4 ms·

> numerous videos of people playing cards or moving to the back seat while Autopilot is engaged—which Tesla warns against, but does not block Would it make sen

> numerous videos of people playing cards or moving to the back seat while Autopilot is engaged—which Tesla warns against, but does not block Would it make sense for Tesla to turn off self driving for idiots who are posting these videos to social media? I’m sure they can easily correlate the posters to drivers in an automated way just based on the time and location of videos posted, since they know every trip and mile driven by all their drivers.

Schiendelman 5y ago
I thought I read that they do that already when they can. They don’t go out there scouring the internet but they do cut it off for TOS violations when reported.
me_me_me 5y ago
Or maybe Tesla should not be allow to call it 'Autopilot' tm with small writing stating that Autopilot is not an autopilot. If I sell 'super seatbelts' with small print stating that during a car crash you should hang on to the seat by the power of your own muscles because super seatbelts protect only against fender benders and tears in high speed car crashes. I will be in prison the moment authorities hear about my product. People are morons, and you cannot expect them to know small caveats of all tech. "Its called Autopilot so it auto pilots my tesla duh."
- DamnInteresting 5y ago
  > Or maybe Tesla should not be allow to call it 'Autopilot' tm with small writing stating that Autopilot is not an autopilot. I see this complaint frequently, and I find it confusing. The feature is clearly named after the 'autopilot' found on airliners, a system which is designed to do things like maintain heading, manage airspeed, and avoid collisions. Airliner autopilot should not be relied upon for every step of a flight without human oversight, but clearly an airliner with autopilot is safer than one without. And if a pilot engaged autopilot and stretched out for a nap, we wouldn't blame autopilot for any resulting catastrophe. So, how is Tesla's autopilot meaningfully different from that? They don't call it 'self-driving', 'autonomous', or 'driverless', they've named it after a very similar existing technology. Tesla deserves a lot of criticism, but this specific complaint strikes me as misplaced.
  - foepys 5y ago
    Tesla lost the right to call it Autopilot in Germany. So even courts agree that it is confusing.
  - me_me_me 5y ago
    > So, how is Tesla's autopilot meaningfully different from that? Simple. The user of the tesla autopilot is a car driver that is 'qualified' to drive a car. Driving licence doesnt entail knowledge of how to use tesla's 'autopilot' You are literately equating a car driver to an air-plane pilot! A pilot that need to be specifically train for a given model of a plane, and its autopilot. A pilot that is fully aware of the scope of the planes autopilot functionality, also pilot cannot 'go for a nap' when autopilot is engaged.
    - datameta 5y ago
      On top of that, the threat model of potential obstacles in the sky is far simpler. On an airliner you have a heading and speed for every tracked aircraft in your vicinity and the buffer zones are far greater, even accounting for relative increase in speed. It is much more difficult to predict and quickly respond to edge case obstacles and erratic agent behavior on the road. Perhaps there would be an analogy here if there was something like a centralized control center for autonomous vehicles (rife with opportunities for system-wide hacks and corporate/gov't abuse) or if vehicles were networked and shared travel vector and size data.
    - DamnInteresting 5y ago
      Well, I agree with much of what you say, but all I was trying to say is this: If 'autopilot' is a misleading name for Tesla's advanced driver assist system, then isn't it also misleading for airliners to use that term? To me, the two systems appear to be very similar in what they can do.
      - me_me_me 5y ago
        the only thing both have in common is the spelling
scohesc 5y ago
It's scary to think you pay however many thousand of dollars for a feature, only to have the company you paid take it away from you because they don't like how you're using it. Why do people think this is okay?
- simonh 5y ago
  It's a subscription to a service, not a natural human right. But in any case, even if it was fully paid for, those idiots do not have the right to put others at risk through their reckless irresponsibility.
  - scohesc 5y ago
    I love how society's been duped into believing that having a company take away something you've paid potentially tens of thousands of dollars for without any form of compensation is perfectly okay and has nothing wrong with it. Government sanctioned corporatocracy, here we come!
    - simonh 5y ago
      As I pointed out, thats actually not the situation here at all. However, that idiot in that car playing pranks while driving alongside me and my children is not really Tesla's problem in the grand scheme of things. It's my problem, and Tesla is helping me with it by banning the stupid git. IMHO there's a reasonable argument they should be required to do so by law.

Schiendelman 5y ago

I thought I read that they do that already when they can. They don’t go out there scouring the internet but they do cut it off for TOS violations when reported.

me_me_me 5y ago

Or maybe Tesla should not be allow to call it 'Autopilot' tm with small writing stating that Autopilot is not an autopilot. If I sell 'super seatbelts' with small print stating that during a car crash you should hang on to the seat by the power of your own muscles because super seatbelts protect only against fender benders and tears in high speed car crashes. I will be in prison the moment authorities hear about my product. People are morons, and you cannot expect them to know small caveats of all tech. "Its called Autopilot so it auto pilots my tesla duh."

DamnInteresting 5y ago
> Or maybe Tesla should not be allow to call it 'Autopilot' tm with small writing stating that Autopilot is not an autopilot. I see this complaint frequently, and I find it confusing. The feature is clearly named after the 'autopilot' found on airliners, a system which is designed to do things like maintain heading, manage airspeed, and avoid collisions. Airliner autopilot should not be relied upon for every step of a flight without human oversight, but clearly an airliner with autopilot is safer than one without. And if a pilot engaged autopilot and stretched out for a nap, we wouldn't blame autopilot for any resulting catastrophe. So, how is Tesla's autopilot meaningfully different from that? They don't call it 'self-driving', 'autonomous', or 'driverless', they've named it after a very similar existing technology. Tesla deserves a lot of criticism, but this specific complaint strikes me as misplaced.
- foepys 5y ago
  Tesla lost the right to call it Autopilot in Germany. So even courts agree that it is confusing.
- me_me_me 5y ago
  > So, how is Tesla's autopilot meaningfully different from that? Simple. The user of the tesla autopilot is a car driver that is 'qualified' to drive a car. Driving licence doesnt entail knowledge of how to use tesla's 'autopilot' You are literately equating a car driver to an air-plane pilot! A pilot that need to be specifically train for a given model of a plane, and its autopilot. A pilot that is fully aware of the scope of the planes autopilot functionality, also pilot cannot 'go for a nap' when autopilot is engaged.
  - datameta 5y ago
    On top of that, the threat model of potential obstacles in the sky is far simpler. On an airliner you have a heading and speed for every tracked aircraft in your vicinity and the buffer zones are far greater, even accounting for relative increase in speed. It is much more difficult to predict and quickly respond to edge case obstacles and erratic agent behavior on the road. Perhaps there would be an analogy here if there was something like a centralized control center for autonomous vehicles (rife with opportunities for system-wide hacks and corporate/gov't abuse) or if vehicles were networked and shared travel vector and size data.
  - DamnInteresting 5y ago
    Well, I agree with much of what you say, but all I was trying to say is this: If 'autopilot' is a misleading name for Tesla's advanced driver assist system, then isn't it also misleading for airliners to use that term? To me, the two systems appear to be very similar in what they can do.
    - me_me_me 5y ago
      the only thing both have in common is the spelling

scohesc 5y ago

It's scary to think you pay however many thousand of dollars for a feature, only to have the company you paid take it away from you because they don't like how you're using it. Why do people think this is okay?

simonh 5y ago
It's a subscription to a service, not a natural human right. But in any case, even if it was fully paid for, those idiots do not have the right to put others at risk through their reckless irresponsibility.
- scohesc 5y ago
  I love how society's been duped into believing that having a company take away something you've paid potentially tens of thousands of dollars for without any form of compensation is perfectly okay and has nothing wrong with it. Government sanctioned corporatocracy, here we come!
  - simonh 5y ago
    As I pointed out, thats actually not the situation here at all. However, that idiot in that car playing pranks while driving alongside me and my children is not really Tesla's problem in the grand scheme of things. It's my problem, and Tesla is helping me with it by banning the stupid git. IMHO there's a reasonable argument they should be required to do so by law.