Sure, they could even call it plain old "self-driving" without the adjective. Or to be even more clear, call it "limited self-driving". At least then it would not be false advertising. The drivers who crash on autopilot would be just as irresponsible, but the company would be off the hook, no longer lying about the car's features or capabilities.
Tesla has the highest death rate of any manufacturer
- Thread starter edyvw
- Start date
But it doesn't sound as cool as "Full Self Driving (Supervised)"!
I just can't believe it actually says that in the car.
It's called "Full Self-Driving (Supervised)". Do I think it is an appropriate name? No, not really.
I can tell you the car will scream at you if you do not pay attention.
Is Tesla being irresponsible with the title of their functionality? I could make that case. Does that excuse irresponsible driving? I cannot make that case.
Just because you can do something does not mean you should. By the way, distracted driving has been going on for a long time, and it has never been a good thing to do. I've been guilty of that and more; I've go zero room to talk.
Last edited:
Neither can I - on that we agree!
Agreed, and features like "Full self-driving (supervised)" encourage more of it.
Really the discussion here is nothing new. Features that "reduce workload" can be counterproductive as they encourage inattention and cause "automation dependency" and "offsetting behavior". That's why earlier I mentioned the Tullock Spike which was a similar idea around 60 years ago from Gordon Tullock.
There must be a bit of a safety flaw with the Model Y to have such a high rate, but the CRV hybrid is actually worse somehow!?
If you look here https://www.nhtsa.gov/file-downloads?p=nhtsa/downloads/FARS/2022/National/
you can look at all the data recorded for fatal accidents, and derive your own interesting statistics from the actual data.
If you look here https://www.nhtsa.gov/file-downloads?p=nhtsa/downloads/FARS/2022/National/
you can look at all the data recorded for fatal accidents, and derive your own interesting statistics from the actual data.
Right on! A classic case of this was Air France flight #447. This is a very interesting read.
Scott
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/bus...d9BX66lV6NqGBLfky6jWIuQcwsCxoV6rT2Yf3Koun_C4j
wemay
Site Donor 2023
They are, but in a lower performing vehicles, they hardly get the urge to zip to 60 in 3 seconds as they do in the Tesla. In those other vehicles they just turn up the volume and mumble words at the top of their lungs.
"Mom, he made me do it!" "It's OK honey. It's not your fault..."
Ban low performance drivers, not high performance cars.
This has been my argument all along. Most of the drivers would have never had a fast car until this. Even then it's still the fastest accelerating car I've ever owned. I don't know what the thought process and methodology is like for the average driver for the first time getting in a car like this. I've had plenty of track time, general performance driving, and even went to a racing school for a week before I ever had my first truly fast car.
I'm not saying that should be a requirement before having a fast car, it's just the path my love of cars led me on and it hasn't steered me wrong yet. I've never been in a situation where my actions caused an accident.
Cirrus had a similar problem with their airplanes. All modern with glass panels lots of automation and a ballistic parachute, should have been a safe airplane. But it had a poor safety record in general aviation. Cirrus advertised it as the "personal airliner" and the automation was causing offsetting behavior, pilots who didn't have the skills to hand-fly IFR relying on the automation and flying into bad weather and icing they wouldn't otherwise have, but what the heck, with this airplane I can always pull the red handle (chute). After a few years when these trends became apparent in the FAA and NTSB data, Cirrus tackled this with an extensive training program for pilots. The safety record improved significantly and has stayed there.
Perhaps Tesla could do the same with their cars, but that would require a level of honesty the company doesn't seem to have. Admitting that a car with that kind of performance requires more skill and attention from the driver, not less, exacerbated by the fact that the "self-driving" feature isn't what it's cracked up to be.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
There are higher performing vehicles that are owend by people who would not be able to look after two drawn cows on the piece of paper. But they are not there. Again, that is why it is adjusted it for driven miles.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Ergonomics, autopilot and FSD.
But then again, Tesla owners love to be beta testers, and pretty proud of it.
Are you suggesting there's a multitude of $50k cars that run 11 second quarters that the average people buy? Could I have this list please?
Then add the fact that Musk got schooled by Robin Zeng who is the CEO of CATL who makes the batteries for all of the Shanghai built Teslas. Musk promised that the new battery type installed in the Cybertruck and some model y's 4680 were going to be "revolutionary" and have 5x's the energy, at least 16% greater range, and 6x's the power. Zeng told Musk that "He doesn't know how to design batteries."
"Apparently Zeng also called out Musk and why he always says projects are "just two years out?"
"Musk told him that the reason he always commits to a two-year timeline for new projects is that he wants to “motivate and focus Tesla staffers” and that he believes anything beyond two years “might as well be infinity.” Zeng went to say His problem is overpromising (since day one) "If you believe him you'll be in big trouble. "
Keep in mind it's becoming such an issue the Government (NHTSA) required Tesla to add "Supervised" to the term fsd and autopilot. The service centers don't help either. I'm still irritated that Musk can promise "full autonomous " just in a couple of years "we're almost there" and the judge dismissed the lawsuit that a number of owners filed who wanted their money back and Tesla bought back. Several said that's THE reason that they bought their Tesla.
And the fact that in most (if not all) wearing earbuds while driving is illegal.
I just wish they hadn’t embarked on this dumb FSD path. The cars themselves for the price are interesting. FSD is snake oil.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Again, that is WHY you measure this by driven miles!
This is a basic research & methods class in college.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
No, ergonomics is not fine. You cannot say, " Why would people dig into menus?" If the menu is there, people WILL dig into it, especially if it has some basic functions one needs. It is like not having a speed limit, and the ask question: "Why would people drive so fast." Give them opportunity, they will do it.
EU pulled a plug, to a certain extent, on this. Hyundai, Toyota and Honda said they will keep multitude of physical buttons because, according to their research, it affects safety. Besides that, data is not projected in front of the driver. Other companies played with that, positioning gauges in the middle, and gave up ASAP.
I agree that numerous crashes are caused by EV power. But again, I ain't see there Porsche, Ferrari etc.
