6 ms·

Tesla very clearly states: "Smart Summon is a BETA feature. You must continually monitor the vehicle and its surroundings and stay prepared to take immediate ac

Tesla very clearly states: "Smart Summon is a BETA feature. You must continually monitor the vehicle and its surroundings and stay prepared to take immediate action at any time. It is the driver's responsibility to use Smart Summon safely, responsibly, and as intended." "When using Smart Summon, you must maintain a clear line of sight between you and Model Y and stay prepared to stop the vehicle at any time by releasing the button on the mobile app." https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modely/is_is/GUID-6B9A1AEA-579C-400E-A7A6-E4916BCD5DED.html https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modely/is_is/GUID-6B9A1AE...

twayt 4y ago
If these are the only kind of edge cases where smart summon fails, I'd say it is actually doing pretty good.
- codezero 4y ago
  I saw someone using it on the top of the parking garage at Disney land. It just circled around but I found it fascinating to watch and am looking forward to when it can go down the ramp :)
sillyinseattle 4y ago
How thoughtful of Tesla ;-) One nearly backed into me a few months back. I banged on the car to alert the driver. It stopped. There was no one in it. Owner was summoning her car in a grocery store parking lot. People.
- rich_sasha 4y ago
  Rest assured, if you were maimed, it would be the owner’s responsibility, not Tesla’s, so all is good. Presumably the driver is insured, right? And insurance covers the his nonsense...
  - sorokod 4y ago
    Isn't Tesla in car insurance itself? Interesting how that recursive setup would work out.
mongol 4y ago
Very convenient of Tesla to absolve themselves of any responsibility
- ASalazarMX 4y ago
  Somehow it makes sense, you wouldn't blame a traditional car manufacturer if you crashed and the airbag shot your phone into your face. If the summon warns that you must have line of sight because it has flaws, you damn well make sure you have line of sight, or don't use it.
  - julianlam 4y ago
    I like the insinuation that my phone was in front of my face during the crash.
  - mongol 4y ago
    It is the reference to the beta feature that stands out. If the airbag was a beta feature, it would not fly. Car manufacturers should not be able to hide behind such weasel words. If dangerous functionality is not fully tested, don't release it.
    - tgsovlerkhgsel 4y ago
      Regular cars are full of dangerous functionality, starting with the accelerator, and it isn't even labeled beta. This makes reckless driving easier, but it should still be considered (primarily) the fault of the driver.
      - mongol 4y ago
        Sure, so why the beta label? What is it with the functionality that makes them put in this disclaimer? Could it be that it is actually not prepared to handle loss of network connection or loss of battery in the phone? Is the phone running on a real time OS as other life critical systems usually are? What are the fail safe modes and redundanices preventing the functionality from hurting someone? With a beta label, they are basically saying that it is not ready, and the driver is at fault for using it.
blenderdt 4y ago
Thats all great but in the end it just didn't detect an obstacle that was placed above the road. Imho this has nothing to do with smart summon. Teslas have a history of not detecting higher placed objects.
- ASalazarMX 4y ago
  Guess they need more private jets for their AI data set.
MBCook 4y ago
“Bobby was hit by a car!” “They we’re using a beta feature honey, it’s not Tesla’s fault.” “Ok! I’ll go out and play.” I’m so sick of people using BETA like some magic get-out-of-responsibility free card. Once you let people drive a 3000lb car remotely you can call it pre-alpha if you want. You’re still responsible. Might as well call not-it.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 4y ago
  Is Ford responsible if someone drives a Ford blindfolded or drunk? While it would be wise for Tesla to introduce some form of verification (e.g. push and release the button according to the flashing pattern of the interior lights), I would consider the driver significantly more responsible than Tesla.
- 58028641 4y ago
  Smart summon requires the user to hold down the button in the app, the user is responsible. The only cases where I would blame Tesla is if the car suddenly rapidly accelerated (the user would not have time to stop the collision) or if the car moved after the user stopped holding the button (the car disobeyed the user's command).
  - MBCook 4y ago
    I have a coworker with an early Model 3. He gleefully demonstrated summon when he got it. Still, it’s not a person in physical control at the drivers seat. No one is even in the car. I can think of a LOT of ways it could go badly. I agree it’s not as bad as it could be. But that’s not good enough for me. The feature can be dangerous, and not just to people. Putting a ‘beta’ label on isn’t enough and doesn’t absolve them. They should be held at fault too, in my opinion. Obviously the ‘driver’(?) is at fault too.
SiempreViernes 4y ago
Maybe the had line of sight but since they weren't standing right behind it simply misjudged the clearance? It does stop after a bit, like if someone was watching from a distance and got surprised by the plane moving. To avoid liability the instructions should specify "monitor at such a distance that clearances can be accurately judged". The current guidance implies it's fine if you watch from a distance.
- filoleg 4y ago
  > To avoid liability the instructions should specify "monitor at such a distance that clearances can be accurately judged". Smart summon intentionally doesn't work at far distances by design, and exactly for the reasons you've mentioned. The distance limitation is 20 meters within a 6 meter radius of the phone's location. There is no need for a guidance on that, as it is automatically enforced. But there is no way to automatically enforce you looking at the car, hence why the warning about keeping line of sight is there.

twayt 4y ago

If these are the only kind of edge cases where smart summon fails, I'd say it is actually doing pretty good.

codezero 4y ago
I saw someone using it on the top of the parking garage at Disney land. It just circled around but I found it fascinating to watch and am looking forward to when it can go down the ramp :)

sillyinseattle 4y ago

How thoughtful of Tesla ;-) One nearly backed into me a few months back. I banged on the car to alert the driver. It stopped. There was no one in it. Owner was summoning her car in a grocery store parking lot. People.

rich_sasha 4y ago
Rest assured, if you were maimed, it would be the owner’s responsibility, not Tesla’s, so all is good. Presumably the driver is insured, right? And insurance covers the his nonsense...
- sorokod 4y ago
  Isn't Tesla in car insurance itself? Interesting how that recursive setup would work out.

mongol 4y ago

Very convenient of Tesla to absolve themselves of any responsibility

ASalazarMX 4y ago
Somehow it makes sense, you wouldn't blame a traditional car manufacturer if you crashed and the airbag shot your phone into your face. If the summon warns that you must have line of sight because it has flaws, you damn well make sure you have line of sight, or don't use it.
- julianlam 4y ago
  I like the insinuation that my phone was in front of my face during the crash.
- mongol 4y ago
  It is the reference to the beta feature that stands out. If the airbag was a beta feature, it would not fly. Car manufacturers should not be able to hide behind such weasel words. If dangerous functionality is not fully tested, don't release it.
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 4y ago
    Regular cars are full of dangerous functionality, starting with the accelerator, and it isn't even labeled beta. This makes reckless driving easier, but it should still be considered (primarily) the fault of the driver.
    - mongol 4y ago
      Sure, so why the beta label? What is it with the functionality that makes them put in this disclaimer? Could it be that it is actually not prepared to handle loss of network connection or loss of battery in the phone? Is the phone running on a real time OS as other life critical systems usually are? What are the fail safe modes and redundanices preventing the functionality from hurting someone? With a beta label, they are basically saying that it is not ready, and the driver is at fault for using it.

blenderdt 4y ago

Thats all great but in the end it just didn't detect an obstacle that was placed above the road. Imho this has nothing to do with smart summon. Teslas have a history of not detecting higher placed objects.

ASalazarMX 4y ago
Guess they need more private jets for their AI data set.

MBCook 4y ago

“Bobby was hit by a car!” “They we’re using a beta feature honey, it’s not Tesla’s fault.” “Ok! I’ll go out and play.” I’m so sick of people using BETA like some magic get-out-of-responsibility free card. Once you let people drive a 3000lb car remotely you can call it pre-alpha if you want. You’re still responsible. Might as well call not-it.

tgsovlerkhgsel 4y ago
Is Ford responsible if someone drives a Ford blindfolded or drunk? While it would be wise for Tesla to introduce some form of verification (e.g. push and release the button according to the flashing pattern of the interior lights), I would consider the driver significantly more responsible than Tesla.
58028641 4y ago
Smart summon requires the user to hold down the button in the app, the user is responsible. The only cases where I would blame Tesla is if the car suddenly rapidly accelerated (the user would not have time to stop the collision) or if the car moved after the user stopped holding the button (the car disobeyed the user's command).
- MBCook 4y ago
  I have a coworker with an early Model 3. He gleefully demonstrated summon when he got it. Still, it’s not a person in physical control at the drivers seat. No one is even in the car. I can think of a LOT of ways it could go badly. I agree it’s not as bad as it could be. But that’s not good enough for me. The feature can be dangerous, and not just to people. Putting a ‘beta’ label on isn’t enough and doesn’t absolve them. They should be held at fault too, in my opinion. Obviously the ‘driver’(?) is at fault too.

SiempreViernes 4y ago

Maybe the had line of sight but since they weren't standing right behind it simply misjudged the clearance? It does stop after a bit, like if someone was watching from a distance and got surprised by the plane moving. To avoid liability the instructions should specify "monitor at such a distance that clearances can be accurately judged". The current guidance implies it's fine if you watch from a distance.

filoleg 4y ago
> To avoid liability the instructions should specify "monitor at such a distance that clearances can be accurately judged". Smart summon intentionally doesn't work at far distances by design, and exactly for the reasons you've mentioned. The distance limitation is 20 meters within a 6 meter radius of the phone's location. There is no need for a guidance on that, as it is automatically enforced. But there is no way to automatically enforce you looking at the car, hence why the warning about keeping line of sight is there.