I read it just fine. He asked for an example of a life threatening accident caused by Full Self Driving. I noted that 2 examples were listed in the article. The ONLY difference was that the driver prevented the accidents by being aware. The FSD was going to cause accidents without intervention. I guess in your would people are supposed to do nothing to avoid a major accident. Hilarious that you want to love FSD driving so much that you’re willing to defend a billionaire who wouldn’t piss on you if you were on fire. Billionaires are not your friends. FSD is BETA feature that doesn’t work properly. Take your love somewhere else and away from my comment because you read it, didn’t understand it, and fired off a reply stating I didn’t do something I did because you can understand me. The next time you want to have a discussion come prepared, or don’t come at all!
Ah the “only difference” in your two examples of life-threatening accidents occurring is that no accident occurred in either example? That’s quite the difference if you ask me… this isn’t a level 4 or 5 system so driver intervention is required. These systems can’t improve without real world testing, meanwhile a hundred people die on the road every single day. I guess you’d prefer more people die on the road from drunk or distracted drivers than have manufacturers roll out solutions that aren’t absolutely 100% perfect even if they’re more perfect than human drivers most of the time.
Your obessesion with Musk is clouding your judgment. I made no mention of him, nor do I like or defend him. This tech wasn’t built by Musk so who gives a shit about him in this discussion?
I am not obsessed with Musk in any form, but the fact of the matter is when you have FSD systems that fail to do the thing they are supposed to do, then maybe it’s not the best idea to roll them out the entire world. Maybe it’s better to continue with more limited testing. You act as if all drunk driving/distracted will stop when FSD is used and that simply isn’t the care. Many people still use gasoline powered cars and drink and drive even though it’s dangerous to do so. Furthermore, FSD will lead to more distracted driving because people will assume the self driving means the car will take of everything and there is no need to be vigilant.
The plain truth is that while FSD can be the future, rolling it out despite knowing that it isn’t ready is not the solution it’s irresponsible and will cause harm. The almost accidents that you aren’t concerned with would have most likely killed the driver and probably other people to. Our difference of opinion here is that you believe it’s okay if people die as long the the testing shoes that there is a chance they won’t die in the future and think if anyone dies it’s too much. The feature clearly isn’t ready for prime time and needs more limited real world testing, but the fact of the matter is testing doesn’t bring in money.
Your inability to ever consider the fact that a worldwide roll out might not be the best idea right now since the testing shows the car isn’t ready shows that you really aren’t arguing in good faith. You have chosen the position that FSD is good and is ready even when confronted with articles like the above show it isn’t. I would wager that a lot of people want the era, of FSD, they just want it when it works. Keep the roll out more limited and do further testing. When mistakes happen, take the time to figure out why and how it can be prevented in the future. You argue testing is needed, but are in favor of a roll out now even though we need lots more limited real world testing. Both can’t be true. Time to think what you really want, because I don’t think you know… And accusing any person who doesn’t want a complete roll out of FSD today of having a bias against Musk shows that.
Hilarious telling them to read the article first when you couldn’t even be bothered to read their question before replying.
I read it just fine. He asked for an example of a life threatening accident caused by Full Self Driving. I noted that 2 examples were listed in the article. The ONLY difference was that the driver prevented the accidents by being aware. The FSD was going to cause accidents without intervention. I guess in your would people are supposed to do nothing to avoid a major accident. Hilarious that you want to love FSD driving so much that you’re willing to defend a billionaire who wouldn’t piss on you if you were on fire. Billionaires are not your friends. FSD is BETA feature that doesn’t work properly. Take your love somewhere else and away from my comment because you read it, didn’t understand it, and fired off a reply stating I didn’t do something I did because you can understand me. The next time you want to have a discussion come prepared, or don’t come at all!
Ah the “only difference” in your two examples of life-threatening accidents occurring is that no accident occurred in either example? That’s quite the difference if you ask me… this isn’t a level 4 or 5 system so driver intervention is required. These systems can’t improve without real world testing, meanwhile a hundred people die on the road every single day. I guess you’d prefer more people die on the road from drunk or distracted drivers than have manufacturers roll out solutions that aren’t absolutely 100% perfect even if they’re more perfect than human drivers most of the time.
Your obessesion with Musk is clouding your judgment. I made no mention of him, nor do I like or defend him. This tech wasn’t built by Musk so who gives a shit about him in this discussion?
I am not obsessed with Musk in any form, but the fact of the matter is when you have FSD systems that fail to do the thing they are supposed to do, then maybe it’s not the best idea to roll them out the entire world. Maybe it’s better to continue with more limited testing. You act as if all drunk driving/distracted will stop when FSD is used and that simply isn’t the care. Many people still use gasoline powered cars and drink and drive even though it’s dangerous to do so. Furthermore, FSD will lead to more distracted driving because people will assume the self driving means the car will take of everything and there is no need to be vigilant.
The plain truth is that while FSD can be the future, rolling it out despite knowing that it isn’t ready is not the solution it’s irresponsible and will cause harm. The almost accidents that you aren’t concerned with would have most likely killed the driver and probably other people to. Our difference of opinion here is that you believe it’s okay if people die as long the the testing shoes that there is a chance they won’t die in the future and think if anyone dies it’s too much. The feature clearly isn’t ready for prime time and needs more limited real world testing, but the fact of the matter is testing doesn’t bring in money.
Your inability to ever consider the fact that a worldwide roll out might not be the best idea right now since the testing shows the car isn’t ready shows that you really aren’t arguing in good faith. You have chosen the position that FSD is good and is ready even when confronted with articles like the above show it isn’t. I would wager that a lot of people want the era, of FSD, they just want it when it works. Keep the roll out more limited and do further testing. When mistakes happen, take the time to figure out why and how it can be prevented in the future. You argue testing is needed, but are in favor of a roll out now even though we need lots more limited real world testing. Both can’t be true. Time to think what you really want, because I don’t think you know… And accusing any person who doesn’t want a complete roll out of FSD today of having a bias against Musk shows that.
They themselves clearly didnt bother to read the rest of the thread.