Tesla Autopilot Design, Plus Driver Error, to Blame for 2018 Crash: Safety Board

By | September 5, 2019

  • September 5, 2019 at 7:51 am
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 2

    I would like to see the number of Tesla Autopilot vehicles on the road, and the mileage they rack up during a year, to do a comparative analysis of frequency of accidents causing more than specified thresholds of damage; e.g. 10,000+ Phys Damage, $50,000 BI…. for Tesla AI Autopilot vehicles and All Other Manually Controlled vehicles. Do any insurance stat firms classify them as a unique vehicle type? …. or do they fall into the stdd VTs; e.g. sedan, SUV, …?

    I think there may likely be a statistically significant difference, between Tesla AI vehicles vs. All Other vehicles, in frequency per $100,000 miles driven, or PIF count. But, what do I know; I’m just a polar bear!

    • September 5, 2019 at 2:13 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 2

      Teslas are written as regular vehicles, not a new class of vehicle (which I predict won’t happen until Level 5 Automation is achieved). As for their accident frequency and miles driven, google is your friend.

      I don’t know of ANY vehicle stats that could tell you average PD/BI claims made against specific cars, nor do I know how you could obtain any data on that. Even if you got the data, there are many reasons why that type of analysis is not viable. I presume you know the reasons, so I won’t give examples and ‘talk down’ to you.

      • September 5, 2019 at 2:20 pm
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 7
        Thumb down 15

        Nope. Goo-gul is NOT my friend, nor will it ever be due to it’s OBVIOUS liberal / social justice warrior bias against personal privacy and free speech.

        • September 5, 2019 at 8:25 pm
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 7
          Thumb down 7

          He wasn’t asking your opinion, he was saying you have a device at your fingertips capable of accessing a world of data. If you don’t know how to verify information, you’re either stupid or you don’t actually want information. Use Alta Vista or whatever crap you idiots think isn’t liberal, it will still give you the same information you just don’t want to hear it.

          • September 6, 2019 at 7:12 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 10

            He has the ability to provide the data he claims proves his OPINION.

            IJ allows me to state my OPINION if I follow their rules of commentary posting.

          • September 6, 2019 at 7:13 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 9

            ‘stupid’ ‘crap’ ‘you idiots’…. do not comply with rules for posting on IJ.

          • September 6, 2019 at 11:58 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 0

            “He has the ability to provide the data he claims proves his OPINION.”

            I agree 100%. However, I did not make any claims aside from “some data doesn’t exist” and “some data can be found online.”

            I can’t provide the data about the first point because it’s not available, and I’m not making any opinion about what the available data shows because I suggested you do your own research to find the answers you seek.

            I don’t know why you felt that reply was snarky when it was on-topic, 100% correct, and devoid of any of the argument fallacy tropes that exist.

          • September 9, 2019 at 4:03 pm
            ??? says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 1

            Polar,

            Just for future reference, you’re supposed to capitalize the words that make the sentence different.. Such as “proves HIS opinion…. state MY opinion.”

            Capitalizing the same word “opinion” does nothing to help the emphasis of your emotion.

          • September 11, 2019 at 8:43 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            OPINION emphasizes my point properly.

        • September 8, 2019 at 9:00 am
          Captain Planet says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 6
          Thumb down 1

          So, won’t use Google but will watch Fox. Got it.

          • September 11, 2019 at 8:44 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            Those two are not mutually exclusive and exhaustive options.

          • September 12, 2019 at 12:35 am
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Yeah, but they make up 90% LOL

      • September 5, 2019 at 2:21 pm
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 7

        Verisk. Company data. Research firms data. Consulting Firm’s data.

        • September 5, 2019 at 2:44 pm
          Armandso Castellini says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 15
          Thumb down 0

          “Verisk” is an insurance industry managed and controlled entity, a unit of which is the Insurance Services Office, or ISO. I act as an insurance expert in insurance-related lawsuits (1,800+ cases to date). You can bet the farm that ISO will very shortly have data on driverless autos, and publish rates and premiums for insurance companies to use, is they so desire. My predication, based on my 50 + years in the insurance industry , is that driverless vehicles or vehicles with that capability, will have higher premiums and rates than driven vehicles. Time will tell.

          • September 6, 2019 at 7:25 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 4

            Thank you for your informative reply to my question.

            Obviously, ISO and its subs are most likely preparing to, or currently engaged in, research into the impacts of AI on auto insurance factors (frequency, severity, pure prem aka lost cost, LR, etc.). I would also be interested to know if there are ALAE (Allocated Loss Adjustment Expense) cost differences between AI and non-AI vehicles, and if so, if those differences are significant. Perhaps I should contact ISO / Verisk directly? (instead of subjecting myself to caustic replies such as those above, other than yours, of course).

            Finally, as a legal consultant, do you believe, based on your observations, that ALAE differences do/ could exist between AI, non-AI vehicles due to uncertainties regarding the effect of the technology on the accident?

      • September 5, 2019 at 2:23 pm
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 8

        So, I ask a question of any readers for data.

        And you’re compelled to reply that you have none.

        Hmm.

        • September 5, 2019 at 2:50 pm
          A. Castellini says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 8
          Thumb down 1

          Hey Polar bear – people aren’t responding to your request for statistical data because they don’t have any – yet. Verisk/ISO should have data soon. That’s the business they are in.

          • September 6, 2019 at 7:34 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 3

            Thanks. I thought someone, such as yourself, would state ISO / Verisk is collecting the data, or that a federal agency had some limited data, and would give projected ETAs (e.g. your comment ‘soon’) for its release / availability to ISO subscribers. There is also NAIPSO, MARB, etc. that may be forward thinking on the issue and have begun collecting the data.

            My question was also intended to prompt productive discussion. Thanks for contributing with your insight via experience, and info on Verisk /ISO.

          • September 6, 2019 at 7:36 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 3

            AIPSO, not NAIPSO…. bear was thinking about NAIC, then AIPSO. Bear culpa.

        • September 5, 2019 at 3:13 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 8
          Thumb down 1

          Why do you look for fights, Polar???

          I was telling you (1) some of data you seek is publicly available, (2) some of the data isn’t available at all, and (3) even we had the data in #2, there are many pitfalls associated with connecting BI/PD severity solely off of the insured vehicle type and not the myriad of other factors that impact loss payments.

          I even gave you the benefit of the doubt and said you probably knew about #3.

          You asked questions and I gave you the on-topic answers without any bias or attack or insults and yet you post that snarky reply.

          This is why we can’t have anything nice in these comment sections.

          • September 5, 2019 at 7:13 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 5

            He’s not trying to actually learn or debate, he’s looking to get his opinion out loudly and then if anyone disagrees with him claim that they don’t have the data, or whine about “where’s your data YOU have to prove it” even though he offers no proof of his own.

          • September 6, 2019 at 7:43 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 8

            Which words in my OP imply what you suggested?

            I asked a question. One person replied with helpful info. Others replied with ‘snark’.

            I do not use Goo-gul because their algorithms are politically and financial biased. That was reported recently by former employees. Thus, my sharp reply to Rosie, who ALMOST ALWAYS bounces my questions back with ‘why don’t you Goo-gul it?’. I wouldn’t seek opinions HERE if credible opinions existed in Goo-gul search results.

          • September 6, 2019 at 10:57 am
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 3

            You clearly don’t understand who Google works. I like when old people try to understand technology, but just because the bugs in your brain told you that’s how google works does not mean that’s how google works. Your issue is anything that disagrees with you, you refuse to find credible. You’ve made an enemy of facts, so your argument of “prove it!” is essentially not capable of being lost. That’s why, like I said, you don’t want to argue. You don’t want to learn. You just want to be right, which you are far from.

          • September 11, 2019 at 8:46 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 3

            ” You clearly don’t understand who Google works. ”

            Yes, I do understand HOW Goo-gul works and WHO it works for; i.e. Liberal Socialists and Communists. They BENT TO THE WILL of the Chinese Govt. Fact.

          • September 11, 2019 at 11:35 am
            TinFoil says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            I would take off your tin foil hat there Polar. Maybe being a little less of an idiot would probably help as well.

  • September 5, 2019 at 7:53 am
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 4

    100,000 miles driven, not $100,000 miles driven. Sleepy bear culpa.

  • September 5, 2019 at 2:33 pm
    A. Castellini says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 0

    So-called “driverless cars” are a danger to any and all, and should be banned entirely unless and until they have been proven to be as safe as driver-controlled vehicles. Can’t make them “perfect” because drivers aren’t “perfect” either. People cause accidents, autos – self-driven or otherwise – do not cause accidents – at least up to now. But the self-driven car will encourage many people to give less attention to their driving, and that’s where the real danger resides.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*