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

Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

abc7news.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 850 posts

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#301

Post by rsynnott »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #278
CPLX wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing you're describing is called a train.

Are you going to having a train running every few minutes to really make the delays comparable? And you need a fleet of rental cars so that people can actually get to their destination. What's the relative cost of all that vs. pavement?

I mean, if there’s the demand, sure. Lots of commuter trains run at that sort of rate.

Though your train of cars would likely have such low passenger density that a series of buses would be just as good. Special lanes just for buses are already a thing.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#302

Post by kolpa »

Johnny555 wrote: post #149
mjamesaustin wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a stark difference in tone this kind of statement would have made. Tesla's statement reeks of a desire to protect themselves from liability or a potential lawsuit. It's very sad to see them adopting such language in the face of such a tragedy.

What company can afford to embrace a wrongful-death lawsuit? And it's not just this one, it's all the others that they'll suddenly be accepting liability for.

Certainly not a company that can't even afford to embrace a 1GB Google maps download over LTE.

https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/tesla%E2%80%99s-crazy-...

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#303

Post by dewski »

Twisell wrote: post #291
dewski wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't just blanket say everything is irrelevant because it doesn't fit your narrative. If he reported the system wasn't working, why would he continue using it especially in a known problematic area?

Because it’s on his daily commuting path? If the autopilot globallly function well and give him added security why should he disconnect it? But if the car consistently swerve toward the barrier in certains circumstances, doesn’t it increase the probability of a crash because it programmatically increase risk of accident in an otherwise safe situation. And then isn’t Tesla culpright of not treating bug report appropri…

Based on his complaints I don’t see how we can infer it gave him added security which would warrant continued use. If I knew a tool I used around the house wasn’t working completely as advertised I wouldn’t continue using the feature that wasn’t working for me.

As a beta user of bank software where clicking transfer money ended up sending twice as much, wouldn’t it be my fault if I did it 7 more times when I acknowledged its behavior even if it wasn’t as advertised?

I realize my examples are hard to compare to this specific situation, but the software is opt in and is littered with disclaimers because it’s not a level 3+ autonomous vehicle.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#304

Post by Rychard »

laythea wrote: post #191
tc wrote: post #18

Tesla probably shouldn't be saying anything about this at all, even just to avoid giving it more news cycles. But if they were going to say something, here's what they should have said the first time. ---- We take great care in building our cars to save lives. Forty thousands Americans die on the roads each year. That's a statistic. But even a single death of a Tesla driver or passenger is a tragedy. This has affecte…

"Saving other lives is the best we can hope to take away from an event like this." I am a bit irked by the arrogance of this statement. The best we can hope for is to ensure the safety of the public. And you, as a company, can be regulated out of business.

"from an event like this" is an important part of the statement.

Pretend for a moment that the occurrence of the accident was a foregone conclusion. In such a scenario, the most positive thing that could be done would be to use the information to save the lives of others.

There's a smidgen of humility in the phrasing; that the accident might have been avoidable with the information that has been gained as a result of the accident. Of course, I presume that sort of sentiment would fall squarely under the "admission of guilt" umbrella that prevents companies from saying things like this.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#305

Post by andrei_says_ »

txcwpalpha wrote: post #59

I used to be in awe of Teslas and I have always been a big fan of Musk, and even after the crash I still imagined myself one day buying a Tesla. But after this response, I've completely lost respect for the company, for Musk, and I don't think I'll ever buy one or advocate for someone buying one. The driver had previously reported to Tesla 7 to 10 times that there was an issue with autopilot, but Tesla told him "no t…

I think the core of the issue lies in what “using autopilot” means.

If the driver had used it according to the instructions (with hands on the wheel, while driving the car, watching the road as a driver always should), the crash would not have occurred.

Tesla is between a rock and a hard place, they need to make it crystal clear that the car performed as expected. The message is not intended for the deceased driver’s family but for everyone listening, including everyone who owns a Tesla.

It’s not an “autopilot”, it’s a lane assist. I see this as a naming failure more than anything else.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#306

Post by dewski »

txcwpalpha wrote: post #179
dewski wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't just blanket say everything is irrelevant because it doesn't fit your narrative. If he reported the system wasn't working, why would he continue using it especially in a known problematic area?

Because he was assured by Tesla that it was working, and there was no problem. They were clearly wrong. As for the relevance: sure I can. My post about Tesla's contradiction has no relevance on what kind of autopilot it was. Tesla denied there was an issue, contradicted themselves by then saying there is an issue, and now is casting blame on the user for that issue. That's not acceptable. It would be unacceptable if…

Nobody was forcing him to use the feature if he knew it wasn’t working as intended on that particular stretch of road. My issue with your statements are you’re shifting 110% of the blame to Tesla when that isn’t remotely the case.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#307

Post by gamblor956 »

Ryudas wrote: post #247
Dwolb wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla need to stop calling it 'Autopilot'. The name implies drivers don't need to drive and is most likely a big reason drivers are lured into a false sense of security.

I find this argument so often. Autopilot has never been a term for autonomous, just as its used in aviation. Just because people don't know the proper term or have an erroneous idea of the term, doesn't mean tesla has to have the burden of people misinterpreting what it says.

The problem is that Tesla creates the misinterpretation by explicitly stating that Autopilot is a self-driving system rather than a driver-assist system.

It's a fatal choice of words.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#308

Post by lopmotr »

mozumder wrote: post #96
cornholio wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The general sentiment is correct but the wording implies some degree of acceptance of liability: Autopilot was engaged... took no evasive action... engineers are investigating... failed to detect. They should have issued a single, very simple statement that they are investigating the crash and that any resulting improvements would be distributed to all Tesla vehicles, so that such accidents can no longer happen even…

Doesn't help that fucking Elon Musk and half of Silicon Valley keeps saying AI technology will solve all driving problems, when they should know fully well that autonomous cars are never going to happen without structural changes to roads themselves. Silicon Valley needs to stop trying to make autonomous cars happen.

What structural changes? Considering that self-driving cars are already running daily in many cities, those changes must be fairly minor since they've already been implemented in those cities.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#309

Post by dhimes »

kolpa wrote: post #295
cdancette wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me it's the opposite. I feel like with cruise control on, I'm much more attentive to the road and the surroundings and feel much safer. It really annoys me when I have to constantly look at the speed to avoid getting above the limit and it is very tiring for long drives.

You need a speed limiter, not necessarily cruise control.

Cruise control works fine for this.

Re: Tesla issues strongest statement yet blaming driver for deadly crash

#310

Post by jijojv »

jhall1468 wrote: post #56
exotree wrote: post #10

This is a very upsetting response. Yes, the driver could have paid more attention, and yes, he shouldn't have activated Autopilot in an area where he knew Tesla's autopilot was not working correctly. However, Tesla calling it "Autopilot" should be no longer allowed. It's clear that it is most certainly not that, and customers are not treating this feature in a careful and cautious fashion, and I do believe that's due…

Autopilot is a marketing term here. It's correct if we think of Autopilot = autonomous but it isn't. The thing alarms at you (visually and via sound) when you take your hands off the wheel. The fact that drivers ignore that isn't Tesla's fault, and saying it's "not enough" is kind of absurd. What the hell are they going to do if you take your hands off the wheel? Stop the car in the middle of a freeway? I could use y…

> alarms when you take your hands off the wheel.

No, only every ~ 1 minute.

>What the hell are they going to do if you take your hands off the wheel

Detect barrier and apply auto emergency brakes and Disengage autopilot like GM's Super Cruise does if it detects your face is not looking at the road.

Post reply on HN