,829
10,866
Visalia, CA
The difference between you and Google is that you accept that some people will die during this development stage. One thing you don't realize that it can happen to you as well. You can't escape from human nature. This is not intentional misuse. Your mind tricks you.

Google has been withholding its life-saving technology during its development.

As a result, drivers without Google's life-saving technology are dying in traffic during its project.

By the way, about deaths, Elon Musk tweeted:

"...It’s not possible to be zero, but probability of fatality is much lower in a Tesla..."

Also quoted:

“Perfect safety is really an impossible goal. It’s really about improving the probability of safety. That’s the only thing that’s ever really possible. With 200,000 cars, eventually we’ll have millions of cars driving millions of miles a year, so even if something is a one in a billion chance, there won’t ever be zero injuries, zero fatalities"

That in contrast with Volvo Vision 2020:

'No Deaths' By 2020: Is Volvo's Audacious Goal Possible? | GearJunkie
 

AlanSubie4Life

Efficiency Obsessed Member
Oct 22, 2018
14,274
18,406
San Diego
Google has been withholding its life-saving technology during its development.

As a result, drivers without Google's life-saving technology are dying in traffic during its project.

By the way, about deaths, Elon Musk tweeted:

"...It’s not possible to be zero, but probability of fatality is much lower in a Tesla..."

Also quoted:

“Perfect safety is really an impossible goal. It’s really about improving the probability of safety. That’s the only thing that’s ever really possible. With 200,000 cars, eventually we’ll have millions of cars driving millions of miles a year, so even if something is a one in a billion chance, there won’t ever be zero injuries, zero fatalities"

That in contrast with Volvo Vision 2020:

'No Deaths' By 2020: Is Volvo's Audacious Goal Possible? | GearJunkie

If only we actually had some statistics. I’m totally open to the possibility that these systems actually save lives, but I want to see some unassailable, scientific, peer-reviewed numbers which prove it to be true. It is not that much to ask.
 

Tam

Well-Known Member
Nov 25, 2012
11,829
10,866
Visalia, CA
If only we actually had some statistics. I’m totally open to the possibility that these systems actually save lives, but I want to see some unassailable, scientific, peer-reviewed numbers which prove it to be true. It is not that much to ask.

There have been no commercially available autonomous vehicles so there is no data on it.

However, Google has bragged that its system can brake and avoid accidents but it would not just release that to consumers.

Tesla has not a working autonomous system yet so there is no data on it either.

However, Tesla has been voluntarily supplying its L2 data to NTSB/NHTSA so the agency can monitor the progress. Tesla has also been reporting its Autopilot Accident Statistics quarterly starting Q3-2018 to the public.

Right now we just have very crude numbers and people might not like it.

NHTSA issued that "The data show that the Tesla vehicles crash rate dropped by almost 40 percent after Autosteer installation."

It talks about cars that have been equipped with Autopilot Hardware and not necessarily the hardware was paid for, activated, or even used.

It's just like saying "A Household with a toothbrush has less dental cavities than those without." That doesn't even say whether a toothbrush was used, and if used, how often, and if often, was it done correctly...

However, if I have to choose, I would choose to have Autopilot and toothbrushes despite the crudeness of the statistics at the present time.
 

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top