Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

#-3 · 09-04-2025, 11:10 AM

Re: Fuzz.

Thanks for that, a lot of interesting info, I think think there is some room for disagreement on the reasons that it is stuck at 97%.

I do agree that you will never get a system that is 100%, but people are hovering somewhere around 99.74% as drivers. and I don't think technology is far off of passing that. But the reality is without redundant systems the frequency will be higher, and it's still easy to accuse Tesla of negligence.

Look at Air Lines of the major North American carriers, there have essentially be 3 incidents causing 8 deaths with 261 survivors in the past 25 years. Every incident has been survivable and therefore controlled to an extent when you compare it to the record of Air Flight in the 20th century. Every system can be built to an acceptable level of safety if the market demands it, and it is achievable to build an FSD system that gets to 99.9%, and that behaves conservatively enough to create survivability in the 0.1%.

But, Decisions like rushing partially complete products to market and rejecting redundant sensors in favor of the low cost option in all cases, will hamper the effort to get there, which is the problem I was commenting on. Tesla has chosen not to put the best possible product on the market, and therefore has chose a lower level of safety in FSD.

I also think there is a case for removing GPT-4o and o3 from that graph as they don't represent generational changes in the same line of progression. I believe GPT-4o was basically the same system as GPT-4 with a larger range of output options, same tech + more options = higher error rate. And o3 was Open AI purposely taking a step back in the speed / accuracy progression to build a model with a slightly different foundation. If that is the case, than the others on the primary GPT line show a slowing but continuing progression rather than a peak or a plateau that the trend line suggests.

09-04-2025, 11:10 AM	#113
#-3 #1 Goaltender Join Date: Mar 2008 Exp:	Re: Fuzz. Thanks for that, a lot of interesting info, I think think there is some room for disagreement on the reasons that it is stuck at 97%. I do agree that you will never get a system that is 100%, but people are hovering somewhere around 99.74% as drivers. and I don't think technology is far off of passing that. But the reality is without redundant systems the frequency will be higher, and it's still easy to accuse Tesla of negligence. Look at Air Lines of the major North American carriers, there have essentially be 3 incidents causing 8 deaths with 261 survivors in the past 25 years. Every incident has been survivable and therefore controlled to an extent when you compare it to the record of Air Flight in the 20th century. Every system can be built to an acceptable level of safety if the market demands it, and it is achievable to build an FSD system that gets to 99.9%, and that behaves conservatively enough to create survivability in the 0.1%. But, Decisions like rushing partially complete products to market and rejecting redundant sensors in favor of the low cost option in all cases, will hamper the effort to get there, which is the problem I was commenting on. Tesla has chosen not to put the best possible product on the market, and therefore has chose a lower level of safety in FSD. I also think there is a case for removing GPT-4o and o3 from that graph as they don't represent generational changes in the same line of progression. I believe GPT-4o was basically the same system as GPT-4 with a larger range of output options, same tech + more options = higher error rate. And o3 was Open AI purposely taking a step back in the speed / accuracy progression to build a model with a slightly different foundation. If that is the case, than the others on the primary GPT line show a slowing but continuing progression rather than a peak or a plateau that the trend line suggests.