434
Tesla braces for its first trial involving Autopilot fatality
(www.reuters.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
434 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
59227 readers
2959 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Autopilot is not safe.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/06/10/tesla-autopilot-crashes-elon-musk/
Isn't it a glorified cruise control/lane guidance system, rather than an actual automated driving system? So it would be about as safe as those are, rather than being something that you can just leave along to handle its own business, like a robotic vacuum cleaner.
The main issue is that they market it like a fully autonomous system, and made it just good enough that it lulls people into a false sense of security that they don't need to pay attention, while also having no way to verify they are, unlike other systems from BMW, GM, or Ford.
Other systems have their capabilities intentionally hampered to insure that you're not going to feel it's okay to hop in the passenger seat and let your dog drive.
They are hands-on driver assists, and so they are generally calibrated in a way that they'll guide you in the lane, but will drift/sway just a bit if you completely take your hands off the wheel, which is intended to keep you, y'know, actually driving.
Tesla didn't want to do that. They wanted to be the "best" system, with zero safety considerations at any step other than what was basically forced upon them by the supplier so they wouldn't completely back out. The company is so insanely reckless that I feel shame for ever wanting to work for them at one point, until I saw and heard many stories about just how bad they were.
I got to experience it firsthand too working at a supplier, where production numbers were prioritized over key safety equipment, and while everyone else was willing to suck it up for a couple of bad quarters, they pushed it and I'm sure it's indirectly resulted in further injuries and potentially deaths because of it.
This is an absolutely bald-faced lie. Tesla absolutely does NOT market Autopilot as fully autonomous system. Autopilot is nothing other than lane-centering and adaptive cruise control with emergency braking, and that's it. There is zero ambiguity about it on the vehicle and in documentation. Plus, it specifically requires the driver to maintain control of the wheel.
You need to stop, drop, and roll or jump in the nearest pool before your pants burn you to a crisp.
Oh really? Is that why for years now, on the front page for Autopilot on Tesla's site, was the infamous "Paint it Black" demo, where in the first 10 seconds it says "The driver only there for legal reasons, the car is driving itself"? What do you think is going to stick in the mind of a potential buyer: that video of the car "driving itself" right on the Tesla website, or the generic 5 line page that you'll see in basically every single car with a satnav these days saying, "Please operate the car safely"?
Regardless of how much people like you love to get into the technicalities and differences between Autopilot and Full Self Driving and chime in with "ACKSHUALLY" and insert any number of the same tired responses about how autopilot works on aircraft or what it says in the documentation, it changes nothing about how they've shaped the public perception of their system and how people are going to attempt and use it.
Stop defending their shitty practices. Literally everyone else has figured out how to prevent people from abusing these systems, Tesla won't even bother, because people like you will step in and defend it every time for some fucking reason, and as a bonus it saves them money.
When you put it that way, the term Autopilot does sound really misleading.
In have this product named Telephone. I absolutely do NOT market Telephone as a remote long distance voice chat system. Telephone is nothing other than a voice-recording and adaptive voice control with emergency saving features, and that’s it.
They literally named it "autopilot". Give me a break. You have zero business calling other people dishonest.
Well there have people accusing Tesla of advertising their cars as much more self driving then they are. Specifically Teals has been accused of false advertising because it is what you describe, but they sell it as a self driving car.
Completely separate systems, a (now) 15k price difference, again with zero ambiguity and ZERO advertising or instruction that allows anyone to enable the system "hands off."
The only people making claims that Tesla is advertising (they don't even have advertisements) are ignorant people regurgitating FUD they read on the internet.
Evert car review that mentions it advertise s it. Tesla mentions it on their web. The fact that people know about it means it has to be advertised somewhere. I never said it was free.
This is a bullshit argument and you know it. And nowhere on the Tesla website does it say Autopilot allows autonomous driving. Come on, man.
I am being serious. Many people believe that tesla have full self driving because of the name and how tesla and other people talk about it. Hence the talk of class action lawsuits against Tesla.
So some how people think they made full auto pilot cars.
People that have never been in a tesla, maybe, because they're morons. That does NOT equal TESLA advertising falsely, nor does anyone driving a Tesla have any reason to believe the car will completely drive itself on autopilot, because it literally tells you it doesn't. Source: I own two of them. The entire argument is bullshit and predicated on people unaffiliated with Tesla being morons.
And yet i just saw a stroy about tesla "fsd" full self driving. If tesla calls a feature full self driving then it sounds loke they are advertising a fully autonomous car.
"Full Self-Driving" for which you have to pay 15k, are told in ZERO uncertain terms that this is BETA software, and that you must maintain a hold on the steering wheel from the screen and speakers else it comes to a stop, and LITERALLY TRACKS YOUR EYES TO VERIFY YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE ROAD.
So again, morons that don't have any idea how a Tesla works, let alone has ever been in one, making shit up. NOT TESLA.
I wonder if there is any legal president for claiming its Beta stage to pass off liability
When all instructions tell you that this is, IN NO WAY, autonomous driving allowing you to take your hands off the wheel OR stop paying attention to the road? You bet your fucking ass there is a mountain of case law throwing out thousands of lawsuits.
There is literally not one bit of false fucking advertising involved in this entire story, and the more you attempt to argue there is, the more you show your ignorance.
What does this remind me of... Oh yeah right, OceanGate
It is just a shit load of if then else statements. If the inputs don't have a corresponding if then it just defaults to doing nothing.
Driving is not safe. These systems could be improved upon, but they've also saved numerous lives by preventing accidents from occurring in the first place. The example in the OP happened while this driver was sitting behind the wheel watching a movie. The first example in your article occurred with a driver behind the wheel. If either of them had been driving a 1995 Honda Civic, these accidents would have occurred just the same, but would anyone be demanding that Honda is to blame?
There is no data to make this claim. You're just making this up.
Give me a break. You think all these companies are dumping billions of dollars into technology that doesn't work? You're making stuff up. Go watch some dashcam videos on YouTube if you want some proof.
Are you kidding me? I never said it will never work. But that does not mean its current state is safe to trust your life.
You did in fact just say that by saying that I was making up the fact that these systems have saved lives. Moving the goalposts to "you can't trust your life to it" doesn't make your original argument anymore accurate nor does it reference anything in dispute. Nobody said you should trust your life to cruise control.
Nobody did indeed say you should trust your life to cruise control.
But Tesla did claim you could trust your life to autopilot because "the car basically drives itself", which it obviously doesn't.
Tesla didn't claim that. Musk claimed their early FSD "basically drove itself" in what appears to have been a staged demonstration. This accident and lawsuit are about Autopilot, which is a completely different system.
There is no doubt that one day these systems will be so good that they will make transportation much safer. But there is no data that shows that we're already there.
Actually there is some doubt about that. Completely irrelevant to the present either way though.
You mean you've done zero research on the topic before injecting your opinions, so you simply haven't seen any data?
https://thedriven.io/2023/04/27/accident-rate-for-tesla-80-lower-than-us-average-with-fsd/
https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/3219570/The-Potential-Benefits-of-LKAS-in-Australia-MUARC-Report-365.pdf
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27624313/
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/car-insurance/vehicle-safety-features-accidents/
We're not talking about ADAS in general, we're talking about what Tesla is selling.
What Tesla is selling was covered in the first link. If you disagree, either provide proof to the contrary or quit "making things up."
That first link is Tesla advertisement, not independently acquired data. It's worthless.
I thought you were all about sourced information though. Where's your evidence that it's inaccurate?
What is the evidence that is it accurate? Is there any reason to trust Tesla's advertisements?
Ah, you have no evidence to back your argument up so you're just going to dig your heels in and quite hypocritically make unfounded claims. Got it.
Autopilot has been around for nearly a decade now but "it doesn't work" and you're the only person on the planet to figure it out in all that time, which is why you can't provide any proof. I'll bet you acquired this super secret knowledge without ever setting foot inside a Tesla too, right?
You're the one making unfounded claims. Tesla advertisements are not data.
So prove it or stop making things up. Show us data proving that Teslas crash at the same rate as all those vehicles without ADAS systems. Should be easy for someone so confident in their (thus far) completely unfounded and unsourced opinion. You haven't been able to provide a single shred of evidence backing your claim. Why is that? Where is the independent verification for your claim since that's something important to you?
Seeing cars pile up on the San Francisco tunnel due to Tesla's phantom breaking crap is good enough reason.
Yet you have failed to provide a single drop of evidence to support the disinformation you're spewing.
Lol so when you rear-end someone, it's the fault of the person in front? Not sure where you learned how to drive, but they failed you.
The phantom braking is an issue, but again that's another example of the driver failing to control their vehicle. Like all other systems, Autopilot warns you multiple times when it's going to disengage.
Funny you claim I've failed to provide a single drop of evidence when I've posted numerous links. You're, what, ten comments in now, having demanded evidence numerous times, yet have failed to provide even a single link to back any of your made-up claims. That's pretty telling and a bit embarrassing if you ask me.
Haha, go away troll. Your links are Tesla advertisements, and yes if you break in fast flowing traffic you are at fault and you will cause an accident.
Lol the only relevant link is the first one, which comes from Teslas cherry picked and thoroughly disproven data set.
No, we would (rightfully so) blame the driver for merging into a semi truck that from my understanding was clearly visible.