Hacker News Reader

Comment by heathrow83829 | Hacker News Reader

this is misleading because they're not comparing apples to apples.

the insurance companies are looking into all the details I'm sure to be able price the risk accordingly. Lemonade is putting their money where their mouth is and it's pricing FSD miles at 1/2 the rate of manned driving. that's because FSD gets 1/2 the number accidents per mile.

View on HN

I think the discrepancy here is that almost all these crashes would not have resulted in an insurance claim, e.g. backing into a pole at 1 mph -- this is not enough damage to report for an average driver.

That said, really bad numbers for an autonomous system which is supposed to be way better than humans.

It depends on what part of the car is crumpled, dented, scratched, or misaligned and what your deductible is. It doesn’t take much body work to hit $250, $500, or even $2000.

> that's because FSD gets 1/2 the number accidents per mile.

I call bullshit and I bet Tesla is quietly paying Lemonade.

FSD is primarily used on highways, and the accident rate on highways is significantly lower per mile which results in FSD appearing to have a lower accident rate per mile.

Meanwhile Musk has a trillion dollars riding on them hitting 10 million FSD subscribers[1], so (past behavior being the best predictor of future behavior) he's obviously going to be committing whatever chicanery is required for him to get that money.

[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-elon-musk-1-trillion-1647...

FSD automatically shuts off and relinquishes control to the user in an emergency. I bet the real number of FSD accidents is far far higher, but they're using this loophole to claim it's lower than it is. If you call them out on it, they just hide behind their "the driver must be in control at all times" legal shield.

Is Tesla insuring their robotaxis thru lemonade?

> insurance companies

If it's so good then why doesnt Tesla eat the liability?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com