5 ms·

>It is an evolving system that should continuously get better and safer. In this instance, it didn't get safer. It did the opposite, and it killed someone. >I

>It is an evolving system that should continuously get better and safer. In this instance, it didn't get safer. It did the opposite, and it killed someone. >I haven't seen anything to suggest Tesla is ignoring that data or being reckless in when they decide to roll out these changes. You haven't? Because I'm sitting here looking at a story about a bug in Tesla's latest software that Tesla ignored and then it resulted in someone's death.

slg 9y ago
You are drawing those conclusions with only half of the equation. Like I said in my previous comment, neither of us know how many accidents were prevented or lives saved by that update.
- txcwpalpha 9y ago
  >Like I said in my previous comment, neither of us know how many accidents were prevented or lives saved by that update. Then why are you making assumptions about it, then? >You are drawing those conclusions with only half of the equation. No, I'm not. The facts are: there was a problem that was reported to Tesla, Tesla ignored that problem, and now someone is dead because of that problem. No further information is needed to recognize that Tesla acted poorly here.
  - slg 9y ago
    I said Tesla failed in my first comment. I am not defending them regarding this particular accident. I am simply explaining the potential logic behind their decisions and why this single failure doesn't mean their approach is inherently wrong. The only assumption I am making is that Tesla has good intentions with their aggressive autopilot releases.
  - fmihaila 9y ago
    > and now someone is dead because of that problem. You've stated this repeatedly without proof. It has not been established he is dead because of that problem. The investigation may yet reach that conclusion, but until then you have no support for this assertion.

5 ms·

>It is an evolving system that should continuously get better and safer. In this instance, it didn't get safer. It did the opposite, and it killed someone. >I

by txcwpalpha 9y ago

slg 9y ago
You are drawing those conclusions with only half of the equation. Like I said in my previous comment, neither of us know how many accidents were prevented or lives saved by that update.
- txcwpalpha 9y ago
  >Like I said in my previous comment, neither of us know how many accidents were prevented or lives saved by that update. Then why are you making assumptions about it, then? >You are drawing those conclusions with only half of the equation. No, I'm not. The facts are: there was a problem that was reported to Tesla, Tesla ignored that problem, and now someone is dead because of that problem. No further information is needed to recognize that Tesla acted poorly here.
  - slg 9y ago
    I said Tesla failed in my first comment. I am not defending them regarding this particular accident. I am simply explaining the potential logic behind their decisions and why this single failure doesn't mean their approach is inherently wrong. The only assumption I am making is that Tesla has good intentions with their aggressive autopilot releases.
  - fmihaila 9y ago
    > and now someone is dead because of that problem. You've stated this repeatedly without proof. It has not been established he is dead because of that problem. The investigation may yet reach that conclusion, but until then you have no support for this assertion.