Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Snooze
"Risk compensation is a theory which suggests that people typically adjust their behavior in response to the perceived level of risk, becoming more careful where they sense greater risk and less careful if they feel more protected. Although usually small in comparison to the fundamental benefits of safety interventions, it may result in a lower net benefit than expected.
By way of example, it has been observed that motorists drove faster when wearing seatbelts and closer to the vehicle in front when the vehicles were fitted with anti-lock brake."
Wikipedia
|
Except in the case of Autopilot people would be driving slower with more distance while driving less aggressive, except they are less engaged. The argument might be that they would reengage during curves in the road or during lane changes initially, but the more they realize the system can manage those situations without driver input, the less often they reengage. Eventually, there is an event when they should reengage, but they don’t out of complacency and over-dependence, and it is too late. So should we get rid of Autopilot, ABS and seat belts, so people drive safer?
My wife and I discussed getting a Tesla Model X or Y, but felt Autopilot wasn’t worth the cost at Level 2. Adaptive cruise control and lane assistant that disengages around every turn where the steering wheel goes beyond twenty degrees or something would be ideal, but we don’t need or want the car managing tight turns, lane changes or cramped traffic situations until it is Level 4 or 5.
Everyone acts like Tesla is wanting to beta test their system on drivers. If anything, drivers are beta testing Tesla’s system for them when it isn’t needed. Like I said before, Tesla is running simulations against the driver’s inputs constantly, so they don’t need people to have their hands off the steering wheel to get information to build their neural network.