Teslag said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

So they both don't work.

---

Autopilot works perfectly as designed.

As my drill sergeant used to say at the range "that weapon isnt ****ed up, you're ****ed up and never forget that".

---

The auto piloted itself right through a wall, eh?

techno-ag said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

17 pages of trolling. disagreement .. it's gotta be a new record.

---

TexReb owns this thread.

---

Oh, so you're the poster starring that nonsense.

Teslag said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

So per the TexasRebel hypothesis, using cruise control should lead to many more accidents where people stomp and hold down the accelerator and eventually crash, versus people who don't use cruise control.

---

Well it's the same guy who replaces his AC compressor, radiator, radio, airbags, alternator, and everything else at 3 years or 36k miles just because.

So go figure.

---

Budgeting for or stocking are different than replacing.

Do you wait until a light bulb burns out before you buy a replacement?

TexasRebel said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

So per the TexasRebel hypothesis, using cruise control should lead to many more accidents where people stomp and hold down the accelerator and eventually crash, versus people who don't use cruise control.

---

Well it's the same guy who replaces his AC compressor, radiator, radio, airbags, alternator, and everything else at 3 years or 36k miles just because.

So go figure.

---

Budgeting for or stocking are different than replacing.

Do you wait until a light bulb burns out before you buy a replacement?

---

So at 36k miles you buy every replacement part for your car?

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

February 2023 article?

FSD Beta v10.69 - but 2/23 was the published date. They are probably going on data collected in 2022.

we are currently on FSD v14.3.

Am I more complacent when the car is driving? Hell yes, that's the point of FSD is it not?

TexasRebel said:

---

Teslag said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

So they both don't work.

---

Autopilot works perfectly as designed.

As my drill sergeant used to say at the range "that weapon isnt ****ed up, you're ****ed up and never forget that".

---

The auto piloted itself right through a wall, eh?

---

Negative. He accelerated through a wall manually after ignoring the perfectly functioning warnings while also basically engaging cruise control in a neighborhood street.

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

February 2023 article?

FSD Beta v10.69 - but 2/23 was the published date. They are probably going on data collected in 2022.

we are currently on FSD v14.3.

---

They did

Quote:

---

A total of 103 semi-structured interviews were conducted between February and June 2022.

---

So four years ago. That study is worthless with the state of current FSD.

Quote:

---

Do you wait until a light bulb burns out before you buy a replacement?

---

No, because I don't want a fragile $200 bulb laying around, and you generally have at least 2 on your car.

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

February 2023 article?

FSD Beta v10.69 - but 2/23 was the published date. They are probably going on data collected in 2022.

we are currently on FSD v14.3.

Am I more complacent when the car is driving? Hell yes, that's the point of FSD is it not?

---

So you think as the software evolved the drivers paid more attention? That's a claim. Care to back it up?

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

Teslag said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

February 2023 article?

FSD Beta v10.69 - but 2/23 was the published date. They are probably going on data collected in 2022.

we are currently on FSD v14.3.

---

They did

Quote:

---

A total of 103 semi-structured interviews were conducted between February and June 2022.

---

So four years ago. That study is worthless with the state of current FSD.

---

The study isn't about the software, it's about driver attention while using it. If you think as the software evolved the drivers paid more attention you're welcome to prove your claim.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

February 2023 article?

FSD Beta v10.69 - but 2/23 was the published date. They are probably going on data collected in 2022.

we are currently on FSD v14.3.

Am I more complacent when the car is driving? Hell yes, that's the point of FSD is it not?

---

So you think as the software evolved the drivers paid more attention? That's a claim. Care to back it up?

---

The claim is behavior leading to more accidents. I dont care if a person goes to sleep as long as there is not an accident. Care to back it up?

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

February 2023 article?

FSD Beta v10.69 - but 2/23 was the published date. They are probably going on data collected in 2022.

we are currently on FSD v14.3.

Am I more complacent when the car is driving? Hell yes, that's the point of FSD is it not?

---

So you think as the software evolved the drivers paid more attention? That's a claim. Care to back it up?

---

On long drives on the interstate, I watch movies, Aggie baseball, Atlanta Braves baseball.

I eat fast food with two hands.

The whole point of FSD is to get to the point where you pay no attention at all or even take a nap.

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

Made it page 18.

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

February 2023 article?

FSD Beta v10.69 - but 2/23 was the published date. They are probably going on data collected in 2022.

we are currently on FSD v14.3.

Am I more complacent when the car is driving? Hell yes, that's the point of FSD is it not?

---

So you think as the software evolved the drivers paid more attention? That's a claim. Care to back it up?

---

The claim is behavior leading to more accidents. I dont care if a person goes to sleep as long as there is not an accident. Care to back it up?

---

That was not the original claim. Neat attempt to pivot though.

a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The mistake is pressing the accelerator to the floor and holding it and crashing.

Your study is worthless bull*****

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

February 2023 article?

FSD Beta v10.69 - but 2/23 was the published date. They are probably going on data collected in 2022.

we are currently on FSD v14.3.

Am I more complacent when the car is driving? Hell yes, that's the point of FSD is it not?

---

So you think as the software evolved the drivers paid more attention? That's a claim. Care to back it up?

---

The claim is behavior leading to more accidents. I dont care if a person goes to sleep as long as there is not an accident. Care to back it up?

---

That was not the original claim. Neat attempt to pivot though.

a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself.

---

So the study studies mistakes that don't ultimately affect safety and rates of accidents? LOL. Its even more worthless than I thought.

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

February 2023 article?

FSD Beta v10.69 - but 2/23 was the published date. They are probably going on data collected in 2022.

we are currently on FSD v14.3.

Am I more complacent when the car is driving? Hell yes, that's the point of FSD is it not?

---

So you think as the software evolved the drivers paid more attention? That's a claim. Care to back it up?

---

On long drives on the interstate, I watch movies, Aggie baseball, Atlanta Braves baseball.

I eat fast food with two hands.

The whole point of FSD is to get to the point where you pay no attention at all or even take a nap.

---

Completely agree. Your last sentence is my entire point. Thanks

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The mistake is pressing the accelerator to the floor and holding it and crashing.

Your study is worthless bull*****

---

Despite the fact that Tesla specifically tells drivers Autopilot will not stop for obstructions. It has zero to do with complacency which is why the study is irrelevant. Rebels statement about complacency was irrelevant.

The driver was "****ed up" the car wasn't.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

Fortunately, we are not on FSD Beta v10 anymore.

I always drive FSD with my hands on my lap. Far right on the image. This is an old study and is not relevant to the discussion today.

For the other Tesla drivers on FSD, do you keep your hands on the wheel? I do not. Also, with the more advanced versions, Tesla is less likely to get mad at you if you look away from the road for longer and longer times.

You know what "beta" means, do you not?

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

Fortunately, we are not on FSD Beta v10 anymore.

I always drive FSD with my hands on my lap. Far right on the image. This is an old study and is not relevant to the discussion today.

For the other Tesla drivers on FSD, do you keep your hands on the wheel? I do not. Also, with the more advanced versions, Tesla is less likely to get mad at you if you look away from the road for longer and longer times.

You know what "beta" means, do you not?

---

You're my proving the point, don't let me stop you. As the software evolves drivers will be required to pay less and less attention, eventually reaching 0 with unsupervised.

Teslag said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The mistake is pressing the accelerator to the floor and holding it and crashing.

Your study is worthless bull*****

---

Despite the fact that Tesla specifically tells drivers Autopilot will not stop for obstructions. It has zero to do with complacency which is why the study is irrelevant. Rebels statement about complacency was irrelevant.

The driver was "****ed up" the car wasn't.

---

Of course, but here we are at page 18 with baseless theories and worthless studies.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The study cites one of the examples as not paying attention to be placing weighted devices on the steering wheel to do other things and trick the system.

This is no longer possible on new FSD as it tracks eye movement and requires engagement and paying attention.

A key data point of the study is now irrelevant specially because of the evolving of FSD.

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The study cites one of the examples as not paying attention to be placing weighted devices on the steering wheel to do other things and trick the system.

This is no longer possible on new FSD as it tracks eye movement and requires engagement and paying attention.

A key data point of the study is now irrelevant specially because of the evolving of FSD.

---

You're missing the forest for the trees. As the software evolves drivers will be required to pay less and less attention, eventually reaching 0 with unsupervised.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The study cites one of the examples as not paying attention to be placing weighted devices on the steering wheel to do other things and trick the system.

This is no longer possible on new FSD as it tracks eye movement and requires engagement and paying attention.

A key data point of the study is now irrelevant specially because of the evolving of FSD.

---

You're missing the forest for the trees. As the software evolves drivers will be required to pay less and less attention, eventually reaching 0 with unsupervised.

---

And when that happens we can and should commission a study at that time to see what the results are.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

Fortunately, we are not on FSD Beta v10 anymore.

I always drive FSD with my hands on my lap. Far right on the image. This is an old study and is not relevant to the discussion today.

For the other Tesla drivers on FSD, do you keep your hands on the wheel? I do not. Also, with the more advanced versions, Tesla is less likely to get mad at you if you look away from the road for longer and longer times.

You know what "beta" means, do you not?

---

You're my proving the point, don't let me stop you. As the software evolves drivers will be required to pay less and less attention, eventually reaching 0 with unsupervised.

---

And safer than human drivers "paying attention" and in control.

Human drivers get sleepy and get distracted. The computer does not. Tesla keeps stats on FSD usage. My car drives itself 84% of the time.

I got pulled over once by a cop - I was driving. FSD has never been pulled over. He let me go - for speeding.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The study cites one of the examples as not paying attention to be placing weighted devices on the steering wheel to do other things and trick the system.

This is no longer possible on new FSD as it tracks eye movement and requires engagement and paying attention.

A key data point of the study is now irrelevant specially because of the evolving of FSD.

---

You're missing the forest for the trees. As the software evolves drivers will be required to pay less and less attention, eventually reaching 0 with unsupervised.

---

That's already the case with level 4 waygo and robotaxis. They are called passengers.

So humans not having to pay attention now with a vehicle that is not level 4 causes them to become complacent and make mistakes that don't cause more accidents, but when they have to pay even less attention with a vehicle that is level 4, they will make even more mistakes that don't cause accidents?!

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The study cites one of the examples as not paying attention to be placing weighted devices on the steering wheel to do other things and trick the system.

This is no longer possible on new FSD as it tracks eye movement and requires engagement and paying attention.

A key data point of the study is now irrelevant specially because of the evolving of FSD.

---

You're missing the forest for the trees. As the software evolves drivers will be required to pay less and less attention, eventually reaching 0 with unsupervised.

---

And when that happens we can and should commission a study at that time to see what the results are.

---

And in the meantime, common sense and available data agree that a person who is manually driving pays more attention than a person who only needs to supervise.

Can't understand why Logo, or anyone would feel a need to argue against that.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The study cites one of the examples as not paying attention to be placing weighted devices on the steering wheel to do other things and trick the system.

This is no longer possible on new FSD as it tracks eye movement and requires engagement and paying attention.

A key data point of the study is now irrelevant specially because of the evolving of FSD.

---

You're missing the forest for the trees. As the software evolves drivers will be required to pay less and less attention, eventually reaching 0 with unsupervised.

---

And when that happens we can and should commission a study at that time to see what the results are.

---

And in the meantime, common sense and available data agree that a person who is manually driving pays more attention than a person who only needs to supervise.

Can't understand why Logo, or anyone would feel a need to argue against that.

---

Uh, the bold is not the claim. Pivot!

Just admit it. You tossed up a bogus study. It happens

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The study cites one of the examples as not paying attention to be placing weighted devices on the steering wheel to do other things and trick the system.

This is no longer possible on new FSD as it tracks eye movement and requires engagement and paying attention.

A key data point of the study is now irrelevant specially because of the evolving of FSD.

---

You're missing the forest for the trees. As the software evolves drivers will be required to pay less and less attention, eventually reaching 0 with unsupervised.

---

And when that happens we can and should commission a study at that time to see what the results are.

---

And in the meantime, common sense and available data agree that a person who is manually driving pays more attention than a person who only needs to supervise.

Can't understand why Logo, or anyone would feel a need to argue against that.

---

Uh, the bold is not the claim. Pivot!

Just admit it. You tossed up a bogus study. It happens

---

The bold was exactly the claim when I jumped in. The study proved it. Common sense proves it. You should pay better attention.

techno-ag said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

17 pages of trolling. disagreement .. it's gotta be a new record.

---

TexReb owns this thread.

---

Big fan of Elon Musk, but never misses an opportunity to **** on his companies.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.

---

You're right. Data is here and he appears to be correct about that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9996345/

It does cause complacency.

---

That study was in 2023. It also is done with "FSD beta".

Let me make sure I understand the theory. Complacency causes a person to stomp the accelerator and hold it fully down in a 30 MPH residential neighborhood until crashing into a house. I don't see that in the study. I guess I missed it.

---

The claim was:
" a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself."

The study supports this, and you've provided nothing to refute it.

---

The study cites one of the examples as not paying attention to be placing weighted devices on the steering wheel to do other things and trick the system.

This is no longer possible on new FSD as it tracks eye movement and requires engagement and paying attention.

A key data point of the study is now irrelevant specially because of the evolving of FSD.

---

You're missing the forest for the trees. As the software evolves drivers will be required to pay less and less attention, eventually reaching 0 with unsupervised.

---

And when that happens we can and should commission a study at that time to see what the results are.

---

And in the meantime, common sense and available data agree that a person who is manually driving pays more attention than a person who only needs to supervise.

Can't understand why Logo, or anyone would feel a need to argue against that.

---

Uh, the bold is not the claim. Pivot!

Just admit it. You tossed up a bogus study. It happens

---

The bold was exactly the claim when I jumped in. The study proved it. Common sense proves it. You should pay better attention.

---

You are the one who is not paying attention:


JX:
This same accident happens all the time no matter what car brand or function. It has nothing to do with the machine, it has to do with a human pressing down on the gas pedal, which all cars have, when they don't intend to.

Rebel:
I'll hypothesize that a person driving who is aware they are in control of the vehicle is less prone to this mistake than a person driving while assuming the vehicle can take care of itself.


GeorgiAg
No need to hypothesize. The data is already out there.



You then post a study "refuting" Georgia... You obviously didn't understand the claim.

That doesn't refute Georgia. Georgia was correct. The data exists.

It may not be the data you wanted.

Even more reason to buy a Tesla.

This thread has nothing to do with data and analysis anymore. You have a number of disingenuous posters that are trolling because they don't like the EV fanboys. Most don't like me other - even though I'm not an EV fanboy - I just prefer data, facts, logic and rational analysis.

The @Tesla Model 3 and Model Y have just been named the #1 and #2 Most American-Made vehicles for 2026 by https://t.co/8eBlPTqKpL. This includes EVs & Gas cars🇺🇸

This is the sixth year in a row that Tesla has claimed the most American-made vehicle. pic.twitter.com/rFtnaC1Urz

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 23, 2026