It’s a new technology which no one else is testing in the real world with actual drivers at such a scale. Onus is on Tesla to provide data for others to verify the claim that it’s safe.

Isn't it a catch 22? How do you provide the data that it is safe without testing it to collect the data?

It would be but Tesla charged ahead and put its vehicles on the road.

Well yes, that is my point. How else would they ever acquire that data if they didn't charge ahead? You are asking them to accomplish an impossible task to release the data without having a way to acquire it.

I don't think this is a good faith answer; feels more like "I don't have a good answer for why this is a problem, so I'm going to punt it onto you to convince me"

Disagree. It is a good faith answer which states standard practice for safety standards.

Burden of proof is on Tesla to show that FSD is safe, not on the DMV to prove that it isn't.

You are welcome to argue that this principle is in need of reform. People may or may not agree with you. The discussion might be interesting.

But like it or not, the underlying principle for an exception to an established safety principle is that the burden of proof is on Tesla.

The only ones who have the hard data are Tesla and you are expecting somebody else to provide it. Are you serious?

It is well-known that Teslas auto-brake-check cars at highway speeds (not with that intention of course, but same outcome). This is behavior for which non-AI drivers get arrested, for good reason.

That's enough reason to be very wary of Teslas on the road. There are others, but even one is enough.

> Show me the data that justifies why I need to be afraid of public FSD.

AFAIK they have mostly resolved the 'phantom braking' issue now.

On an absolute basis, Tesla has more self-driving-related deaths than every other automaker in the world, combined. That doesn't scare you?

On a relative basis, it's even scarier: scaled up to Toyota or GM numbers (in terms of vehicles sold), hundreds of people would be dying each year from self-driving crashes.

A few hundred people have died on a 5km stretch of road near me in the last couple of years. None of them driving Teslas. Most of them drunk or driving far too fast (50km/h is safe, people often drive 150km/h because shortcut and the stretch literally drives like a race course).

That sounds a lot better than the tens of thousands that die with humans at the wheel.

Not if you start comparing against miles driven it doesn't.

So far FSD beta has killed 0 people, and other FSD software has killed 1 person. So they seem to be ahead.

3000 people die every day from Human Driven Cars

Until teslas don't require constant human attention and frequent interventions, this comparison doesn't matter. A human is still technically in control of the car.

So they should work on doing that as soon as possible?

But aren’t 10s of thousands of people dying from self-driving crashes?

https://www.tesladeaths.com/miles.html https://www.tesladeaths.com/vehicleyears.html

Tesla doesn't release total yearly mileage data anymore so there isn't much to work with. There is some IIHS data and from that Tesla models do worse than comparable vehicles without a doubt (https://www.tesladeaths.com/index.html#FAQ).