Hacker News Reader

This is a great analogy. Like driving on the freeway, agents are super time efficient, generally safe, but the stakes are high in terms of the worse possible outcomes.

View on HN

The analogy falters in scope, it should be more like ”do you put your entire family and all your friends in different cars, on different highways, and try to remote control them all at the same time, while also driving yourself, facing backwards”

I think all three of you are quibbling over the risk/reward ratio, and you have different estimates. It's not unreasonable that you're all correct - given your estimates. My estimate is that Tesla FSD is safer in aggregate than human drivers, so I believe it is safer for me to use that than drive. It doesn't get tired, have medical emergencies, get impatient and frustrated, speed, lose focus because a child shouts, thinks at the speed of light, and can see from eight cameras all around the car, all at the same time. I only have two eyes.

You would also be correct if your risk estimate concluded that Tesla FSD has arguably killed people, makes mistakes humans would not, can glitch, and has no one to hold accountable. For these reasons, you choose not to use it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com