← Back to context

Comment by sfblah

9 hours ago

One thing that was unclear to me from the stats cited on the website is whether the quoted 52% reduction in crashes is when FSD is in use, or overall. This matters because people are much more likely to use FSD in situations where driving is easier. So, if the reduction is just during those times, I'm not even sure that would be better than a human driver.

As an example, let's say most people use FSD on straight US Interstate driving, which is very easy. That could artificially make FSD seem safer than it really is.

My prior on this is supervised FSD ought to be safer, so the 52% number kind of surprised me, however it's computed. I would have expected more like a 90-95% reduction in accidents.

I think this might be right, but it does two interesting things:

1) it let's lemonade reward you for taking safer driving routes (or living in a safer area to drive, whatever that means)

2) it (for better or worse) encourages drivers to use it more. This will improve Tesla's training data but also might negatively impact the fsd safety record (an interesting experiment!)

  • > ...but also might negatively impact the fsd safety record (an interesting experiment!)

    As a father of kids in a neighborhood with a lot of Teslas, how do I opt out of this experiment?