Marha01 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Anecdotes. Only accident rate per mile driven (compared to human drivers' rate) is a relevant comparison. I don't think that any self-driving system will ever be absolutely perfect (all such complex non-linear systems are to some degree probabilistic and chaotic), but as long as the accident rate is lower than the human accident rate, I would consider it solved.

red75prime 44 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Note that the article has no info on whether it's FSD or Autopilot and whether they contributed to the fatal crashes. "Verified engaged" means ADAS was active at some point in the interval from T-30s to the end of the accident. The total number of collisions is not normalized by the miles driven.

	▲	Rohansi 22 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It also has no info on what hardware+software version was in use. The older cars are significantly less capable but there are far more of them on the road.

▲

atonse an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You added "totally" - as others have said, I don't know if anyone will claim a perfect system with no fatalities, enough stats show that it is already much safer than human drivers.

And the true third party validation is that insurance companies are starting to offer lower premiums the more you use FSD. So their risk models are showing enough improvement that they're putting their money where their mouths are.

The idea that Tesla's FSD is not ready for the mainstream is quite outdated, given that tons of Tesla owners are already using it daily, not just your early adopter types.

▲

Obscurity4340 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

$o $olved