tmRgwnM9b87eJUPq

Yeah right, and they are a big problem. I haven’t encountered a single V1 super charger in Europe after 4 years.

I have only ever seen one in the US and it was surrounded by V2 and V3.

You will not have that problem with Tesla though. All chargers are 150kW+.

Tesla super chargers are €0,36 per kWh

Just to add: they should not be chained, but they should run in parallel.

The car indeed has mobile data. A Tesla has a permanent 4g connection.

Huh?! If I look at the source of the article at Mozilla, Tesla is actually ranked as almost least creepy.

So I do not understand where this is coming from. Also the picture of the article only showing teslas is highly suggestive

https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/categories/cars/

~~Although it’s far from perfect, autopilot gets into a lot less accidents per mile than drivers without autopilot.~~

~~They have some statistics here:~~ https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

EDIT: As pointed out by commenters in this thread, autopilot is mainly used on high ways, whereas the crash average is on all roads. Also Tesla only counts a crash if the airbag was deployed, but the numbers they compared against count every crash, including the ones without deployed airbags.

The fine contains a letter, a picture and payment information. If the person really wasn’t using their phone, they can file a complaint and the fine will be dismissed. Seems pretty simple to me.

However, I have not heard any complaints about it in the news and an embarrassing amount of fines has been given for this offense.

The system works with AI signaling phone usage by driving.

Then a human will verify the photo.

AI is used to respect people’s privacy.

The combination of the AI detection+human review leads to a 5% false negative rate, and most probably 0% false positive.

This means that the AI missed at most 5% positives, but probably less because of the human reviewer not being 100% sure there was an offense.

Just to clarify the result: the article states that AI and human review leads to 95%.

Could also be that the human is flagging actual positives, found by the AI, as false positives.

I suspect they sent through a controlled set of cars where they tested all kinds of scenarios.

Other option would be to do a human review after installing it for a day.