Why don't you share them with us?

I assume you know about the safety data Tesla does publish, but what you're saying is they don't publicly publish the (underlying) raw data.

Some excerpts:

If Tesla's data is to be believed, Autopilot is already more than 6.5 times less likely to have an accident than the national average human driver.

Let that sink in.

By railing against Tesla Autopilot, you are attacking a technology that on average has already saves a significant number of human lives, and prevented serious injury to others.

The claims were not false, they were, according to counsel for the NHTSA, not appropriate, in reference to NHTSA guidelines.

As you say, that is ongoing, and we'll have to wait to see how it pans out.

But the key point is: a government agency has guidelines in place regarding the use of the information it publishes. The legal counsel for the agency has objected to the use of such info, based on those guidelines.

You negligently portrayed this situation as Tesla having made false statements.

Taking Tesla at their word has proven to be a poor decision. But to entertain the conversation, answer this question, what are autopilot conditions? Are the conditions autopilot drive in similar at all to your average daily driver? Not even close. Find some data on highway milage per crash and we can begin to have a reasonable conversation based on what are likely lies

The condition should be pretty simple.

FSD means Tesla removing the language telling driver to keep paying attention while FSD is on.

This is a reasonable criticism. I'm not saying Tesla's data is gospel.

My main point is that it's much more meaningful to attempt a data-driven critique of Autopilot, than it is to post anecdotal evidence and news articles (regardless of whether they are positive or negative).

Relative safety is what matters. The answer lies in a statistical analysis. Agree getting the data, and interpreting it, is non-trivial.

But note how quickly ToothSayer's confidence evaporates when he is confronted with a request for data to back up his criticism of Tesla Autopilot's performance to date.

It's easy to post clickbait. Much harder to rely on data.

Please see this thread to understand why I do not want to bet vs ToothSayer (on anything, not just this).

I also think it's hard to make an intelligent bet on the FSD timeline given how many arbitrary factors could slow it down. One example: regulation. Not only is regulation not within Tesla's control, it's an opaque and arbitrary process. Sure you can hire good lawyers and lobbyists, but you can't control the outcome/timeline, it's always going to be a throw of the dice on outcome, with indeterminate timeframe. That's a bad combination if you're attempting to predict both timeframe and outcome.

Also, Musk is absurdly optimistic on timelines. His companies tend to get it done but it often take longer than he predicts.

Having said that, I do believe Tesla's tech will be ready in 2020, if someone else proposes terms/odds, I'll consider it.

Some things to consider:

> might be hard to find mutually acceptable 3rd parties to adjudicate
> definitions likely to be more difficult than grizy suggests
> would need force majeure clauses to cover things beyond Tesla's control
> there's no shortage of on market opportunities to realize your EV; I understand sometimes a dick waving contest requires a wager, doubt it's worth the hassle here though

You mean that bet that TS lost in spectacular fashion and immediately paid out?

That makes you NOT want to bet with him???

This is like claiming that 20 year olds wearings Acme Brand sunglasses are 11x less likely to die in the next year than the average person. This is a true statement by the way.

Do we attribute that to Acme Brand sunglasses? No, we attribute it 20 years olds dying at a far lower rate.

Similarly:

- Highway accidents per mile (where the vast majority of autopilot is engaged) are far lower than elsewhere, for obvious reasons

- Late model cars are far less likely to be involved in accidents.

- Luxury cars are far less likely to be involved in accidents (mostly because their drivers are wealthier and have far lower accident rates)

Yet Tesla compare their late model luxury cars driving on the highway to all cars driving everywhere. It's completely dishonest, and it's why they're under a cease and desist order for their lies.

Indeed, luxury cars are so safe that multiple large-release models of luxury cars have zero fatalities over a 3 year period (compare to Tesla's 17 this year and counting).



(the data is old because it takes years to generate reliable enough statistics because there are so few fatalities in luxury cars, and dropping all the time).

In comparison to the 0 deaths per million vehicle years above, Tesla have around 45 deaths per million vehicles years. They've had 71 deaths already in I'm guessing around 1.5 million vehicle years; with 500K cars out last year they're running at about 22/year. The average for luxury cars is 13 deaths per million vehicle years. So Tesla is running at about 3.3x the rate of their peers. Is Autopilot the cause? Maybe, maybe not. We don't have the data, Tesla controls and filters it. But we do know Tesla are far less safe, since while they can control and filter accident data, they can't control fatality data which is logged independently. On that they are far worse than their peers.



They're death traps compared to their peers despite being far heavier (which reduces fatalities).

Yeah, when you plain make **** up, I guess so.

All of the data on autopilot accidents is supplied and filtered by Tesla. Insurance data which is independent, shows that Tesla have higher collision claim frequencies than other cars. Fatality data which is independent, shows far higher rates among Teslas.

Who to believe?

There seems to be more to that story. cbf going through that thread with a fine tooth comb though.

Yeah, my one bet was an unescrowed bet paid out immediately and he claims he's worried about me as a counterparty on an escrowed bet? It's as genius as his Tesla claims.

I'm fine with him admitting that 2020 robotaxis is bullshit. I know he thinks it is. There's stupid and then there's stupid enough to bet on Tesla robotaxis in 2020 - and unfortunately he's not the latter.

Pointless responding to this if you're not going to post your sources.

Go ahead and add me to the spreadsheet on Drive if you made it all up. EDIT: I was joking, but it now seems likely this actually is a screenshot of a spreadsheet you created from scratch, based on nothing.

LOL. This could be a new all time low for you.

I invite you to post your source.

I know it's a new and scary idea: but try it!

People were (rightly or wrongly) severely butt hurt about side bets and your conduct in relation to those. I don't know the detail at all, and you might have been in the right, but it's enough for me to not want to get involved (especially given your proclivity to bend the truth itt).

This is funny, but wrong.

I predict you'll continue to post anti-Tesla propaganda in this thread FROM a robotaxi in 2020.

Truck Lust is by far my favorite term to come out of this whole affair.

It's all been painstakingly recorded and meticulously sourced at https://www.tesladeaths.com/

71 deaths is the lower bound from what's been reported in news sources that the investigator could find. Deaths are likely higher. Teslas are death traps compared to their peers.

An independent research report on Tesla's autopilot found higher death rates. List of resources here: https://www.tesladeaths.com/resources.html , such as:

IIHS/HLDI article showing "Tesla Model S has higher insurance losses than other large luxury cars" (higher frequency and severity)

Multiple independent strands of data contradict Musk's safety claims - someone who is known a liar and a fraud. Who to believe?

Umm..This is one of the main reasons people are calling bullshit on Musk's robotaxi nonsense. Saying that "the technology is ready, it just hasn't been approved by regulators" is a giant pile of nothing. It's literally worthless.

(The technology will not be ready next year)

By definition a taxi is something that has been approved to transport passengers for a fee. If a technology hasn't been approved for that purpose then calling it anything with the word "taxi" in it is nothing but a lie. Even if the FSD tech were ready next year (did I mention that it won't be?) we're looking at years before enough data has been collected, enough studies have been done, enough safety panels have been formed, and enough limited testing has been performed before any sort of actual public usage begins.

Robotaxis secured!

Facts and evidence are propaganda now? You have a pattern of this.

First you claimed I drew the industry research report myself.
Then when it was shown to be real, you claimed it was over 3 years old
Then when it was shown to be from 2018, you claimed the reports methodologies weren't valid - a report you had first claimed was drawn by me and then 3 years old.

Now you're repeating the same thing with other well sourced material. You're an idiot.

I'm still waiting for the full citation on that. We only got half way there.

The methodology is so obviously flawed (as of today) and probably was even when the report was current. Do you deny this?

Lmao, you need the fine tooth comb for that thread but you've been posting straight from the Tesla shill cheat sheet for the past month.

Who told you about the cheat sheet?

I want names!

In honor of despacito's dogged and desperate astroturfing for Tesla, I have decided to triple my equity short today. Setting a stop for this portion at 226.50.

I'm coming for your stack

This thread makes my eyes bleed.

thread pretty good today! also this:

EDIT: and looks like people are posting it's more expensive than their current coverage
https://old.reddit.com/r/teslamotors...ance/?sort=new

Descapito you really should just post a bet or leave the thread. You're tarding it up at an increasingly higher rate. Spoiler alert in case you're actually this clueless: Escrow there is no counter-party risk. If you somehow want to still make excuses and not bet with TS, pretty sure everyone else in this thread would take you up on it, including myself (w/ escrow and for any $ amount you may have)


As a neutral observer -- but someone who has made $ following TS Tesla analysis -- this is embarrassing. Just stop posting or at the very least go outside for 2 weeks, breathe, and come back. The fact that you can't concede points destroys any small shred of credibility (or good will) people may have had towards you. I promise you I have no ill will towards you as a person, the point of this reply is to let you know of course anyone would bet so stop dodging, and yeah you truly are a bottom 5% awful poster who also happens to have a top 5% posting rate...so please just chill and don't ruin a good thing other posters like TS have going here please.

I don't get a stop at 226.50. Seems right in the range it could wick up to on a market + fraud pump, would rather have a limit sell up there. They are out of positive catalysts as far as I can see, really nothing of a fundamental nature can go right at this point. I see pumps as a threat only after large pullbacks at this stage in the descent.

It's just pure risk management in view of size.

this story is a gift that keeps on giving

this is especially great, tells you everything there is to know about elon's claims: