650
Elon's Death Machine (aka Tesla) Mows Down Deer at Full Speed , Keeps Going on "Autopilot" (jalopnik.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
286 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

OK, its just a deer, but the future is clear. These things are going to start kill people left and right.

How many kids is Elon going to kill before we shut him down? Whats the number of children we're going to allow Elon to murder every year?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 18 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (14 children)

... and that's the kind of driving Tesla is trying to emulate? awesome.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago* (13 children)

    No, I'm saying that one video of a Tesla hitting a deer doesn't prove that they're less safe or just as likely as human to hit things when using assisted driving.

    Show actual stats of accidents per miles driven compared to cars without assisted driving and then we'll be able to talk.

    If we had videos of every Toyotas or Hyundai or Ford that hit deers while being driven by a human, this video of a Tesla doing it would just be a drop in a pool of water, but because it happened with an assistant behind the wheel people are acting like it means assisted driving doesn't make cars safer.

    TL;DR: It's an anecdote, without actual stats it's just noise to influence people's opinion

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Problem is the data is rigged. It's road miles driven that autopilot deigned to activate for with cars that rarely need their friction brakes that are less than 10 years old versus total population of cars with more age and more brake wear and when autopilot says 'nope, too dangerous for me', the human still drives.

    The other problem is people are thinking they can ignore their cars operation, because of all the rhetoric. A human might have still hit the deer, but he would have at least applied brakes.

    Finally, we shouldn't settle for 'no worse than human' when we have more advanced sensors available, and we should call out Tesla for explicitly declaring 'vision only' when we already know other sensors can see things cameras cannot.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago

    A human might have still hit the deer, but he would have at least applied brakes.

    You're making quite the assumption there.

    I'm not saying we need to settle, I'm saying it's useless to share that example if we don't have actual numbers to compare the stats between human driven miles and miles in cars with assistance available and insurance companies would have that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Do you own Tesla stock?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Nope and I'll be the first to say that Musk is a fucking moron, but there's tons of shit to attack him on, pretending that Tesla cars are more deadly than human driven cars with anecdotal evidence is just stupid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago*
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (7 children)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)

    Bravo, you're the first person to bring actual fucking statistics to the discussion! Per driven miles would be better than per driver but hey, at least it's not just a clickbait article.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    per driven miles would almost definitely be worse for tesla.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    That's an assumption I wouldn't be ready to make, but maybe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    are you saying you expect an average tesla to have more mileage than regular cars?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    because fuel stations are everywhere while tesla uses proprietary charging ports that aren't compatible with other chargers.

    forgive me but I'm not gonna take tesla's own words about their mileage at face value.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    One costs a lot more to drive than the other though and the gas station vs charging station argument only matters if you travel more than the range of your car, with their models letting you drive pretty far and back without charging, it's not hard to go over the annual average without ever needing to charge somewhere that isn't home. Hell, any EV that does 100 miles on a charge can easily beat it without relying on charging stations as the average is 33 minutes a day!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent