If so, that's pretty crazy and people will die because of this decision.
The usual comparison is vs. all cars on the road, but Teslas are comparatively new cars with a lot of recent and expensive safety features not available in older cars. They’re also likely to be maintained better. On top, they’re also a driven by a different demographic which skews accident statistics.
Teslas autopilot can only be enabled in comparatively safe and simple circumstances, yet the comparison is made against all driver in all situations. When autopilot detects a situation it can’t handle, it turns off and hands over to the human who gets a few seconds warning. Human drivers can’t just punt the issue and then crash.
Tesla FSD may be safer than Human drivers for the limited set of environments where you can use it, but last time I checked, the numbers that Tesla published are useless to demonstrate that.
This is incorrect. FSD can be enabled everywhere from dirt road to parking lots, even highways and dense urban environments like NYC. There is no geofence on FSD, you can turn it on anywhere the car can see drivable space.
It enables in snow and rain yes. The only time it refuses to engage is in extreme weather that obstructs the cameras.
It gets confused a lot in heavy traffic but it will attempt anything.
The primary one is:
1) FSD turns itself off whenever things get too difficult or complex for it. Human drivers don’t get to do this. Recent crowdsourced data suggests a disengagment every 6 miles of driving: https://twitter.com/TaylorOgan/status/1602774341602639872
If you eliminate all the difficult bits of driving I bet you could eliminate a lot of human driver crashes from your statistics too!
A secondary issue, but relevant if you care about honesty in statistical comparisons is
2) The average vehicle & driver in the non-Tesla population is completely different. Unless you correct for these differences somehow, any comparison you might make is suspect.