3 ms·

So don’t call it ‘Autopilot’. It’s like calling something’food’ with the disclaimer: not to be eaten.

sdinsn 6y ago
"Autopilot" is also used in planes, despite the fact that we require a pilot and co-pilot to be always active and alert.
Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
Autopilot is a perfect name for it. It matches the original usage of the word in aviation perfectly. The problem is that people don't understand that even in aviation, autopilot still requires the pilot to pay attention.
- reitzensteinm 6y ago
  Ok, so the name gives the correct implication to pilots and everyone else will be confused, and that's the perfect name for it? I don't have a problem with the name. If increasing the safety of the system is your priority driver focus detection seems a much better complaint. But if I have to read another comment explaining that it's fine because it fits the technical definition from aviation I'm going to scream. It's such a simplistic summation of a genuinely complicated question. For instance the AP style guide has given guidelines on language to use for partially autonomous vehicles. They're concerned enough to take it seriously. https://www.caranddriver.com/features/columns/a32702153/the-associated-press-wants-everyone-to-stop-calling-cars-autonomous/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/columns/a32702153/the-...
jryle70 6y ago
Tesla wasn't even the first one who picked Autopilot name. Chrysler did in 1958. [0] I'm not so sure why so many people are hung up on Autopilot name. After all Apple's MagicMouse can't do any tricks, and there is nothing intelligent about Microsoft's IntelliSense. It's also already mentioned below that autopilot is prominent on airplanes despite requiring not only one, but two pilots. [0] - https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/history/automotive-history-capsule-chryslers-1958-auto-pilot-56-years-before-teslas-autopilot/ https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/history/automotive-hist...
- IshKebab 6y ago
  Yes but I don't think anyone expected autopilot to fully drive the car for you in 1958. Now lots of people think fully driverless cars are already possible, and Tesla still markets their cars as having "full self driving" (distinct from "autopilot", but how many people are going to understand that nuance?)
imtringued 6y ago
The term Autopilot isn't misleading. What is misleading is that Tesla claims that all cars since 2016 have full self driving hardware and that they will enable full self driving via over the air updates. Basically they have created the impression that FSD is around the corner and this has probably fooled some people into believing that Autopilot is working much better than the disclaimers say. Some people might think standard features like emergency breaking are included in Autopilot and then they crash into stationary objects that Autopilot didn't detect. If Tesla cars actually had "FSD hardware" then these accidents wouldn't have happened. https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now-have-full-self-driving-hardware?redirect=no https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now... https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/30/18204427/tesla-autopilot-elon-musk-full-self-driving-confusion https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/30/18204427/tesla-autopilot-... https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/20/18000884/tesla-full-self-driving-option-gone-musk-autopilot https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/20/18000884/tesla-full-self...

"Autopilot" is also used in planes, despite the fact that we require a pilot and co-pilot to be always active and alert.

Sohcahtoa82 6y ago

Autopilot is a perfect name for it. It matches the original usage of the word in aviation perfectly. The problem is that people don't understand that even in aviation, autopilot still requires the pilot to pay attention.

reitzensteinm 6y ago
Ok, so the name gives the correct implication to pilots and everyone else will be confused, and that's the perfect name for it? I don't have a problem with the name. If increasing the safety of the system is your priority driver focus detection seems a much better complaint. But if I have to read another comment explaining that it's fine because it fits the technical definition from aviation I'm going to scream. It's such a simplistic summation of a genuinely complicated question. For instance the AP style guide has given guidelines on language to use for partially autonomous vehicles. They're concerned enough to take it seriously. https://www.caranddriver.com/features/columns/a32702153/the-associated-press-wants-everyone-to-stop-calling-cars-autonomous/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/columns/a32702153/the-...

jryle70 6y ago

Tesla wasn't even the first one who picked Autopilot name. Chrysler did in 1958. [0] I'm not so sure why so many people are hung up on Autopilot name. After all Apple's MagicMouse can't do any tricks, and there is nothing intelligent about Microsoft's IntelliSense. It's also already mentioned below that autopilot is prominent on airplanes despite requiring not only one, but two pilots. [0] - https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/history/automotive-history-capsule-chryslers-1958-auto-pilot-56-years-before-teslas-autopilot/ https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/history/automotive-hist...

IshKebab 6y ago
Yes but I don't think anyone expected autopilot to fully drive the car for you in 1958. Now lots of people think fully driverless cars are already possible, and Tesla still markets their cars as having "full self driving" (distinct from "autopilot", but how many people are going to understand that nuance?)

imtringued 6y ago

The term Autopilot isn't misleading. What is misleading is that Tesla claims that all cars since 2016 have full self driving hardware and that they will enable full self driving via over the air updates. Basically they have created the impression that FSD is around the corner and this has probably fooled some people into believing that Autopilot is working much better than the disclaimers say. Some people might think standard features like emergency breaking are included in Autopilot and then they crash into stationary objects that Autopilot didn't detect. If Tesla cars actually had "FSD hardware" then these accidents wouldn't have happened. https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now-have-full-self-driving-hardware?redirect=no https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now... https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/30/18204427/tesla-autopilot-elon-musk-full-self-driving-confusion https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/30/18204427/tesla-autopilot-... https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/20/18000884/tesla-full-self-driving-option-gone-musk-autopilot https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/20/18000884/tesla-full-self...