Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86
I don't think that's how those probabilities work - you can make a mistake that doesn't cause an accident.
Eg, yesterday I was making a left-turn at an uncontrolled residential intersection. I was looking into the sun, and the combination of that and the A-pillar meant I missed an oncoming vehicle and turned directly into its path. That's a bad mistake. It didn't result in an accident/collision because the other driver braked (and then honked which I deserved). Basically luck/other vehicles adjusting means not every mistaken judgement causes a collision.
But if my body was equipped with Lidar not just eyesight I would have observed the vehicle and waited...
|
Tesla tracks two types of interventions, one is non-critical, such as you got to the parking lot, and you decide to turn left instead of right, or it was in the left lane, and you knew the exit right gets backed up, so you take over. The other are critical safety interventions, and yours would count as one, even if the other driver mitigated it. So yes, the actual number of collisions would be less, but I was using it as an example of the percent needed for non collision drives. You need that number higher than 99.9%. Waymo recently released they go 17k miles per disengagement. Most of their driving is also urban. Tesla's data mixes in highway autopilot, which are basically advanced driver assistance tools, so you can't compare their official number since it is not just FSD, and includes a huge amount of highway miles. They say it's 7 million per collision, but I think that's fairly meaningless to compare to other companies.
We will finally get public data now that they've launched their driver supervised ride hailing service in California, and that license requires them to publicly report interventions. Waymo started this in 2015, and removed the driver in 2020, for an idea where Tesla may be at in progress. I suspect Tesla won't wait as long to try it. In Austin they have different rules.