"The analysis suggests that accidents of vehicles equipped with Advanced Driving Systems generally have a lower chance of occurring than Human-Driven Vehicles in most of the similar accident scenarios. However, accidents involving Advanced Driving Systems occur more frequently than Human-Driven Vehicle accidents under dawn/dusk or turning conditions, which is 5.25 and 1.98 times higher, respectively."
Unfortunately, that seems to include data regarding Tesla's FSD function, which renders it useless for actual comparisons between human driving and responsible implementations of self driving technology.
Nitpick, but Tesla does not yet have full self driving technology. They have a beta which is "supervised" by human drivers. Repeating the myth that they have self driving perpetuates the misconception that Tesla's marketing has pushed in the past.
tl;dr
"The authors highlighted two significant negative outcomes for level 4 AVs. It found they were over five times more likely to be involved in an accident at dawn and dusk. They were relatively bad at navigating turns as well, with the odds of an accident during a turn almost doubled compared to those for human-driven vehicles."
In my experience, copy is used the same way as code. And just as you probably wouldn't say, "I changed the codes for the three apps," most people wouldn't say, "I rewrote the copies for the three websites."
https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/obama-comes-ou...
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/us/politics/biden-express...