Live data from Hacker News

Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

electrek.co

151–152 of 152 posts

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#151
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been quite happy with my "first generation" tesla with the mobileye system. It has only tried to kill me a couple times in 6 years of driving it; it is not terribly smart but within the system's limits it is very stable. I certainly don't trust it to drive unattended, but it does offload 5-30% of the toil of driving on highways, which is pretty nice. Offloading 50-80% but constantly wondering "is it going to try…

It has only tried to kill me a couple times in 6 years of driving I understand your pragmatism, but it still boggles my mind how this metric could be considered satisfactory.

Well, with a car without lane keeping or cruise control, it'll try to kill you pretty quickly if you stop actively controlling the car....

With an AP1 car, you can scan ahead 5-10 seconds (in about 1 second) and pretty quickly assess if the car's going to have a hard time with anything coming up (mostly it is an issue of lane lines vanishing in highway curves or lanes splitting ambiguously).

It is in the happy medium of predictably stupid such that it isn't ever really trusted. Something smarter may lull you into trusting it more, which leads to situations where it can trick you... I imagine there are people who think it's safe enough to scan the road every 1-2 minutes when in a more automated vehicle, and obviously the ultimate goal is "people in car ignore the driving aspect of the trip" -- both of those seem pretty ambitious goals but people are spending gigatons of money to solve these, so maybe it'll be solved?

I've also had animals jump in front of me (just in general, not related to teslas); driving is just dangerous but is a lot more convenient than walking everywhere.

Re: Tesla owner won $10k in court for Tesla's FSD lies. Tesla is still fighting him

#152
post #149
post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the link and information, but are you sure about that? I don't see or read anything about liability... And footnote 2 on that page says: 2 DRIVE PILOT is an SAE Level 3 (conditional automated driving) system: the automated driving function takes over certain driving tasks. However, a fallback-ready user is still required. The fallback-ready user must be ready to take control of the vehicle at all times w…

Yes, I'm sure about that. Mercedes-Benz accepts legal liability for collisions when Drive Pilot is active. https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a39481699/what-happens-if-...

Thanks for your reply. In good faith, I will give some kudos to mercedes for accepting some liability in specific situations. However, I do not grant them full liability which is what I originally stated.

AFAICT from a public search, this is the current 'drive pilot' legal terms:

https://www.mbusa.com/en/legal-notices/drive-pilot

Section 5: "...the individual using DRIVE PILOT Subscription Services becomes the fallback-ready user". That is not full liability. Full stop. I will not use drive pilot.

Additionally:

Section 6: This is a legal arbitration clause. It's a red flag to me as I believe this is a move by the legal system to contractually operate outside of the u.s. constitution. I realize this is more a personal opinion, but, regardless, this will always be a barrier, for me, to what some in industry call "Full Self-Driving (Supervised)".

Post reply on HN