A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter? • Hacker News Board

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#81

Post by ck2 » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:14 PM UTC

How about the coder? The person who reviewed the code?

The person who assembled the sensor and has some kind of defect? Or steering/braking mechanism?

Remember Toyota's accelerator-by-wire spaghetti code? No oversight by any third party on that code, what has changed today (nothing except even more complex code doing more complex/dangerous things)

At some point people are going to start victim blaming pedestrians/cyclists for just "being there" when their car mows them over. I guess it already happens but it will become far more common.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#82

Post by imglorp » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:14 PM UTC

ct0 wrote: post #12

lettergram wrote: post #2

Short answer is “yes”. It’s the same way a homeowner can be responsible if they negligently leave some issues on their property and a person falls to their death. The ultimate responsibility is the person behind the wheel. That said, I’d argue Tesla is also liable. To what extent I don’t know, but it was clearly a contributing factor.

Do we hold pilots accountable when the plane in on autopilot? Genuinely curious.

U.S. CFR Title 14, Part 1, Section 1.1 defines the duties of Pilot in Command, legal term: [...] Has the final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight. [...]

That means PIC can delegate flying to their mom if they like but they are responsible. If they delegate to hardware and it misbehaves, they are still responsible.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#83

Post by me_me_me » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:14 PM UTC

_aavaa_ wrote: post #46

toomuchtodo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how Tesla is liable? It is made clear to the driver (both in the manual and at activation of Autopilot) that they remain the final authority in control of the vehicle, and at the time of the accident, the Tesla software build did not support detection and actioning of stop lights nor stop signs. Are folks going to sue GM and Ford when people don't pay attention when their versions of driver assist don…

Tesla markets their software as "full self-driving". Their page on their own website[1] for the autopilot has a video which starts with the words "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself." Followed by a video of a tesla driving itself on public roads with other cars around while the person's hands are not on the wheel. While they have those…

There is definitely a lot of gray area for lawyers to argue about this in court.

And its solely tesla's fault for all mis-information for sake of PR, that muddied the water around issue of responsibility.

'Driver assist' leave very little to argue/interpret who is charge of driving.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#84

Post by _aavaa_ » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:16 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #76

_aavaa_ wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla markets their software as "full self-driving". Their page on their own website[1] for the autopilot has a video which starts with the words "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself." Followed by a video of a tesla driving itself on public roads with other cars around while the person's hands are not on the wheel. While they have those…

They market the vehicles as being capable of full self driving at some point in the future. They don't market them as being capable of such today. It's in the very copy you cite at the end of your comment. > Current Autopilot features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous. (Control-F of this quote gets you there) EDIT: You must also acknowledge that you remain in control of the vehi…

Again, same thing. That's not there for customers, that's there so they can tell regulators "Look! See. We told them to be careful."

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#85

Post by eldaisfish » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:16 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #76

_aavaa_ wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla markets their software as "full self-driving". Their page on their own website[1] for the autopilot has a video which starts with the words "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself." Followed by a video of a tesla driving itself on public roads with other cars around while the person's hands are not on the wheel. While they have those…

They market the vehicles as being capable of full self driving at some point in the future. They don't market them as being capable of such today. It's in the very copy you cite at the end of your comment. > Current Autopilot features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous. (Control-F of this quote gets you there) EDIT: You must also acknowledge that you remain in control of the vehi…

that is then misleading. it's as simple as that. Tesla should be fined for this and i'm really surprised they haven't already been.

Hiding behind legalese and specific wording is the textbook definition of misleading.

How would you feel if i sold you an "apple peeler" and made you sign a legal agreement where i stated that the "apple peeler" was not capable of peeling apples today but at some indeterminate point in the future? Is that not misleading?

Why are you arguing semantics for a scummy corporate?

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#86

Post by melenaboija » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:16 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #76

_aavaa_ wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla markets their software as "full self-driving". Their page on their own website[1] for the autopilot has a video which starts with the words "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself." Followed by a video of a tesla driving itself on public roads with other cars around while the person's hands are not on the wheel. While they have those…

They market the vehicles as being capable of full self driving at some point in the future. They don't market them as being capable of such today. It's in the very copy you cite at the end of your comment. > Current Autopilot features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous. (Control-F of this quote gets you there) EDIT: You must also acknowledge that you remain in control of the vehi…

Then maybe change the name Autopilot to something else. Cars are not publicized with Autobrake systems that you have to press the pedal to stop. That would be confusing.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#87

Post by jeroenhd » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:16 PM UTC

bluGill wrote: post #36

jeroenhd wrote: post #7

Yes. Tesla cars are not self-driving cars, despite their marketing. They probably won't be for years to come. I don't think anyone who has read up on the current state of self driving would come to any other conclusion. At best the convicted drivers could sue Tesla for damages because of their advertising after conviction, because Tesla puts a lot of effort into their marketing materials to convince people that the c…

Tesla's marketing is admissible in court as evidence, and probably will carry more weight than any warnings. Marketing is designed to be clear and easy to understand, so courts tend to assume that people understand the marketing intent more than the letter of the legalese warnings. I have no idea what courts will do. It tends to take a lot of cases going opposite ways in slightly different situations before they sett…

You have to put in a conscious effort to stop the car from telling you to hold on to the damn steering wheel. People install mods to their cars to disable these features, but that too requires conscious effort to do.

Tesla owners might sue Tesla for not fulfilling their promises, but I don't think they'll get out of the responsibility for autopilot accidents so easily.

Unless the court rules that Tesla's cars don't pass the minimum road safety tests and are immediately banned from accessing the public road, I don't think any court will accept "the ads told me it was fine" as an excuse for killing two people. You're expected to know the law, and the law says you're responsible for your car while you're on the road.

The subject of who's responsible for self driving cars is an interesting one, and it'll take years for real, clear decisions will be made, but that's completely irrelevant here.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#88

Post by giorgioz » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:16 PM UTC

I think we should immediately prohibit the use of the term Autopilot for level 2 autonomous vehicles like the current Tesla. The name is terribly misleading far past gray area marketing into factfully lying. Pilot assist would be a better term.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#89

Post by f0xJtpvHYTVQ88B » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:17 PM UTC

_aavaa_ wrote: post #46

toomuchtodo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how Tesla is liable? It is made clear to the driver (both in the manual and at activation of Autopilot) that they remain the final authority in control of the vehicle, and at the time of the accident, the Tesla software build did not support detection and actioning of stop lights nor stop signs. Are folks going to sue GM and Ford when people don't pay attention when their versions of driver assist don…

Tesla markets their software as "full self-driving". Their page on their own website[1] for the autopilot has a video which starts with the words "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself." Followed by a video of a tesla driving itself on public roads with other cars around while the person's hands are not on the wheel. While they have those…

All new Tesla cars have the hardware needed in the future for full self-driving in almost all circumstances. The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat.

The future use of these features without supervision is dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions. As these self-driving capabilities are introduced, your car will be continuously upgraded through over-the-air software updates.

Re: A Tesla on autopilot killed two people. Is the driver guilty of manslaughter?

#90

Post by bartread » Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 2:18 PM UTC

tomxor wrote: post #77

No. It's easy to blame the driver, until you consider whether or not the premise of a " partially automated self driving car" is fit for the road. It is not possible to both "stay alert" to anywhere near the same degree required for manual driving, and let an automated navigation system take control. If you sell something inherently dangerous to people under the premise that it is not dangerous provided you do someth…

> It's easy to blame the driver, until you consider whether or not the premise of a "partially automated self driving car" is fit for the road. It is not possible to both "stay alert" to anywhere near the same degree required for manual driving, and let an automated navigation system take control.

This is a poor argument. Aeroplane autopilots were "partial automation" for decades - possibly still are for all I know - and yet have been considered fit for purpose. But the responsibility lies with the driver to ensure the vehicle is travelling safely, same as it does with the pilot of a plane.