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

Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 176 posts

Re: Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

#141

Post by keernan »

Tesla has been taking the legal position in these lawsuits that Tesla vehicles are not intended to be operated without an attentive driver with their hands on the steering wheel at all times.

I suspect it is technologically feasible to design a Tesla to detect: (i) someone is sitting in the driver's seat (seatbelt systems detect that for years); (ii) hands are on the steering wheel; (iii) the driver is attentive (not asleep and is actively monitoring the road).

Are Tesla vehicles designed to blare a loud annoying sound for as long as the system fails to detect an attentive driver?

Re: Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

#143

Post by keernan »

keeganpoppen wrote: post #45
jqpabc123 wrote: post #2

Tesla Apologists: The judge/jury agreed that Tesla was "Full Self Driving" all the way to the scene of the crash.

well the other person in the comments said the guy literally held his accelerator to the floor the entire time. is that actually a reasonable standard, or are you preemptively out for blood because you would never let reality get in the way of a good agenda? ironic, given that you go out of your way to accuse others of this. methinks you doth protest too much?

The article says 'he dropped his phone and bent down to retrieve it'

Re: Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

#144

Post by seanmcdirmid »

philistine wrote: post #139
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Autopilots in airplanes are kind of dumb (keep heading, speed, and altitude, they won’t do much anything else), which is why Tesla doesn’t use the name as branding for its full self driving software. People at least know that much. But then again even on HN people like parent think that autopilot is the same as full self driving, when it is and always has been just smarter cruise control. The payout was for autopilot…

> keep heading, speed, and altitude, they won’t do much anything else That is absolutely not true. A plane on autopilot can land itself except for applying the brakes.

Autolanders are separate systems from autopilots, and there are definitely planes in production today with autopilots (pretty universal) and no autolanders (like almost all Cessnas, you need the garmin auto land system, and it’s only for emergencies). Autopilots have been a thing since the 1920s, when they were just a rope tied to a stick, they definitely didn’t do auto landing back then.

If you are trying to claim that all autopilots come with auto landers, thats absolutely not true. Even most, and again, they are always separate systems even if the auto lander can access the same servos used by the autopilot. Additionally, autolanders, unlike the autopilot, require the runways to support it (well, the ones used on commercial airplanes where it’s used sometimes in low visibility situations).

I really think only a few people on HN don’t get that autopilots are actually very much simple systems that have been around forever and do one thing well (keep the plane going in one direction at a specific altitude and speed).

Re: Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

#145

Post by DoesntMatter22 »

DannyBee wrote: post #8
DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #3

This will continually be appealed until it’s reduced.

They claim have a pretrial agreement to reduce it to 3x compensatory damages (which would make the total judgemnet 160 million instead of 243 million). Appealing is expensive because they have to post a bond with 100% collateral, and you pay for it yearly. In this case, probably around 8 million a year. So in general its not worth appealing for 5 years unless they think they will knock off 25-30% of the judgement. He…

They will 100% fight it regardless. This is a massive verdict against them and it sets a bad precedent. There's no way they don't fight it. It's a ridiculously large verdict.

Re: Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

#146

Post by DoesntMatter22 »

EastSmith wrote: post #120
DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #3

This will continually be appealed until it’s reduced.

Why the f this was downvoted? Literally from the article: > Tesla has indicated it will appeal the verdict to a higher court.

Generally the people here are extremely against Musk so most things that are said which are positive, even if true, will get downvoted.

Re: Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

#147

Post by nickff »

judahmeek wrote: post #140
nickff wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've owned and used two of the affected models (for ~6 years in total), and also read the version of events presented by the plaintiffs (in their claims), as well as the judges' view of what happened. I originally read the documents to understand whether the unit I own is safe, and believed in its safety strongly enough that I have continued to use it.

So you've never actually tried to bypass the safety mechanism to determine the difficulty of doing so? Because I'd bet you that the jury certainly did.

I’d make that bet, because you obviously don’t know much about pressure cookers or the law. Juries hear expert testimony; they do not perform independent investigations. I have inadvertently tested the safety mechanisms, and they are quite secure. I will not do what plaintiffs say they did, because it is so incredibly stupid.

Re: Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

#148

Post by joshfraser »

sonofhans wrote: post #106
joshfraser wrote: post #102

[flagged]

> self driving software is already ~10x safer than a human. This is, technically speaking, pure bullshit. You have no proof because none exists.

Sorry, 8x not 10x

https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/tesla-releases-new-fsd-safe...

Re: Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

#149

Post by sonofhans »

joshfraser wrote: post #148
sonofhans wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> self driving software is already ~10x safer than a human. This is, technically speaking, pure bullshit. You have no proof because none exists.

Sorry, 8x not 10x https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/tesla-releases-new-fsd-safe...

You … can’t be serious, can you? Do you really think these statistics — even taken at face value — mean that self-driving software is “better than humans”?

This article is comparing miles with FSD engaged vs miles driven by humans. You do realize that those are driven under different conditions, yes? That FSD is engaged only for the easy stuff?

Re: Tesla has to pay historic $243M judgement over Autopilot crash, judge says

#150

Post by sonofhans »

joshfraser wrote: post #148
sonofhans wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> self driving software is already ~10x safer than a human. This is, technically speaking, pure bullshit. You have no proof because none exists.

Sorry, 8x not 10x https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/tesla-releases-new-fsd-safe...

Also, you say “self driving software” but you’re linking to a Tesla press release. Do you think Tesla currently has the best self driving software? It seems to me that Waymo and Mercedes are way ahead, both of them putting their money where their mouth is insurance-wise, and using better tech. Yet neither Waymo nor Mercedes would claim their tech is anywhere near as good as a human.
Post reply on HN