I would like to see mercedes publish their own statistics on their FSD. Given the tight constraints where they allow self driving, they could easily claim 100% safety record and thus infinitive more safe than any other manufacturer. It would be misleading, but statistically it would be the truth (any accidents could be said to be outside the constraint and thus will not count).
Personally I would only really trust such statistics if insurance companies would reflect that in the premium. Somehow I doubt they would be willing to cut the fee based on what Tesla claims.
Can someone present evidence that Teslas are more expensive to insured than other comparable vehicles? Along with evidence that the difference is because of safety rather than cost of repairs?
> Why else would they come up with their own insurance?
If they had evidence that their cars were less likely to be involved in accidents then it would pay them to set up an insurance company and charge just below the usual rates.
Even if they are merely as safe as other cars then Tesla could provide insurance at lower prices because they need only break even and they have better statistics.
There is a reason it is said, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." Statistically, there's a ~7% chance I won't die because ~7% of all humans who have ever lived haven't died.
That's not a great idea. The driver is still in control of the car and is no better than anybody else, and maybe even not paying attentnion because some think autopilot is self driving. You should treat all other traffic with the same defense.