TL;DR: Tesla self-driving tech is becoming less safe per mile, according to Tesla’s own data.
Q1 2025 was 2.5% worse than Q1 2024.
Q2 2025 was 2.8% worse than Q2 2024.
Not a great look.
This is taking “testing in production” to a whole new level. How did this get past the regulations?
On second thoughts, does any country have concrete regulations for self driving vehicles? I am curious what they would be, and how they would quantify the thresholds since no self driving solution would be 100% accident-free.
Teslas “FSD” is not legal in the EU AFAIK.
Teslas are already the least safe cars sold in america!
If you ask Tesla drivers, they often purchased the car because someone told them Teslas are safe, despite them being the statistically most lethal car you could drive in America.
We live in a dystopian information environment.
I remember back when elon bragged how save they are and how they smashed the safety tests (american, not real ones) and i though wow interesting and looked at the tests. And literally every test they smashed was because the car is super bottom heavy because that’s where the battery is. You could weld some railroads under every car and they would do just as well. I even remember thinking: oh he’s gonna get roasted once people realise that. Still waiting
“It broke the test equipment” is not NEARLY the clapback Elon thinks it is. That’s actually really bad, and probably demonstrates the lethality of the vehicle (it’s just too heavy)
Also I love your username, show me the lie
Ha funny. I highly suspected this could happen when I heard they have quotas for how many changes the people training the AI make to the AI behavior. That’s a recipe for flooding the system with bad data.
No AI can be better than the info it is given, and if X is an indicator on that, it’s just about a certainty that Tesla AI will rot in misinformation.Could this be attributed to the driver mix changing?
It’s quite possible tesla drivers are worse in 2025 than 2024
The politically motivated sell off should have something to do with it 😂
Yeah exactly!
End-to-end ML can be much better than hybrid (or fully rules-based) systems. But there’s no guarantee and you have to actually measure the difference to be sure.
For safety-critical systems, I would also not want to commit fully to an e2e system because the worse explainability means it’s much harder to be confident that there is no strange failure mode that you haven’t spotted but may be, or may become, unacceptable common. In that case, you would want to be able to revert to a rules-based fallaback that may once have looked worse-performing but which has turned out to be better. That means that you can’t just delete and stop maintaining that rules-based code if you have any type of long-term thinking. Hmm.
This is actually in line with ai I’ve used… For some reason it just turns to shit after a while, I’m not sure why
I’ve also noticed that.
Intrinsic to the tech, I think. It’s not that it gets worse, it just gets different (intentionally, as a feature).
The teams that ensure “different” trends in the direction of “better,” those teams are universally very new at their jobs and at the technology.
So, serious organizations are figuring out how to test and deploy consistently better AIs. I don’t think Elon Musk runs a single serious organization, other than arguably SpaceX.
It will be fine they said, it will get better they said.
Somehow it gets even worse.
