Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 286 posts

Re: Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

#41

Post by [deleted] »

furyofantares wrote: post #31
guywithahat wrote: post #4

> The company must pay $329 million in damages to victims and survivor, including compensatory and punitive damages. > A Tesla owner named George McGee was driving his Model S electric sedan while using the company’s Enhanced Autopilot, a partially automated driving system. > While driving, McGee dropped his mobile phone that he was using and scrambled to pick it up. He said during the trial that he believed Enhanced…

> This doesn't hold up logically unless I'm missing something, certainly the victim wouldn't be getting fined 329 million if it was decided to be his fault for not looking at the road I hope we haven't internalized the idea that corporations should be treated the same as people. There's essentially no difference $3M and $300M fine against most individuals, but $3M means very little to Tesla. If you want Tesla's behav…

[deleted]

Re: Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

#42

Post by bangaladore »

metabagel wrote: post #37
bangaladore wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> feature called Autopilot functions as a true autopilot What's a "true autopilot"? In airplanes, autopilot systems traditionally keep heading, altitude, and speed, but pilots are still required to monitor and take over when necessary. It's not hands-off or fully autonomous. I would argue you are creating a definition of "autopilot" that most people do not agree with.

What matters is the definition which most people use. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44761341

I guess I don't understand how.

> A navigation mechanism, as on an aircraft, that automatically maintains a preset course.

Applies here. As far as I can tell the system did do exactly that. But the details of the actual event are unclear (I've heard parked car but also just hitting the back of another car?)

Re: Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

#43

Post by metabagel »

jayess wrote: post #40

Good lord, $129 million in compensatory damages is absurd. One thing you notice when visiting Florida is that every other billboard says "In a wreck? Get a check! Call Lawyer Ambulance Chaser Jones!!"

How much is your life worth?

Re: Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

#44

Post by cosmicgadget »

ajross wrote: post #21
IdSayThatllDoIt wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine the jury heard "autopilot" and then assigned blame to the company that called it that. "[Plaintiffs] claimed Tesla’s Autopilot technology was flawed and deceptively marketed."

As gets pointed out ad nauseum, the very first "cruise control" product in cars was in fact called "Auto-Pilot". Also real "autopilot" systems in aircraft (where the term of art comes from!) aren't remotely supervision-free. This is a fake argument (post hoc rationalization): It invents a meaning to a phrase that seems reasonable but that has never been rigorously applied ever, and demands that one speaker, and only…

Is there any contextual difference between the first instance of cruise control (which has since been relabeled cruise control, perhaps with reason), automatic flight control, and a company whose CEO and fanboys incessantly talk about vehicle autonomy?

Re: Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

#45

Post by ratelimitsteve »

furyofantares wrote: post #31
guywithahat wrote: post #4

> The company must pay $329 million in damages to victims and survivor, including compensatory and punitive damages. > A Tesla owner named George McGee was driving his Model S electric sedan while using the company’s Enhanced Autopilot, a partially automated driving system. > While driving, McGee dropped his mobile phone that he was using and scrambled to pick it up. He said during the trial that he believed Enhanced…

> This doesn't hold up logically unless I'm missing something, certainly the victim wouldn't be getting fined 329 million if it was decided to be his fault for not looking at the road I hope we haven't internalized the idea that corporations should be treated the same as people. There's essentially no difference $3M and $300M fine against most individuals, but $3M means very little to Tesla. If you want Tesla's behav…

>I hope we haven't internalized the idea that corporations should be treated the same as people.

Only when it comes to rights. When it comes to responsibilities the corporations stop being people and go back to being amorphous, abstract things that are impossible to punish.

Re: Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

#46

Post by close04 »

IdSayThatllDoIt wrote: post #9
guywithahat wrote: post #4

> The company must pay $329 million in damages to victims and survivor, including compensatory and punitive damages. > A Tesla owner named George McGee was driving his Model S electric sedan while using the company’s Enhanced Autopilot, a partially automated driving system. > While driving, McGee dropped his mobile phone that he was using and scrambled to pick it up. He said during the trial that he believed Enhanced…

I imagine the jury heard "autopilot" and then assigned blame to the company that called it that. "[Plaintiffs] claimed Tesla’s Autopilot technology was flawed and deceptively marketed."

> I imagine the jury heard "autopilot" and then assigned blame to the company that called it that.

It's only fair. If the name was fine when it was attracting the buyers who were mislead about the real capabilities, it must be fine when it causing the same to jurors.

There's another similar argument to be made about the massive amount awarded as damages, which maybe will be lowered on appeal. If people (Tesla included) can make the argument that when a car learns something or gets an "IQ" improvement they all do, then it stands to reason that when one car is dangerous they all are (or were, even for a time). There are millions of Teslas on the road today so proportionally it's a low amount per unsafe car.

Re: Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

#47

Post by ratelimitsteve »

IdSayThatllDoIt wrote: post #9
guywithahat wrote: post #4

> The company must pay $329 million in damages to victims and survivor, including compensatory and punitive damages. > A Tesla owner named George McGee was driving his Model S electric sedan while using the company’s Enhanced Autopilot, a partially automated driving system. > While driving, McGee dropped his mobile phone that he was using and scrambled to pick it up. He said during the trial that he believed Enhanced…

I imagine the jury heard "autopilot" and then assigned blame to the company that called it that. "[Plaintiffs] claimed Tesla’s Autopilot technology was flawed and deceptively marketed."

do you think they heard "autopilot" or "full self driving"?

Re: Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

#49

Post by guywithahat »

ajross wrote: post #21
IdSayThatllDoIt wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine the jury heard "autopilot" and then assigned blame to the company that called it that. "[Plaintiffs] claimed Tesla’s Autopilot technology was flawed and deceptively marketed."

As gets pointed out ad nauseum, the very first "cruise control" product in cars was in fact called "Auto-Pilot". Also real "autopilot" systems in aircraft (where the term of art comes from!) aren't remotely supervision-free. This is a fake argument (post hoc rationalization): It invents a meaning to a phrase that seems reasonable but that has never been rigorously applied ever, and demands that one speaker, and only…

It's also worth mentioning he would have been required to keep his hands on the wheel while using autopilot, or else it starts beeping at you and eventually disables the feature entirely. The system makes it very clear you're still in control, and it will permanently disable itself if it thinks you're not paying attention too many times (you get 5 strikes for your ownership duration).

Re: Tesla must pay portion of $329M damages after fatal Autopilot crash, jury says

#50

Post by bko »

bangaladore wrote: post #29
panarky wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you you make a manufacturing error without intentionally deceiving your customers through deceptive naming of features, you have to pay millions per death. If you intentionally give the feature a deceptive name like "autopilot", and then customers rely on that deceptive name to take their eyes off the road, then you have to pay hundreds of millions per death. Makes sense to me.

Wouldn't that logic mean any automaker advertising a "collision avoidance system" should be held liable whenever a car crashes into something? In practice, they are not, because the fine print always clarifies that the feature works only under specific conditions and that the driver remains responsible. Tesla's Autopilot and FSD come with the same kind of disclaimers. The underlying principle is the same.

Right, this is the frustrating thing about court room activism and general anger towards Tesla. By any stretch of the imagination, this technology is reasonably safe. It has over 3.6 billion miles, currently about 8m miles per day. By all reasonable measures, this technology is safe and useful. I could see why plaintiffs go after Tesla. They have a big target on their back for whatever reason, and activist judges go along. But I don't get how someone on the outside can look at this and think that this technology or marketing over the last 10 years is somehow deceptive or dangerous.

https://teslanorth.com/2025/03/28/teslas-full-self-driving-s...

Post reply on HN