Gary Marcus

Rank 35 of 47
|
Score -49
4/25/2024, 3:54:49 PM
X
In reply to:
Nathan Cahill
@nathanmcahill
·
323d
@GaryMarcus Avg fatalities per million miles driven in the us is 1.37 according to this: https://www.iihs.org/topics/fata…

This month FSD hit 1bn miles: . If it killed people the way humans do 1370 people would have died. How many people have died with FSD engaged?
Tesla AI
@Tesla_AI
·
342d
Hit >1 billion miles driven on FSD
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
323d
@nathanmcahill Based on what do you reach that conclusion?
Nathan Cahill
@nathanmcahill
·
323d
@GaryMarcus As a reminder, there are statistically hundreds if not thousands of people walking around that wouldn’t be here if those billions of fsd miles had been driven by humans instead.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
324d
⚠️ Perhaps the biggest risk facing the AV industry is that people will be led to trust vehicles that are not fully ready for prime time.

Here, a Tesla driver appears to have put to much faith in FSD, and to have killed a motorcyclist in the process. The Tesla driver has been…
KIRO 7
@KIRO7Seattle
·
325d
Tesla driver arrested for Vehicular Homicide after striking and killing a motorcyclist while on auto pilot. https://www.kiro7.com/news/local…

The statement by @nathanmcahill is part of a public discourse on the safety and reliability of autonomous vehicles (AVs), specifically Tesla's Full Self-Driving (FSD) system. The discourse involves a comparison of fatality rates per miles driven between human drivers and Tesla's FSD, highlighting the importance of accurate data interpretation and the factors influencing these statistics.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement aims to correct misinformation and clarify data usage, which helps prevent harm that might arise from misinterpretation. [+2]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It respects the dignity of others by focusing on factual correction without derogatory language or personal attacks. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The clarification promotes understanding by addressing the complexity of comparing fatality rates across different driving conditions. [+2]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    Engages in constructive criticism by pointing out the error in data interpretation and elaborating on factors that affect driving safety. [+2]
  5. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    Acknowledges a mistake in the interpretation of data presented in the public discourse, aiming for accuracy. [+1]
  6. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    Uses influence to foster a more informed discussion about AV safety, contributing positively to societal understanding of this issue. [+2]