5 ms·

That's a bit cynical, "single-digit number" of people died simply because they believed the marketing. Ultimately it is their fault for taking the marketing ove

That's a bit cynical, "single-digit number" of people died simply because they believed the marketing. Ultimately it is their fault for taking the marketing over common sense and legal requirements but you can't handwave it away because "not enough people died". You can't blame a government for intervening to make sure more people don't fall for this kind of deceptive advertising tactics. No car manufacturer today offers anything resembling true self driving. Not even close. But Tesla is the only manufacturer who insists they do and that any issues are of legal and regulatory nature. Wink wink nudge nudge. That is simply not true and if it weren't for drivers repeatedly intervening the AP would cause far more than single-digit number of accidents or deaths. And this is not an effort against Tesla, it's an effort for consumers and safety. And the right to be informed about what you;re actually buying.

Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
> died simply because they believed the marketing That's really not true. Those are people who consciously chose to ignore numerous warnings presented, both in the marketing (where the exact phrase "requires conscious human attention" is used), and also the warnings of the car itself where it says all the time things like "keep the eyes on the road", "need to stay alert", warnings every 10 seconds, audio signals, turning off in case the car knows the human is non-attentive etc. It is very unfortunate when people die, but you have to take into account how many people die in other cars in general. If we want to get 0 traffic deaths, we need to ban all cars, period. As a society, we do not want this. > But Tesla is the only manufacturer who insists they do This is just blatantly false. No they don't. Show me any marketing material where tesla claims to have operational Level 5 self-driving in currently available to consumers cars. Show me where it says that. Not some article in some mainstream media where a journalist tries to get attention, but in Tesla-distributed materials, marketing or otherwise, where they claim to have Level 5. Where is it? Why would you even make such a claim that is so easy to check...
- tweetle_beetle 6y ago
  If the messages delivered through marketing channels are different to the ones delivered with a physical product, then that is a problem. Visit https://www.tesla.com/autopilot https://www.tesla.com/autopilot and see for yourself how the message changes within a single page. Yes: "All new Tesla cars come standard with advanced hardware capable of providing Autopilot features today..." No: "...and full self-driving capabilities in the future—through software updates designed to improve functionality over time." Yes: "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself." Yes: Video showing self driving car on real roads with no hands on wheel or feet on pedals. No "Autopilot advanced safety and convenience features are designed to assist you with the most burdensome parts of driving." Yes: "The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat." Yes: "All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go." No: "The future use of these features without supervision is dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions." This is not what I would describe as clear. It's a contrived dance around the truth, designed to help you arrive at a conclusion without ever quite saying it outright - a deliberate marketing strategy. To be honest, combining this with the use of Autopilot with a capital A, we're not that far off subliminal messaging at this point. A more honest marketing message would improve safety.
  - Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
    > Yes: "All new Tesla cars come standard with advanced hardware capable of providing Autopilot features today..." > No: "...and full self-driving capabilities in the future—through software updates designed to improve functionality over time." "Autopilot" is not the same thing as full self-driving. What don't you understand? Those statements make perfect sense. > Yes: "All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go." "WILL NEED". What is not clear? "Will" implies future tense.
    - Animats 6y ago
      The future is now. Tesla has been making that claim since, what, 2016?
- buran77 6y ago
  > but you have to take into account how many people die in other cars in general I do and I see a completely different topic. What's your point? That people die in accidents? Sure. That companies should be allowed to mislead even if this leads to deaths? Those deaths in "other cars" are not because the manufacturer mislead the consumer. And if they do they'll probably get the same treatment since there are laws against false advertising. It's done all the time [0]. The end result of all those practices is that the consumer is deliberately mislead into getting the wrong impression even without explicitly lying. There's nothing special about Tesla's case in this context. > This is just blatantly false. No they don't. > Why would you even make such a claim that is so easy to check I checked and quoted from the Tesla website literally 5 cm above on your screen [1]. Feel free to point me to any other manufacturer who describes their technology like that. Or to any other 150.000 E car with advanced self driving tech whose driver attention detector can be tricked with an orange because the manufacturer refuses to implement proper systems based on cameras or capacitive sensors. Or to any manufacturer whose driver assists caused deaths. This isn't about technology failing. It's about intentionally proliferating an image of that technology that makes it look more capable than it actually is. Tesla's marketing material consistently makes people paint a false impression of the system. That in itself is a good enough reason to label it deceptive. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23843007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23843007

Erlich_Bachman 6y ago

> died simply because they believed the marketing That's really not true. Those are people who consciously chose to ignore numerous warnings presented, both in the marketing (where the exact phrase "requires conscious human attention" is used), and also the warnings of the car itself where it says all the time things like "keep the eyes on the road", "need to stay alert", warnings every 10 seconds, audio signals, turning off in case the car knows the human is non-attentive etc. It is very unfortunate when people die, but you have to take into account how many people die in other cars in general. If we want to get 0 traffic deaths, we need to ban all cars, period. As a society, we do not want this. > But Tesla is the only manufacturer who insists they do This is just blatantly false. No they don't. Show me any marketing material where tesla claims to have operational Level 5 self-driving in currently available to consumers cars. Show me where it says that. Not some article in some mainstream media where a journalist tries to get attention, but in Tesla-distributed materials, marketing or otherwise, where they claim to have Level 5. Where is it? Why would you even make such a claim that is so easy to check...

tweetle_beetle 6y ago
If the messages delivered through marketing channels are different to the ones delivered with a physical product, then that is a problem. Visit https://www.tesla.com/autopilot https://www.tesla.com/autopilot and see for yourself how the message changes within a single page. Yes: "All new Tesla cars come standard with advanced hardware capable of providing Autopilot features today..." No: "...and full self-driving capabilities in the future—through software updates designed to improve functionality over time." Yes: "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself." Yes: Video showing self driving car on real roads with no hands on wheel or feet on pedals. No "Autopilot advanced safety and convenience features are designed to assist you with the most burdensome parts of driving." Yes: "The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat." Yes: "All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go." No: "The future use of these features without supervision is dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions." This is not what I would describe as clear. It's a contrived dance around the truth, designed to help you arrive at a conclusion without ever quite saying it outright - a deliberate marketing strategy. To be honest, combining this with the use of Autopilot with a capital A, we're not that far off subliminal messaging at this point. A more honest marketing message would improve safety.
- Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
  > Yes: "All new Tesla cars come standard with advanced hardware capable of providing Autopilot features today..." > No: "...and full self-driving capabilities in the future—through software updates designed to improve functionality over time." "Autopilot" is not the same thing as full self-driving. What don't you understand? Those statements make perfect sense. > Yes: "All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go." "WILL NEED". What is not clear? "Will" implies future tense.
  - Animats 6y ago
    The future is now. Tesla has been making that claim since, what, 2016?
buran77 6y ago
> but you have to take into account how many people die in other cars in general I do and I see a completely different topic. What's your point? That people die in accidents? Sure. That companies should be allowed to mislead even if this leads to deaths? Those deaths in "other cars" are not because the manufacturer mislead the consumer. And if they do they'll probably get the same treatment since there are laws against false advertising. It's done all the time [0]. The end result of all those practices is that the consumer is deliberately mislead into getting the wrong impression even without explicitly lying. There's nothing special about Tesla's case in this context. > This is just blatantly false. No they don't. > Why would you even make such a claim that is so easy to check I checked and quoted from the Tesla website literally 5 cm above on your screen [1]. Feel free to point me to any other manufacturer who describes their technology like that. Or to any other 150.000 E car with advanced self driving tech whose driver attention detector can be tricked with an orange because the manufacturer refuses to implement proper systems based on cameras or capacitive sensors. Or to any manufacturer whose driver assists caused deaths. This isn't about technology failing. It's about intentionally proliferating an image of that technology that makes it look more capable than it actually is. Tesla's marketing material consistently makes people paint a false impression of the system. That in itself is a good enough reason to label it deceptive. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23843007 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23843007