You can do that as well, but (in theory) the correction will be smaller than it otherwise would need to be if the temperature is regulated within a narrower range.
And the links don't even touch on things that are comparable lol. Waymo might keep all the data themselves as they own the cars, while with Teslas, the drivers can and will just grab the camera data themselves, many post it YouTube.
You cannot compare "the subset of conditions, locations, weather, street markings where FSD is available, because if they're not suitable, you can't use it" against "all drivers, all conditions, all weather, all the time, whether suitable or not" and keep a straight face.
Also, "fun" facts:
Tesla doesn't count an incident as an accident if the airbags don't deploy. Modern airbag systems don't blindly deploy on impact at a certain speed. Sensors assess speed, intensity of impact, angles, chassis intrusion before determining whether to trigger airbags. Sometimes it just might be seatbelt tensioners that fire. You can hammer into someone at 30mph and because of those variables, airbags don't deploy (I've also witnessed this literally hundreds of times as a firefighter/paramedic). But no airbags? That 30mph collision? "Not an accident". This also includes accidents where damage to the vehicle was so severe that airbag systems were unable to deploy. Not an accident in Tesla's "statistics".
Even more egregious - Tesla specifically does not count fatality accidents in its accident stats. Why? Who the hell knows, but they don't, and have said so themselves.
Tesla also redacts more information than any other company to the NTSB about driver assistance system incidents. Including Waymo.
So, due respect, nothing has been "immediately proven untrue". The only thing known is that Tesla is happy to pimp themselves on garbage logic and math that there's no earthly way they know is not a number that's close to useless and deceiving.
> But statisticians have pointed out serious analytical flaws, including the fact that the Tesla stats involve newer cars being driven on highways. The government’s general statistics include cars of all ages on highways, rural roads and neighborhood streets. In other words, the comparison is apples and oranges.
> and we count all crashes in which the incident alert indicated an airbag or other active restraint deployed. (Our crash statistics are not based on sample data sets or estimates.)
You're trying too hard to cope. Tesla's own vehicle safety report says that they don't count accidents without airbag deployment.
There's plenty of points about Musk's bullshit. Just a few months ago he was telling investors that Teslas can ignore noise from dirt, dust, snow, because Tesla's cameras do photon counting.
Spoiler: they don't. they can't. Photon counting requires special cameras. It requires an enclosed lab so you can you know, actually count the photons.
But then there's people like you, who can't seem to understand why his repeated garbage spewing might engender skepticism in others, and instead put it down to them being haters or jealous or something.
You sound like one of those fan boys that keeps a picture of Elon next to their bed.
He's a con-man that has endangered lives by tacking on the word "beta" to a dangerous "full self driving" system for almost a decade to fool customers. Meanwhile others like Waymo did it the right, safe way. And wait no... now it's labeled "supervised" and "unsupervised" full self driving or some bs like that.
Last but not least, he's the immoral idiot that fanned hate and the political divide in America by supporting Trumps claims of a stolen election. He then manipulated a democratic election by offering million dollar in bribes (or prizes as he called them) to people who voted for Trump. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/10/20/elon-musk-offers-1-milli...
It’s still counted as FSD enabled. Would you prefer FSD to remain active and potentially cause further collateral damage after an accident causing who knows what kind of damage to the vehicle? Safer to shut it down when systems are working and brace for impact. Seriously use your brain.
Is it "counted" if FSD was engaged within a certain time frame prior to a crash? If so, do you know what time frame?
Or only if it was disabled automatically due to detecting a potential crash?
The latter would still be problematic, as a human driver noticing a problem just prior to the FSD disabling itself would potentially be missed (right?).
Do you know who does the counting and who makes the rules in this regard?
Asking as you seem to have more knowledge here than me.
That's like Joe Pesci in My Cousin Vinny where he stays overnight in a cabin and wakes up and freaks out at every little noise, but when he's held in contempt and there's a prison riot going on, he's sleeping like a baby.
I appreciate the sentiment but I don't see that catching on. I think a variant of bricked makes sense as it basically means you can't use the device until you can figure out how to fix it. Which the "muddied" analogy doesn't really fit - it's usually possible to use muddy things if not necessarily pleasant.
"fix it" was the definition of the the old usage of brick though, with the "fix it" generally meant a hardware fix, like replaced components. if the fix is reinstalling software, then that means it's still a completely functional piece of hardware. there's nothing wrong with it. you don't say your car is broken because someone who can't drive sits in the driver seat! get off my lawn!
I remember this being referred to as "the OS needs to be reinstalled", a trivial thing that nobody bothered to give a name to, because it was frequent and non-consequential.
I had an idea somewhat related to this where we use the solar winds as a sort of road and the earth's magnetic field as a sort of rotor to convert kinetic energy from the sun into electricity.
At that point, couldn't we just use the temperature value to compensate for the drift?