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

31–40 of 176 posts

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

#31

Post by palmotea »

mey wrote: post #13
standardUser wrote: post #10

I'm not clear on what Tesla is doing these days. They've been left in the dust on autonomous driving, they've failed to update their successful car models, and their only new model was a spectacular failure.

Ask the CEO? Based on recent incentives and acquisitions, are they planning to remain a car company?

>> I'm not clear on what Tesla is doing these days.

> Ask the CEO? Based on recent incentives and acquisitions, are they planning to remain a car company?

I believe Musk wants to hype humanoid robots, because he can't get away with irrationally hyping electric cars or self-driving technology like you used to.

Tesla was never a car company, their real product is sci-fi dreams.

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

#32

Post by 1970-01-01 »

palmotea wrote: post #20
WalterBright wrote: post #16

[flagged]

> It's an absurd judgement. > Consider also how many lives have been saved by the autopilot. > Be careful what you wish for. How many? Tell me.

There's legit dashcam video showing Autopilot preventing severe crashes. Go on YouTube instead of balking. Here's a few to get your algorithm working:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3K410O_9Nc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qy6SplEn4hQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcfgIltPyOA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tu2N8f3nEYc

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

#33

Post by bryanlarsen »

standardUser wrote: post #10

I'm not clear on what Tesla is doing these days. They've been left in the dust on autonomous driving, they've failed to update their successful car models, and their only new model was a spectacular failure.

And as the lunar new year demo dance shows, China is leaving them in the dust building humanoid robots.

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

#34

Post by palmotea »

dekhn wrote: post #15
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.

If I read the article it says autopilot, not FSD.

> If I read the article it says autopilot, not FSD.

What's the difference? And does it matter?

Both are misleadingly named, per the OP:

> In December 2025, a California judge ruled that Tesla’s use of “Autopilot” in its marketing was misleading and violated state law, calling “Full Self-Driving” a name that is “actually, unambiguously false.”

> Just this week, Tesla avoided a 30-day California sales suspension only by agreeing to drop the “Autopilot” branding entirely. Tesla has since discontinued Autopilot as a standalone product in the U.S. and Canada.

> This lands weight to one of the main arguments used in lawsuits since the landmark case: Tesla has been misleading customers into thinking that its driver assist features (Autopilot and FSD) are more capable than they are – leading drivers to pay less attention.

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

#35

Post by mmooss »

dolphinscorpion wrote: post #6
josefritzishere wrote: post #5

Tesla would benefit from the board replacing the CEO. It's increasingly clear that there is a problem and it's not talent, it's decision-making.

Their stock would crash to $10 without the hype machine

Après moi, le déluge.

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

#36

Post by coredog64 »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #17
xiphias2 wrote: post #7

This case will make settlement amounts higher, which is the main thing car companies care about when making decisions about driving features/marketing. With Robotaxi it will get even higher as it will be clear 100% the company's fault.

Fight Club 2.0: You pay to retrain it only if the AI will kill more people than our settlement fund can pay out.

You're already downvoted, but this quote from Fight Club always annoyed me as it misunderstands how recalls work.

1. Insurance companies price in the risk, and insurance pricing absolutely influences manufacturers (see the absolute crap that the Big 3 sold in the 70s) 2. The government can force a recall based on a flaw whether or not the manufacturer agrees

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

#37

Post by Almondsetat »

standardUser wrote: post #10

I'm not clear on what Tesla is doing these days. They've been left in the dust on autonomous driving, they've failed to update their successful car models, and their only new model was a spectacular failure.

By which metrics has Tesla been left in the dust wrt autonomous driving? Right now they are the only brand where you can buy a car and have it do basically 90% (or sometimes 100%) of your daily driving. Sure, it's supervised, but the alternatives are literally extremely geogated taxis

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

#38

Post by 1970-01-01 »

coredog64 wrote: post #36
1970-01-01 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fight Club 2.0: You pay to retrain it only if the AI will kill more people than our settlement fund can pay out.

You're already downvoted, but this quote from Fight Club always annoyed me as it misunderstands how recalls work. 1. Insurance companies price in the risk, and insurance pricing absolutely influences manufacturers (see the absolute crap that the Big 3 sold in the 70s) 2. The government can force a recall based on a flaw whether or not the manufacturer agrees

v2.0- Tesla drivers insure with Tesla and the recalls are all OTA software fixes.

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

#39

Post by dekhn »

nradov wrote: post #25
dekhn wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When my spouse worked in the area of determining "the value of an individual" (economically, not morally), it was computed as present value lifetime earnings: the cumulative income of the individual, converted back to its current value (using some sort of inflation model). IIRC, the PVLE averaged out to about $1-10M.

You shouldn't be down voted. Regardless of the moral or technical issues involved, there are established formulas used to calculate damages in wrongful death civil suits. Your range is generally correct although certain factors can push it higher. (Punitive damages are a separate issue.)

I generally don't complain about being downvoted, but it is always puzzling when I post a neutral fact without any judgement.

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

#40

Post by tass »

I’m not usually an apologist, and I’d agree with this judgement if the car was left to its own devices, but the driver of the car held his foot on the accelerator which is why it blew through those stop signs and lights.

In regards to the autopilot branding, would a reasonable person expect a plane on autopilot to fly safely if the pilot suddenly took over and pointed it at the ground?

Post reply on HN