288
Lawsuits test Tesla claim that drivers are solely responsible for crashes
(www.washingtonpost.com)
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
288 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
63455 readers
5465 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I’m saying the technology leads to more harm than good in its current implementation. I don’t care it’s better than your Audi, it still sucks overall. “Used correctly” shouldn’t be a huge factor in a good design. It should be easy to use correctly and hard to use incorrectly. This is not the current state. It’s very easy to use incorrectly, as you admit, and the accidents demonstrate this.
In what way?
The vehicle prompts you to keep your hands on the wheel and be ready to take over at any moment every time you enable FSD. Everyone using it incorrectly is doing so knowingly.
Not supported by the evidence, but sure, keep relying on your feelings and telling other people it’s their problem. Projection.
This is the stupidity I hate most about Tesla shills.
Great engineers make genius innovations all the time to keep idiots from harming themselves or others. Those innovations saturate our society and industries at all levels. Good engineering should be trying to do it more.
Tesla just doesn't care, or is even complicit in giving the idiots just enough freedom so people can think Tesla is ahead of the competition. The only difference from Tesla is that other car manufacturers don't give idiots that freedom.
When did I refer to Musk? You must be sensitive.
Yes, when cruise control came out over 100 years ago, there were very little controls. Responsible car makers have changes that. Some even recently aimed for zero fatalities for people using their cars and the associated technologies.
And there are many cars that keep you from driving into a wall. Maybe, at this point, you can't keep 100 percent of the idiots from doing something stupid, but responsible car makers do much, much better than Tesla, who actually promotes and markets the actions of idiots abusing the systems in their cars.
The responsible car makers showing drivers performing stunts well beyond the ability or legality of most drivers?
You've got some kind of chip on your shoulder man. It's a car company, who cares.
You think giving me Tesla marketing BS, published by a proxy Tesla marketing rag, is going to convince me? If it is anything else like Tesla's marketing department, they just pulled something out of their ass, Musk saw the numbers and told them to fudge it some more, and then they put it up on their website dressed in fancy graphs and tech-speak. That's why you'll never find any actual data that third-party researchers can verify it with.
You have this article that looked at a four-month period. During that time, Tesla was responsible for every 10 of 11 deaths related to automated driving features. This report states that Tesla has the most accidents of any brand.
Tesla's create horrible driving habits in their customers. On the one hand, you have the CEO that creates a culture to disregard for safety and rules, praising users that openly go against the terms of use, as long as they show it doing something cool. On the other hand, you have a system that is just good enough to lull you into a sense of safety and confidence in the system itself. Then one day it decides to kill a motorcyclist, a kid getting off the bus, or a paramedic working on the side of the road. The driver that maybe praised Tesla to their friends and colleagues about how amazing it was is now dumbstruck because the car acted so unexpectedly.
Tesla is just as much as fault as the driver for that situation.
So why do you think Tesla's crash at a higher rate? I think it's a combination of instant acceleration, poor sensor-suite (like the lack of radar), and Tesla giving idiots free-reign to abuse the system as they please.
They use the term "rate," which would account for absolute numbers. So just because Tesla sells more EVs wouldn't account for it.
Where are you getting that number? The report just said Tesla had the highest accident rate of all brands.
Okay, so Tesla had the highest rate, but switching power train types seems problematic. It didn't really say if other EVs are close to Tesla's accident rates, or am I missing something?
In any case, I think we can dispel the myth that Tesla is one of the safest cars. They have the worst accident rates among all brands and their driving assist features either can't keep idiots from making bad decisions or, worse, even amplify the dangerous effects that idiots create while driving.
They give 2 statistics, accidents and incidents. Accidents are crashes, incidents are crashes plus tickets.
Tesla has most accidents per driver. Ram has the most incidents - the report you mention. Tesla has the second most incidents.
So, Teslas still top the number is accidents. Agree, we would need a study to figure out if Tesla driving assist suite is either incompetent at driver safety or malignant to driver safety. Perhaps this lawsuit will shed some light on it.
That's the malignant part I mentioned. They trust it too much and end up running into a first responder, motorcycle or kid getting off a school bus. The aviation industry and many other industries have extensive knowledge how to avoid this very problem. Most other car companies implement systems to avoid it. Tesla just doesn't really care that much.
My thoughts were also about phantom breaking, but I don't know if it is still an issue.
By the way, I'm not downvoting you here.
Dude, I was literally in another thread where someone posted a video talking about how many deaths FSD caused (17) and extrapolating those numbers by how many FSD miles were driven lead to fsd being 11x more dangerous than a humans driver.
It had all sorts of upvotes.
Except, those accidents were on AP which has multiple billions of miles driven, not FSD. The NHSTA has only said there was 1 fsd related death. Related, as in, not confirmed to be the cause of.
They don't even know what they're mad about. And i get downvoted for showing the major flaw in their post.
I bet they've never used, or had to acknowledge the warnings prior to using AP. Let alone the even more dire warning FSD gives (or gave prior to v12 anyway, not sure what today's warnings are)