Did anyone actually read the article before commenting? The crashes were all minor. No injuries. If anything this shows Tesla making an effort to report everything. A 2mph bump isn’t a “crash” it’s barely anything. The 17mph collision may have caused some minor damage to the “fixed object” but not clear from the article.

Such slop. First, they take NHTSA SGO "crashes" which explicitly includes basically any physical impact with property damage e.g. 1–2 mph “backed into a pole/tree”.

Then they compare that numerator to Tesla’s own “minor collision” benchmark — which is not police-reported fender benders; it’s a telemetry-triggered “collision event” keyed to airbag deployment or delta-V ≥ 8 km/h. Different definitions. Completely bogus ratio.

Any comparison to police-reported crashes is hilariously stupid for obvious reasons.

On top of that, the denominator is hand-waved ("~800k paid miles extrapolated"), which is extra sketchy because SGO crashes can happen during non-paid repositioning/parking while "paid miles" excludes those segments. And we’re talking 14 events in one geofenced, early rollout in Austin so your confidence interval is doing backflips. If you want a real claim vs humans, do matched Austin exposure, same reportable-crash criteria, severity stratification, and show uncertainty bands.

But what you get instead is clickbait so stop falling for this shit please HN.

It's impressive how bad they're at hiring the safety drivers. This is not even measuring how good the Robotaxi itself is, right now it's only measuring how good Tesla is at running this kind of test. This is not inspiring any confidence.

Though maybe the safety drivers are good enough for the major stuff, and the software is just bad enough at low speed and low distance collisions where the drivers don't notice as easily that the car is doing something wrong before it happens.

Is there any place online to read the incident reports? For example Waymo in CA there's a gov page to read them, I read 9 of them and they were all not at the fault of Waymo, so I'm wondering how many of these crashes are similar (ie at a red light and someone rear ends them)

Also keep in mind all of the training and data and advanced image processing has only ever been trained on cities with basically perfect weather conditions for driving (maybe with the exception of fog in San Francisco).

We are still a long, long, long way off for someone to feel comfortable jumping in a FSD cab on a rainy night in in New York.

Funny to see the comments here vs the thread the other day where a Waymo hit a child.

There's no real discussion to be had on any of this. Just people coming in to confirm their biases.

As for me, I'm happy to make and take bets on Tesla beating Waymo. I've heard all these arguments a million times. Bet some money

This is something Electrek does regularly and isn't unique to this article but I don't like how they suggests the Tesla crash reports are doing something shady by following the reporting guidelines. Tesla is reporting things by the books, and when Electrek doesn't like how the laws are laid out they blame Tesla. Electrek wants Tesla to publish separate press notes, and since they don't they take their frustration out on the integrity of the article, which is worse for everyone.

Given how minor these are, you think they'd get in front of the conspiracy by full disclosure.

ill stick to the bus

He going to fix this by having grok redefine "widespread"

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/22/musk-tesla-robotaxis-us-expa...

Tesla CEO Elon Musk said at the World Economic Forum in Davos that the company’s robotaxis will be “widespread” in the U.S. by the end of 2026.