4 ms·

> If someone hits you using cruise control they remain at fault. That'd be relevant if they didn't call it autopilot. If they called it lane assist or cruise c

> If someone hits you using cruise control they remain at fault. That'd be relevant if they didn't call it autopilot. If they called it lane assist or cruise control plus or something then I'd agree. Tesla is at major fault for implying that the Teslas can drive themselves, even if the driver is also at fault.

mwint 5y ago
Tesla could call it Egre-MuzzFlorp and it wouldn’t matter. The surveys showing people think “autopilot” means “can drive itself” were fatally flawed, in that they were done with non-Tesla owners.
- yupper32 5y ago
  And yet, people drive their Teslas as if it means "can drive itself". Words matter. You'd need real evidence to convince me that Tesla calling the system "Autopilot" hasn't significantly contributed to crashes.
  - mwint 5y ago
    On the contrary, we need real evidence suggesting it does. Certainly the population level crash data doesn’t support it.
- simion314 5y ago
  >The surveys showing people think “autopilot” means “can drive itself” were fatally flawed, in that they were done with non-Tesla owners. Reality check: There are videos shown Tesla drivers sleeping in the car, or using the car from the back sit, so we have proof that a subset of Tesla users are using autopilot as "it drives itself and only laws forced Tesla to add those warnings". This videos are reality, no conspiracy, no subjectivity, no fake stats... some idiots are believing the marketing and some other idiots are still defending that marketing.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    > some idiots are believing the marketing That doesn't follow. Some people are definitely being idiots, but the marketing doesn't say that it's okay to do those things, so they're not "believing the marketing" by doing so.
sokoloff 5y ago
If an at-fault Tesla hits me, my legal beef is with the driver of that Tesla. They may in turn rely on insurance or on suing Tesla to recover damages from their own misunderstanding of the car’s abilities or improper marketing, but my beef remains with the driver of the at-fault vehicle.

mwint 5y ago

Tesla could call it Egre-MuzzFlorp and it wouldn’t matter. The surveys showing people think “autopilot” means “can drive itself” were fatally flawed, in that they were done with non-Tesla owners.

yupper32 5y ago
And yet, people drive their Teslas as if it means "can drive itself". Words matter. You'd need real evidence to convince me that Tesla calling the system "Autopilot" hasn't significantly contributed to crashes.
- mwint 5y ago
  On the contrary, we need real evidence suggesting it does. Certainly the population level crash data doesn’t support it.
simion314 5y ago
>The surveys showing people think “autopilot” means “can drive itself” were fatally flawed, in that they were done with non-Tesla owners. Reality check: There are videos shown Tesla drivers sleeping in the car, or using the car from the back sit, so we have proof that a subset of Tesla users are using autopilot as "it drives itself and only laws forced Tesla to add those warnings". This videos are reality, no conspiracy, no subjectivity, no fake stats... some idiots are believing the marketing and some other idiots are still defending that marketing.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  > some idiots are believing the marketing That doesn't follow. Some people are definitely being idiots, but the marketing doesn't say that it's okay to do those things, so they're not "believing the marketing" by doing so.

sokoloff 5y ago

If an at-fault Tesla hits me, my legal beef is with the driver of that Tesla. They may in turn rely on insurance or on suing Tesla to recover damages from their own misunderstanding of the car’s abilities or improper marketing, but my beef remains with the driver of the at-fault vehicle.