4 ms·

>Can you provide an example of a publication that "strongly implied or outright claimed" on their own that autopilot was involved? Sure. Here you go. https://

>Can you provide an example of a publication that "strongly implied or outright claimed" on their own that autopilot was involved? Sure. Here you go. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/19/tesla-texas-driverless-crash/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/19/tesla-texas... Headline: A driverless Tesla crashed and burned for four hours, police said, killing two passengers in Texas. Lede: "Just before midnight Saturday, a Tesla drove swiftly around a curve, veered off the road, struck a tree and burst into flames in The Woodlands, Tex., a suburb north of Houston, police said." "Driverless" is used here to relate the reader to "Driverless cars," aka "self driving car." Note that the police only said that the driver wasn't in the driver's seat at the time of the crash. The lede puts the agency for the driving on the car: "a Tesla drove..." Looks like NBC did it too: The vehicle, a 2019 Tesla Model S, was driving at high speed when it ran off the road, hit a tree and burst into flames, he said. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/2-dead-tesla-crash-after-car-no-one-was-driving-n1264470 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/2-dead-tesla-crash-afte... Here's Yahoo News with a video, headline "2 killed after self-driving Tesla crashes into tree, bursts into flames": https://news.yahoo.com/2-killed-fiery-tesla-crash-210032357.html https://news.yahoo.com/2-killed-fiery-tesla-crash-210032357.... But wait, isn't that "technically correct" (the best kind of correct) to what the original investigation said? Sure! But then why did other news sources go to great lengths to avoid using the phrase? Here's The Verge: https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/18/22390612/two-people-killed-fiery-tesla-crash-no-driver https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/18/22390612/two-people-kille... "Two people killed in fiery Tesla crash with no one driving" "Preliminary reports suggest the car was traveling at a high rate of speed and failed to make a turn, then drove off the road into a tree." Notice the hedging in the paragraph. Notice the use of passive voice "was traveling." Professional writers know the meaning of words. They know what those words mean to readers. They use them deliberately.

herbstein 5y ago
Your whole argument hinges on the fact that the publications are intentionally trying to smear Tesla and their AutoPilot feature. The fact of the matter is that those articles very clearly state that they're quoting what the police say about the crash. From your The Verge article, that supposedly is the example of trying very hard not to divulge this fact. > Authorities in Texas say two people were killed when a Tesla with no one in the driver’s seat crashed into a tree and burst into flames, Houston television station KPRC 2 reported. It's the first line of the article. > Preliminary reports suggest the car was traveling at a high rate of speed and failed to make a turn, then drove off the road into a tree. One of the men killed was in the front passenger seat of the car, the other was in the back seat, according to KHOU. Harris County Precinct 4 Constable Mark Herman told KPRC that “no one was driving” the fully-electric 2019 Tesla at the time of the crash. It’s not yet clear whether the car had its Autopilot driver assist system activated. That's the third paragraph. I don't think they're hiding that they're parroting police officials.
- websites420 5y ago
  >Your whole argument hinges on the fact that the publications are intentionally trying to smear Tesla and their AutoPilot feature. The fact of the matter is that those articles very clearly state that they're quoting what the police say about the crash. I don't think it has anything to do with smearing Tesla. I think that people have anxiety about self-driving cars and publications know that, so they play to that. This isn’t about Tesla, or AutoPilot. It’s about getting the details right. If these publications are claiming to quote the police, they're doing a shitty job of it, because the police said only that there wasn't anyone in the driver's seat at the time of the crash. The police didn't comment on auto pilot, didn't comment on the car being "driverless" (which would imply that it never had a driver to start with, which it did. If someone takes their hands of the wheel to stop their kids in the back seat from fighting, does the car become driverless for that moment? If so, where are all the other news stories calling those crashes driverless? Car accidents happen all the time while the car is cruise control. Is that driverless? Why not? It's essentially the same technology that Tesla has for adaptive cruise control).

herbstein 5y ago

Your whole argument hinges on the fact that the publications are intentionally trying to smear Tesla and their AutoPilot feature. The fact of the matter is that those articles very clearly state that they're quoting what the police say about the crash. From your The Verge article, that supposedly is the example of trying very hard not to divulge this fact. > Authorities in Texas say two people were killed when a Tesla with no one in the driver’s seat crashed into a tree and burst into flames, Houston television station KPRC 2 reported. It's the first line of the article. > Preliminary reports suggest the car was traveling at a high rate of speed and failed to make a turn, then drove off the road into a tree. One of the men killed was in the front passenger seat of the car, the other was in the back seat, according to KHOU. Harris County Precinct 4 Constable Mark Herman told KPRC that “no one was driving” the fully-electric 2019 Tesla at the time of the crash. It’s not yet clear whether the car had its Autopilot driver assist system activated. That's the third paragraph. I don't think they're hiding that they're parroting police officials.

websites420 5y ago
>Your whole argument hinges on the fact that the publications are intentionally trying to smear Tesla and their AutoPilot feature. The fact of the matter is that those articles very clearly state that they're quoting what the police say about the crash. I don't think it has anything to do with smearing Tesla. I think that people have anxiety about self-driving cars and publications know that, so they play to that. This isn’t about Tesla, or AutoPilot. It’s about getting the details right. If these publications are claiming to quote the police, they're doing a shitty job of it, because the police said only that there wasn't anyone in the driver's seat at the time of the crash. The police didn't comment on auto pilot, didn't comment on the car being "driverless" (which would imply that it never had a driver to start with, which it did. If someone takes their hands of the wheel to stop their kids in the back seat from fighting, does the car become driverless for that moment? If so, where are all the other news stories calling those crashes driverless? Car accidents happen all the time while the car is cruise control. Is that driverless? Why not? It's essentially the same technology that Tesla has for adaptive cruise control).