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

161–170 of 286 posts

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

#161

Post by SilverElfin »

izacus wrote: post #17
SilverElfin wrote: post #6

> 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 Autopilot would brake if an obstacle was in the way. His Model S accelerated through an intersection at just over 60 miles per hour, hitting a nearby empty parked car and its owners, who were standing on the other side of their vehicle. Hard for me to see this as anything b…

The driver at that time was Tesla Autopilot. So yeah, drivers fault as the jury said.

That sounds indistinguishable from “The driver at the time was the motor”

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

#162

Post by juancampa »

MBCook wrote: post #155
dzhiurgis wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FSD wasn’t even released at that time.

Substitute Autopilot then. No other auto maker uses similar language. Ford and GM use BlueCruise and SuperCruise, clearly implying an improved kind of cruise control.

Autopilot in an aircraft is basically cruise control, not full self flying.

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

#163

Post by trog »

MBCook wrote: post #155
dzhiurgis wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FSD wasn’t even released at that time.

Substitute Autopilot then. No other auto maker uses similar language. Ford and GM use BlueCruise and SuperCruise, clearly implying an improved kind of cruise control.

From what bits I've seen of the trial, at least a chunk of it was devoted to the meaning of the word "autopilot". Tesla even brought in a linguist to argue their case: https://bsky.app/profile/niedermeyer.online/post/3lunfw2s2is...

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

#164

Post by stouset »

bruce511 wrote: post #70
stouset wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that Tesla should receive punitive damages. And the size of the punitive damages must be enough to discourage bad behavior. I'm not necessarily sure the victim(s) should get all of the punitive damages. $329 million is a gargantuan sum of money; it "feels" wrong to give a corporation-sized punishment to a small group of individuals. I could certainly see some proportion going toward funding regulatory agencie…

>> it "feels" wrong to give a corporation-sized punishment to a small group of individuals This feeling has a name; loss aversion. It's a really interesting human traits. About 66% of people feel bad when someone else does well. The impact of this feeling on behavior (even behavior that is self-harming) is instructive. The concept of "Fairness" comes into play as well. Many people have an expectation that the "world…

It is definitely not loss aversion. It also has nothing to do with whether or not someone else is getting the money. Handing me nearly half a billion because a parent died would certainty be welcome, but I think it would feel equally as disproportionate and out-of-place.

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

#165

Post by MBCook »

trog wrote: post #163
MBCook wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Substitute Autopilot then. No other auto maker uses similar language. Ford and GM use BlueCruise and SuperCruise, clearly implying an improved kind of cruise control.

From what bits I've seen of the trial, at least a chunk of it was devoted to the meaning of the word "autopilot". Tesla even brought in a linguist to argue their case: https://bsky.app/profile/niedermeyer.online/post/3lunfw2s2is...

Makes sense. If you’re Tesla’s lawyer you need to do whatever you can to try to prove the name wasn’t a promise of functionality it didn’t meet.

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

#166

Post by MBCook »

juancampa wrote: post #162
MBCook wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Substitute Autopilot then. No other auto maker uses similar language. Ford and GM use BlueCruise and SuperCruise, clearly implying an improved kind of cruise control.

Autopilot in an aircraft is basically cruise control, not full self flying.

This is such a pointless talking point, it amazes me how pro-Tesla people have latched onto it.

It doesn’t matter what it means. It matters what people think it means.

This is discussed tons of other places in these comments, and every previous story about Autopilot and FSD here on HN.

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

#167

Post by __m »

stouset wrote: post #164
bruce511 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> it "feels" wrong to give a corporation-sized punishment to a small group of individuals This feeling has a name; loss aversion. It's a really interesting human traits. About 66% of people feel bad when someone else does well. The impact of this feeling on behavior (even behavior that is self-harming) is instructive. The concept of "Fairness" comes into play as well. Many people have an expectation that the "world…

It is definitely not loss aversion. It also has nothing to do with whether or not someone else is getting the money. Handing me nearly half a billion because a parent died would certainty be welcome, but I think it would feel equally as disproportionate and out-of-place.

Killed, not just died.

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

#168

Post by __m »

bangaladore wrote: post #28
thorum wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The product simply should not be called Autopilot. Anyone with any common sense could predict that many people will (quite reasonably) assume that a feature called Autopilot functions as a true autopilot, and that misunderstanding will lead to fatalities.

> 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.

The word literally means automatic pilot. Legal departments create an alternate definition of the word to not get sued and most people will interpret the word literally.

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

#169

Post by danny_codes »

andsoitis wrote: post #108
comte7092 wrote: post #64

A lot of discussion in this thread about the technical meaning of “autopilot” and its capabilities vs FSD. This is really missing the point. Tesla could have called it “unicorn mode” and the result would still be the same. The true issue at hand is that Elon Musk has been banding about telling people that their cars are going to drive themselves completely for over a decade now and overstating teslas capabilities in…

> it doesn’t matter because technically the fine print says otherwise. Every time you engage the system it tells you to pay attention. It also has sensors to detect when you don’t and forces you. If you have more than N violations in a trip, the system is unavailable for the remainder of your trip. I don’t know how much clearer it could be. I would argue that the system is actually so good (but imperfect) that people…

Which is kind of the entire problem. It’s Tesla bringing this grey-zone product to market that the Jury/Judge found to be problematic (and thus ruled against Tesla).

Tesla has always been blasé about safety.

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

#170

Post by TheAlchemist »

andsoitis wrote: post #108
comte7092 wrote: post #64

A lot of discussion in this thread about the technical meaning of “autopilot” and its capabilities vs FSD. This is really missing the point. Tesla could have called it “unicorn mode” and the result would still be the same. The true issue at hand is that Elon Musk has been banding about telling people that their cars are going to drive themselves completely for over a decade now and overstating teslas capabilities in…

> it doesn’t matter because technically the fine print says otherwise. Every time you engage the system it tells you to pay attention. It also has sensors to detect when you don’t and forces you. If you have more than N violations in a trip, the system is unavailable for the remainder of your trip. I don’t know how much clearer it could be. I would argue that the system is actually so good (but imperfect) that people…

Look at what Elon and even Tesla official account are publishing daily on Twitter. The tweet suggestions like your car can drive you even when you have a health emergency and need to drive to ER or that you can make an espresso while your car is driving itself.

Can you point to any other automaker that even come close to this level of false advertising ?

Post reply on HN