Telsa will be very transparent when the first round of lawsuits begins and they're facing multi-billion dollar lawsuits.
Toyota lost billions from simply not following accepted safety design practices. Does anyone really think Tesla's self-driving tech is ISO26262 or MISRA compliant?
IEC61508-7 F is giving an example how to come from test hours to a quality and safety statement, in terms of failure in time rates.
With how many, 700.000 morning and evening commutes, tesla is gathering evidence pretty quickly that their vehicles save more lives than they kill due to those rare FSD faults which lead to fatal failures.
Air bags kill people. Always have, always will. Fully misra and 26262 compliant. And air bags save many more people.
Tesla FSD will come, fully validated and fully standard compliant, so will Waymo (I doubt they go with misra).
I need to apologize, it's iec61508-7 Annex D, not F
> This annex provides initial guidelines on the use of a probabilistic approach to determining
> software safety integrity for pre-developed software based on operational experience. This
> approach is considered particularly appropriate as part of the qualification of operating
> systems, library modules, compilers and other system software.
Tesla, given the size of their fleet, can also follow such an approach for their "application" especially the neural nets and the rule sets.
Toyota lost billions from simply not following accepted safety design practices. Does anyone really think Tesla's self-driving tech is ISO26262 or MISRA compliant?