2 ms·
> You said it's designed to work without human supervision. When?
by dimino 10y ago
> You said it's designed to work without human supervision.
When?
- mikeash 10y ago"It was not designed to work under human supervision...." I don't know how else to understand that other than that it was designed to work without human supervision. If that's not what you meant, perhaps you could elaborate.
- dimino 10y agoI meant what I said. Collision detection was not designed to work under human supervision, which means when it runs into something, it has failed its design. Tesla cars are not designed to run into things.
- simoncion 10y ago> Collision detection was not designed to work under human supervision, which means when it runs into something, it has failed its design. From your quote upthread: > "Digital control of motors, brakes, and steering helps avoid collisions from the front and sides, and prevents the car from wandering off the road." (Emphasis mine.) Notice the shift in language from "helps avoid" to "prevents" when describing the two different aspects of the car's thrust and positioning systems. The different is significant and important. It's clear that the systems are a front and side collision assistance system, not a front and side collision prevention system. You see the distinction?
- freehunter 10y agoIs your name Jared Overton? Or is that the name of your client? Because no impartial person would be so deliberately dense to argue against his own words.
- dimino 10y agoRelax, I'm just trying to point out that Tesla did not intend to build a car that would run into stationary objects.
- cynix 10y agoThey also did not build their car to never run into objects. These 2 are not mutually exclusive. For example, a kitchen knife is not designed to kill people, but it also wasn't designed to prevent itself from being used to kill people.