this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2024
885 points (95.8% liked)

Technology

59605 readers
3345 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kava@lemmy.world 23 points 7 months ago (60 children)

Is the investigation exhaustive? If these are all the crashes they could find related to the driver assist / self driving features, then it is probably much safer than a human driver. 1000 crashes out of 5M+ Teslas sold the last 5 years is actually a very small amount

I would want an article to try and find the rate of accidents per 100,00, group it by severity, and then compare and contrast that with human caused accidents.

Because while it's clear by now Teslas aren't the perfect self driving machines we were promised, there is no doubt at all that humans are bad drivers.

We lose over 40k people a year to car accidents. And fatal car accidents are rare, so multiple that by like 100 to get the total number of car accidents.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 30 points 7 months ago (40 children)

The question isn't "are they safer than the average human driver?"

The question is "who goes to prison when that self driving car has an oopsie, veers across three lanes of traffic and wipes out a family of four?"

Because if the answer is "nobody", they shouldn't be on the road. There's zero accountability, and because it's all wibbly-wobbly AI bullshit, there's no way to prove that the issues are actually fixed.

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

The question isn’t “are they safer than the average human driver?”

How is that not the question? That absolutely is the question. Just because someone is accountable for your death doesn't mean you aren't already dead, it doesn't bring you back to life. If a human driver is actively dangerous and get taken off the road or put in jail, there are very likely already plenty more taking that human drivers place. Plus genuine accidents, even horrific ones, do happen with human drivers. If the death rate for self-driving vehicles is really that much lower, you are risking your life that much more by trusting in human drivers.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah that person's take seems a little unhinged as throwing people in prison after a car accident only happens if they're intoxicated or driving recklessly. These systems don't have to be perfect to save lives. They just have to be better than the average driver.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago

Hell, let's put the threshold at "better than 99% of drivers", because every driver I know thinks they are better than average.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Exactly.

We should solve the accountability problem, but the metric should be lives and accidents. If the self-driving system proves it causes fewer accidents and kills fewer people, it should be preferred. Full stop.

Throwing someone in jail may be cathartic, but the goal is fewer issues on the road, not more people in jail.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 1 points 7 months ago

Because I'm sure that's what corporations are interested in.

load more comments (37 replies)
load more comments (56 replies)