> It does not appear as if the driver had sufficient reason to believe the system was capable of complete autonomous operation. And it does not appear as if the

> It does not appear as if the driver had sufficient reason to believe the system was capable of complete autonomous operation. And it does not appear as if there was a critical flaw or bug in the system that was putting consumers at risk. I am going to disagree there. Tesla names its system autopilot. Uses the fact that autopilot that includes collision avoidance reduces accidents by 40%, and then claims that there system is safer than a human (assisted human safer than a human, genius!). Elon musk has a statement every month about self driving autonomous driverless cars. They even have the gall to say that new cars have "full self driving hardware", is proof of outrageous statements even required? And all this hype/misleading advertising is fine because Tesla showed a few warnings? And the driver didn't have sufficient reason to believe the car was capable of complete autonomy. A simple Google search will tell you that this driver wasn't the only one.