We are just pushing back and forth where you measure safety at. The site of the incident? At scale? You are saying at scale. You are saying this is unequivocally true but do not provide any reasoning as to why. It might be safer measured on a cross country trip as opposed to driving in the city. I don't really leave the city that much. So, it might not actually be safer for me. I hope you can genuinely engage with this as opposed to being so purposefully obtuse.
> And Tesla has shown that data that even among it's own cars it's safer.
I'm not going to trust the data from people who designed a system that immediately turns off the second it becomes apparent it would generate an adverse statistic. Get real.
That's all anyone has been talking about in this thread from my reading. There was no pushing back and forth.
> I'm not going to trust the data from people who designed a system that immediately turns off the second it becomes apparent it would generate an adverse statistic.
You're going to need citations for that. There's no demonstrations I've ever seen showing that.
Tesla counts any incidents that occurred within five seconds of FSD/Autopilot disengaging as being "under autopilot". Given the driver is meant to be paying attention and ready to take over at any time 5 seconds is plenty of time to take over (and come to a complete stop from ~70mph)
Oh cool, it'll point your car at a child and give you 5 seconds to fix its own mistake! How generous! What a great system! Fully autonomous driving except for when it makes a mistake...
> And Tesla has shown that data that even among it's own cars it's safer.
I'm not going to trust the data from people who designed a system that immediately turns off the second it becomes apparent it would generate an adverse statistic. Get real.