This data, https://www.tesladeaths.com/, doesn't tell us much if accurate, other than Tesla crashes don't seem to be any kind of real problem in an absolute sense.
Not really. Most of the data is based on comparing all sorts of cars against all sorts of other cars.
Even ignoring how many years other brands have been making cars compared to Tesla, car models have very specific demographics they cater to.
Take the Corvette for example, one of the highest deaths per mile, and it's not because the car is inherently unsafe... it just attracts a very specific type of buyer with a very specific purpose in driving.
-
Adding in Autopilot makes the comparison even more hopeless since it works best in the absolute easiest situation (basic highways) doesn't work in the hardest ("stroads") and limits speeding.
You could try comparing only cars that have AEB/LKA/etc. but no one seems to have done that (Tesla certainly won't since it doesn't sell their narrative)
FSD would be slightly more interesting, but again, will work best on highways (so people will enable it there more) and also Tesla hasn't shared FSD numbers separately
Hopefully this evaluation will force Tesla to share the data as the other companies, hopefully the army of fanboys have nothing against transparency.
You can compare all cars vs Tesla and you still have bad stats since Tesla are new and expensive cars, you can't compare with old cheap cars.
You can compare autopilot vs human drivers and is still bad stats because most of autopilot miles are on good conditions on big hihgways so you would need to compare on the exact same roads.
TL:DR you need stats for the similar driver population, similar car prices and age and drive assist, similar roads. The TFA asks for more transparency so we would get more data and maybe we get better stats or more bad statistics, that we need to debug.
1 they are not alpha/beta testing on public roads
2 not all cars track you, my brother Ford won't call to the homebase with crash info when he hit a dog.
Why would the model/price/class of the car affect the crash rate of a self driving car?
There is quite the difference getting into an accident with a 20 year old Honda Accord and a 3 year old Model 3.
My point is that anti Tesla self driving sentiment is almost exclusively driven by emotion, not hard data.
Show me the data that justifies why I need to be afraid of public FSD.
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.
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.
That's enough reason to be very wary of Teslas on the road. There are others, but even one is enough.
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).
Just like drug companies have to prove that their medicines work before FDA approves them to be provided to patients, similarly Tesla has to provide data and prove that it works before it should have been unleashed on public roads since both, drugs and FSD/autopilot, have the capacity to kill if they don't work as designed/promised.
...yeah, that's exactly what I asked for in the first sentence.
I'm not defending Tesla here, just stating the obvious. Not a fan of their cars for quite a few reasons