That conclusion is not supported by the data in the report. A supportable conclusion based on this report would be that Tesla automation with auto-steer produces 40% fewer air bag deployments than Tesla automation without auto-steer.
>22 The crash rates are for all miles travelled before and after Autopilot installation and are not limited to actual Autopilot use.
Because of course there were no autopilot miles in the before bucket you would be skewing the analysis if you only looked at autopilot miles in the after bucket.
What we know is after installing the autopilot feature, accidents with airbag deployments reduced 40%. Not just during so-called "safe" autopilot miles, but over all miles driven.
Now it's plausible that autopilot makes you a better driver both while it's on and off, but I'd say it's just exceedingly common to rear-end people due to distracted driving.
the driving mode-specific execution by a driver assistance system of either steering or acceleration/deceleration using information about the driving environment and with the expectation that the human driver perform all remaining aspects of the dynamic driving task
Moreover, if experience showed that TACC reduces safety, NHTSA and its counterparts in other countries would have noticed and put the brakes on it. If you don't think this is a reasonable assumption, so be it.
The problem here is that you're mis specifying the null hypothesis. We have had human drivers for 100 years. New automated systems start to come into the fray. We're trying to figure out if they are safer than humans. The null in this case is that they are not. That's what we assume until proven otherwise.
No, we're not. We're trying to figure out if TACC has any impact either way. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is that they are no more and no less safe than human drivers alone. You need data to show the direction of the change. You just picked a direction (i.e., towards worse) that was more intuitive to you.
>I think it is reasonable to assume that Tesla TACC is not less safe than Tesla non-TACC, therefore the conclusion is also relevant to comparisons between Tesla level 0 (entirely human-driven, no assist) vs. Tesla level 2.
Is it really reasonable to assume it's not less safe in this case? Neither of us can say either way, seems like it would be impossible to assume either way.
Yes, because this assumption is consistent with the null hypothesis. The negation of this statement is that it is strictly less safe, which is not consistent with the null hypothesis, and for which there is no evidence.
These two lead us to your null which is that it is as safe.
When a new unproven technology comes out does it seem correct to automatically assume that it is as safe as the current standard? Would you not expect some proof?
In the absence of any data or given priors whatsoever, we should give the three possibilities (less safe, as safe, more safe) equal weight. This means that there is a 33% chance it's less safe, which is too large to ignore. That's why we want more proof when we deploy new tech, introduce a new drug, etc.
But note that specifically in the context of TACC as it stands today, we are not in that situation. There has been plenty of data accumulated already, which constitutes the proof you are looking for (i.e., the data we do have doesn't show a decrease in safety.) That's why today it is reasonable to assume that TACC is not less safe than no TACC.
Haha, well we could have totally sidestepped this whole thing then! Can you show me the data?
So yes, it is literally human Vs computer driven safety.
You are bringing it up, but I don't think you are doing this for any reason other than to be contrarian.
Also, ALL cars have cruise control right now. So the 40 percent STILL applies to all these cars.
The correct way to frase the study is that "99 percent of cars are level 1 autonomous cars. For this 99 percent, going from level 1 to level 2 would make them 40 % safer"
You shouldn't assume intentions. A ton of people here are misreading this study (or should I say not reading it).
> Also, ALL cars have cruise control right now. So the 40 percent STILL applies to all these cars. The correct way to frase the study is that "99 percent of cars are level 1 autonomous cars. For this 99 percent, going from level 1 to level 2 would make them 40 % safer"
The comparison here is only on Tesla so accordingly it's only on TACC vs TACC+Autosteer. TACC is fundamentally different than the type of cruise control that is in basically all cars.