X has a higher accident rate.

X has a higher fatality rate.

It's clear the factual and statistical premise underlying this debate is dicey (on both sides). Common problem on forums but acutely bad itt.

Should Tesla limit the speed and acceleration of its vehicles with a software update (until FSD)?

EDIT: class action lawsuit based on accidents due to speed/acceleration have no legs, the performance characteristics have always been publicly available (so Tesla owners weren't misled) and non-Tesla owners should sue the Tesla driver who misused the vehicle (and their insurer), not Tesla. It would take a really dumb ambulance chasing attorney to even attempt this.

A ****ing electric scooter or skateboard will have a different mode for beginners, offering some training wheels mode should be mandatory with that kind of cars that belong more on a track than on some road performance-wise.

Discussing accident rate on tesla is complicated since users are gaming the system all the time on teslas, using fake phone holders not to hold the steering wheels while using autopilot, using autopilot where they are not allowed. and obviously musk is underreporting issues aswell on the other side of the argument.

You're don't want to confirm the logic at all, you want to make **** up and throw out distractions to avoid the fact that the hard data on this topic shows that Musk is a liar and a fraud with his claims about the safety of his cars.

You're trying (and failing miserably, but still trying) to gaslight to protect someone who's literally killing people with his lies so he can sell his vaporware. That's the kind of piece of **** you are.

Tesla cars have higher accident rates, higher death rates, and we know that autopilot is seriously flawed in multiple ways it shouldn't be flawed (it shouldn't get confused by highway lanes and run people at full speed into concrete dividers, for example, especially after claiming it can fully navigate "highway on ramp to off ramp" safely and has "emergency braking" and "collision avoidance". The Apple engineer that Musk and his team killed with their lies, spin and incompetence had a wrong idea about the safety of autopilot despite being an intelligent techie.

Why don't you focus on posting credible sources and statistics?

You could start with an English language source for the Norway data.

A training mode and/or a mandatory training course both seem like reasonable options to me.

Or just a cap on performance. Safety issues were what finally drove F-1 to put caps on F1 specs even though F1 was originally conceived as competition for the fastest cars we can build.

This is your lowest (highest?) moment yet.

I posted the IIHS data on accident insurance claims which is for the US, which shows that Tesla has a substantially higher rate. Now Norway shows the same. As for you complaining it's in another language, like I said, you are the dumbest person ever to post on 2p2. Apparently you've never heard of Google translating a web page.

Let's recap on the claims of despacito:

- Industry reports showing Tesla dead last in autonomy are "bullshit"
- US insurance data from the industry body showing higher claims from Tesla vehicles than others are made up
- Norway insurance data showing far higher claims from Tesla vehicles "aren't in English" and not credible
- Tesladeaths.com, each death fully sourced to linked reliable news reports, aren't credible. Comparing with other late model luxury cars (showing Tesla 3x higher) is "bullshit"
- Comically incompetent "advanced summon" that fails on every level as people can see for themselves is "an almost functional product with a few wrinkles to be ironed out"

Even you must realize that you're coming across as an utter clown. What's your angle? Getting paid to shill for Tesla (they do pay a social media team and they're incompetent enough to pay an utter joke like yourself who is actually perfect negative PR with your incompetence)? Think you're doing The Lord's Work by lying and shilling for Musk? I don't get it. I've never met someone as delusional as you so you're either paid or crazy.

Google translate does not capture nuance and unless you regularly read elbil24.no it's impossible to put the article in context and read it critically. Probably fine if your goal is to push a specific agenda, less helpful if you want to gauge veracity with an open mind.

As for [company name]deaths.com, not the URL I'd choose for an objective and unbiased source of information on an industry.

lol @ me being a paid shill because I don't swallow your extremely biased sources of info.

Sounds like Tesla acknowledge the issue and are addressing it.

The article says fossil fuel cars have a 9% damage rate (sample size: 3 million, injuries: 283,110). EVs have a 13.5% damage rate (sample size = 200,359). Teslas have a damage rate of 20.4% (sample size unknown, my estimate is 40,000).

I'm not denying there is a problem that needs to be addressed ASAP.

But cute that you didn't mention the dramatically different sample sizes. You compare 200K+ injuries of 3 million vehicles to 8000 of 40,000 as if it's a perfectly valid comparison.

Shame on you.

Back to my point above, please raise your very low and dishonest standards for sources and data.

Dude you are an assclown. Norway's industry body reports the same that the US industry body does - that Tesla are involved in more accidents (by far). This directly contradict your and Musk's claim that Teslas are invovled in fewer accidents. Add in the fact that Musk is a known serial liar and fraud. The end.

I completely agree, which is why tesladeaths.com has a linked mainstream news reference source for every single death. I've mentioned this three times and you still try to throw shade. You're a dishonest loser.

Fully referenced lists and the industry body for insurance stats in two different countries are "extremely biased"? You're either a paid shill or crazy. You even claimed the IIHS insurance data was "made up by insurance companies".

Meanwhile, about 30 posts ago you claimed (quoting Musk) there's no issue and Tesla are far safer, then lied, conspiracied and sophisted away all information that said otherwise. You're either a paid shill or crazy.

You were denying there's a problem until I rammed the stats down your throat...the US industry body stats I first posted you first claimed were "made up by the insurance companies". At least now seeing the Norway ones you're dropping a little of your obfuscation and/or crazy delusion and admitting there is in fact a problem. Any mea culpa for your previous stupidity, lies and conspiritarding?

I go long more often than I go short, so your "evil short seller" narrative is cute. I will be very sad as a trader once Tesla is gone. And like I said, you're the dumbest person who ever posted on 2p2. 8000 of 40,000 is two orders of magnitude more than required to establish a reliable confidence interval when the incidence rate is 20%. You're on a poker site for ****'s sake and you can't calculate a confidence interval?

Yes, it would, it shows perfect integrity and honesty. The is you comically admitting you don't know have the most basic clue of statistics.

Thank you for betting an utter assclown, I couldn't ask for a more stupid opponent. You're doing a tremendous job making Tesla look awful; without you those videos of advanced summon failing wouldn't be posted, neither would the death stats.

You don't understand stats on the most basic level if you think 40k isn't a sufficient sample

Yeah, the guy's a clown. 8000 of 40,000 not a valid sample for population comparison is just awesomely dumb. You don't even need to know any statistics; it's intuitively obvious if you're not a raging dumbass like despacito.

Anyway...more interesting insurance data, this time on fires. Musk claims Teslas have 1/5 the fire rate of other cars (and I actually believed the liar/fraud for some reason; lack of gasoline seems like they'd have fewer fires unless something is seriously wrong with Teslas). Yet here is the insurance data:



2.5x the fire claim rate despite no gasoline is just incredible; much higher fire severity score as well. It's amazing that this fraud gets away with all these false claims; I guess that's the halo effect from a decade of carefully tended positive press.

This does actually have sample size issues but the S shows similar numbers, much higher claim rate and much higher severity. Both S & X have the worst fire stats of the class in they're in (Luxury and Large SUV).

Regardless, the point of it is to show that the data we have shows the exact opposite of Musk claims of fewer accidents and fewer fires.

Why not Bayesian?

More importantly I think you should spend more time thinking about the cause of the accidents. There are a few possible scenarios, some of them pretty damning for Tesla, some not at all so.

Where is the insurance data from in your last post? Is linking your source a difficult concept for you to grasp?

ITT I learned that Norwegian is not a credible language. My ancestors are crushed.

Just wanted to bold all the high quality aspects to TS posts... Someone needs anger management lol.

Seems like you captured the nuance of the article just fine

Rather than have TS and despacito further make this thread unreadable, hopefully WBF can provide an update since he actually owns a Model 3 unlike pretty much everyone in this thread.

Despacito has one. He napped in it while it drove him to the recent shareholders meeting.

this twitter thread:


scary stuff

guess a huge fire truck in the middle of the road is one of those 'edge cases' they still have to work on

I've actually wondered about this for a while, how are the FSD features available to Tesla owners actually legal? Do you have to sign a huge TOS before you activate it? What does it say?

What are legal consequences if you have an accident while using FSD features?

Are the FSD features blocked in certain jurisdictions because legally it doesn't work?

Fwiw, we'd definitely be interested in getting a 7-seater Model Y.

(Assuming the company isn't insolvent and that the car won't kill us, of course. Neither of which should be taken for granted.)

FWIW JKC Europe August country by country numbers are out and Tesla is still down QoQ approximately 5% even though Netherlands is +900 deliveries approximately.

Also what is this crap about owning a car as a prerequisite to discussion? This thread is for discussion of $tsla. If you want to make a skin in the game argument the right standard would be owning $tsla stock or options.

By most accounts the Tesla seems like a fun car to drive. The car isn't the company though

To be honest, it's been more than five years now since he started ranting about Tesla. By now, there are a million things to point at on both sides that can support your view. Meanwhile, the stock price is still not at $0 and Tesla has not gone bankrupt. At some point, you have to admit that the only chance of ever being right is by moving the goal post constantly.


Meanwhile, Porsche's Tesla killer the Taycan will be priced at more than $150k for the Turbo version and $180k for the Turbo S.
Another indication that the existing car companies just can't compete in Tesla's segment.

These sort of fictional futures are what bears base their bankruptcy scenarios on. This is off by $100k...

Another completely made up scenario that was supposed to happen, but when reality struck, somehow none of it shows.