5 ms·

Tesla crashes into wall during auto-park, Tesla: Beta feature, so owner's fault

44 points by heyyyouu 7y ago

priceytomato292 7y ago
don't you sign a liability waiver when entering Tesla beta program?
- microwavecamera 7y ago
  Tesla still has to meet vehicle safety regulations. It's a friggin' car not the Windows Insider Program. No one dies if my PC crashes.
  - rudolph9 7y ago
    People die when the .net program in Tesla crashes
  - ulfw 7y ago
    This is what happens when you are trying to do manufacturing “Silicon Valley” style
zyang 7y ago
Just glad no one was hurt.
vondur 7y ago
I don't think signing up for beta software on a car like this is a good idea.
heyyyouu 7y ago
What I don't understand (and maybe I'm just naive) is how it's legal to test a so-called "beta feature" -- which, if it fails, clearly can be dangerous (lucky no one was hurt) -- on customers in a live environment, vs using its own test drivers at the very least? I can't imagine this being legal with any other form of transportation (or just large equipment; they don't even sell lightbulbs that aren't CE certified).
- SilasX 7y ago
  Yeah, you'll notice that aviation industry doesn't have an equivalent. Which is not to say that none of their new features fail catastrophically -- as we were reminded recently by the 300 MAX -- but they don't consider this a valid defense.
  - TheAdamist 7y ago
    the auto industry doesn't have this equivalent either, its just tesla. They'll eventually just claim everything is beta and take no responsibility for anything not working.
- surrealize 7y ago
  Of course Tesla tests things itself with its own drivers. What they can't do is replicate every single one of the unusual corner cases that people encounter in the real world.
  - hjk05 7y ago
    Sure, but that’s true of all companies. Imagine a drug company put a drug on the market that might kill your or leave you crippled if you don’t match the results they had on their 3 test patients, and them telling you “That’s on you, the drug is a beta”.
    - kruczek 7y ago
      That's a bad example, because drugs typically have all kinds of warnings about negative effects. They certainly test on more than 3 patients, and they won't tell you the drug is a beta, but I'm sure they will still claim they are not responsible, because they warned you about very small chance of failure.
    - NullPrefix 7y ago
      > Imagine a drug company put a drug on the market that might kill your or leave you crippled Taking out of context by cutting off your sentence, but pretty much any drug has a listed side effect like this.
extropy 7y ago
IMO this is pure FUD, no actual correspondence with Tesla to back it up. It would be silly for Tesla to argue that it's driver's fault because "beta". Every other car manufacturer will say it's driver's responsibility when using autopark, full stop.
unstatusthequo 7y ago
Do people have any personal accountability anymore? "The company will protect me" is such a foolish thought process, especially when you're playing with beta features that have risks. This to me isn't all that different than the guy who crashed his Tesla while watching a movie behind the wheel. Culpability. Assumption of risk. But-for causation. All the usual legal theories apply.
- serf 7y ago
  >Do people have any personal accountability anymore? Yes. The problem is that people shouldn't have to be accountable for failure-modes that they in no way have the training to predict, understand, or recover from. The FDA explains the specific risks of a drug. They don't just say "This drug can cause issues.". Hand-waving all corporate fault by admitting that your corporation is perfectly okay with beta software being on the public road as long as the car owner assumes responsibility is not a solution to the liability question. A responsible beta program would 1) not be on the public highway in any means 2) require the participants to have a high familiarity with the product and the technical know-how to be effective members of the testing community; which should include training on not only error and incident reporting, but failure recovery and failure scope. It's perfectly reasonable that a user would operate a mechanism incorrectly when their only advice is "Good luck, it's experimental!".
duxup 7y ago
It would be interesting to get non Twitter, more in depth information on this. Beta software that has safety implications on a car seems strange.
- heyyyouu 7y ago
  There are a few reporters who reached out to the poster via twitter -- I'd expect follow-up stories over the next couple days (with them at least asking Telsa for comment; no guarantee they'll respond, of course, but would really like to see what Tesla says).
Traster 7y ago
I'm kind of interested how anything even could be a Beta feature in a car's context - or atleast a safety critical feature like this.

44 points by heyyyouu 7y ago

priceytomato292 7y ago

don't you sign a liability waiver when entering Tesla beta program?

microwavecamera 7y ago
Tesla still has to meet vehicle safety regulations. It's a friggin' car not the Windows Insider Program. No one dies if my PC crashes.
- rudolph9 7y ago
  People die when the .net program in Tesla crashes
- ulfw 7y ago
  This is what happens when you are trying to do manufacturing “Silicon Valley” style

zyang 7y ago

Just glad no one was hurt.

vondur 7y ago

I don't think signing up for beta software on a car like this is a good idea.

heyyyouu 7y ago

What I don't understand (and maybe I'm just naive) is how it's legal to test a so-called "beta feature" -- which, if it fails, clearly can be dangerous (lucky no one was hurt) -- on customers in a live environment, vs using its own test drivers at the very least? I can't imagine this being legal with any other form of transportation (or just large equipment; they don't even sell lightbulbs that aren't CE certified).

SilasX 7y ago
Yeah, you'll notice that aviation industry doesn't have an equivalent. Which is not to say that none of their new features fail catastrophically -- as we were reminded recently by the 300 MAX -- but they don't consider this a valid defense.
- TheAdamist 7y ago
  the auto industry doesn't have this equivalent either, its just tesla. They'll eventually just claim everything is beta and take no responsibility for anything not working.
surrealize 7y ago
Of course Tesla tests things itself with its own drivers. What they can't do is replicate every single one of the unusual corner cases that people encounter in the real world.
- hjk05 7y ago
  Sure, but that’s true of all companies. Imagine a drug company put a drug on the market that might kill your or leave you crippled if you don’t match the results they had on their 3 test patients, and them telling you “That’s on you, the drug is a beta”.
  - kruczek 7y ago
    That's a bad example, because drugs typically have all kinds of warnings about negative effects. They certainly test on more than 3 patients, and they won't tell you the drug is a beta, but I'm sure they will still claim they are not responsible, because they warned you about very small chance of failure.
  - NullPrefix 7y ago
    > Imagine a drug company put a drug on the market that might kill your or leave you crippled Taking out of context by cutting off your sentence, but pretty much any drug has a listed side effect like this.

extropy 7y ago

IMO this is pure FUD, no actual correspondence with Tesla to back it up. It would be silly for Tesla to argue that it's driver's fault because "beta". Every other car manufacturer will say it's driver's responsibility when using autopark, full stop.

unstatusthequo 7y ago

Do people have any personal accountability anymore? "The company will protect me" is such a foolish thought process, especially when you're playing with beta features that have risks. This to me isn't all that different than the guy who crashed his Tesla while watching a movie behind the wheel. Culpability. Assumption of risk. But-for causation. All the usual legal theories apply.

serf 7y ago
>Do people have any personal accountability anymore? Yes. The problem is that people shouldn't have to be accountable for failure-modes that they in no way have the training to predict, understand, or recover from. The FDA explains the specific risks of a drug. They don't just say "This drug can cause issues.". Hand-waving all corporate fault by admitting that your corporation is perfectly okay with beta software being on the public road as long as the car owner assumes responsibility is not a solution to the liability question. A responsible beta program would 1) not be on the public highway in any means 2) require the participants to have a high familiarity with the product and the technical know-how to be effective members of the testing community; which should include training on not only error and incident reporting, but failure recovery and failure scope. It's perfectly reasonable that a user would operate a mechanism incorrectly when their only advice is "Good luck, it's experimental!".

duxup 7y ago

It would be interesting to get non Twitter, more in depth information on this. Beta software that has safety implications on a car seems strange.

heyyyouu 7y ago
There are a few reporters who reached out to the poster via twitter -- I'd expect follow-up stories over the next couple days (with them at least asking Telsa for comment; no guarantee they'll respond, of course, but would really like to see what Tesla says).

Traster 7y ago

I'm kind of interested how anything even could be a Beta feature in a car's context - or atleast a safety critical feature like this.