3 ms·

> TESLA CRASH ON SF’S BAY BRIDGE > resulting in an eight-vehicle crash I'm sorry, but this is an 8 vehicle pile up from people following too close (or paying

> TESLA CRASH ON SF’S BAY BRIDGE > resulting in an eight-vehicle crash I'm sorry, but this is an 8 vehicle pile up from people following too close (or paying too little attention). At least where I'm from if you run into the back of a car it's your fault. It means you followed too close, failed to react to a situation in front of you. Should the car have stopped there, no? But is it that car's fault that others ran into the back of it? No.

advisedwang 4y ago
The Tesla changed lanes with very little clearance to the car behind it and then immediately braked. The first car that rear-ended the Tesla could not have avoided the accident short of mind-reading.
- maerF0x0 4y ago
  And the car behind it braked with minimal impact (hard to tell, but you dont see the tesla jump in any major way like the subsequent cars do)... So it didn't completely cut off the car behind it. > short of mind-reading. This is called defensive driving and it involves running "what if scenarios" and being prepared for even those. "What if the tesla has a tire blow out and comes in my lane" Is something that can be thought of any brand of car.
urda 4y ago
It absolutely is the Tesla's fault for coming to an illegal stop in response to no event ahead of them during a lane change which is clearly demonstrated in video. The rest of your comment is approaching victim blaming. The Tesla is 100% at fault here.
- maerF0x0 4y ago
  It's never illegal to stop in reaction to a perceived dangerous situation.
  - urda 4y ago
    Correct, but if you read and watched the video you would see the Tesla changes lanes and slows to a stop in response to *zero* events ahead of them. It is a neat fact to bring up but that doesn't apply here. The Tesla is still at fault and you would be hard pressed to find any adjuster or courts agreeing with you thanks to this excellent video evidence.
    - maerF0x0 4y ago
      My point is if someone were to respond "I thought I saw a deer/child/car swalloing pothole" they wouldnt be at fault. It's their right to avoid perceived issues. And its not like the tesla sufficiently cut off the stopping distance for the car behind it (one lane to the left) that car was able to brake substantially/sufficiently (hard to tell exactly in the video). Luckily it's not up the adjuster, it's up the courts.
  - bavila 4y ago
    Fortunately, the law follows a "reasonable person" standard, not a "the AI tried its best" standard. No reasonable person would have perceived any dangerous situation in these circumstances. Any person who suddenly slowed to a crawl and moved into the far left lane on a fast-moving highway for no discernable reason would be found to be substantially at fault here.
timeon 4y ago
I think it is both. It seems to me that initiation of this mess was Tesla's fault. At the same time this pile up was fault of later cars not paying attention.

advisedwang 4y ago

The Tesla changed lanes with very little clearance to the car behind it and then immediately braked. The first car that rear-ended the Tesla could not have avoided the accident short of mind-reading.

maerF0x0 4y ago
And the car behind it braked with minimal impact (hard to tell, but you dont see the tesla jump in any major way like the subsequent cars do)... So it didn't completely cut off the car behind it. > short of mind-reading. This is called defensive driving and it involves running "what if scenarios" and being prepared for even those. "What if the tesla has a tire blow out and comes in my lane" Is something that can be thought of any brand of car.

urda 4y ago

It absolutely is the Tesla's fault for coming to an illegal stop in response to no event ahead of them during a lane change which is clearly demonstrated in video. The rest of your comment is approaching victim blaming. The Tesla is 100% at fault here.

maerF0x0 4y ago
It's never illegal to stop in reaction to a perceived dangerous situation.
- urda 4y ago
  Correct, but if you read and watched the video you would see the Tesla changes lanes and slows to a stop in response to *zero* events ahead of them. It is a neat fact to bring up but that doesn't apply here. The Tesla is still at fault and you would be hard pressed to find any adjuster or courts agreeing with you thanks to this excellent video evidence.
  - maerF0x0 4y ago
    My point is if someone were to respond "I thought I saw a deer/child/car swalloing pothole" they wouldnt be at fault. It's their right to avoid perceived issues. And its not like the tesla sufficiently cut off the stopping distance for the car behind it (one lane to the left) that car was able to brake substantially/sufficiently (hard to tell exactly in the video). Luckily it's not up the adjuster, it's up the courts.
- bavila 4y ago
  Fortunately, the law follows a "reasonable person" standard, not a "the AI tried its best" standard. No reasonable person would have perceived any dangerous situation in these circumstances. Any person who suddenly slowed to a crawl and moved into the far left lane on a fast-moving highway for no discernable reason would be found to be substantially at fault here.

timeon 4y ago

I think it is both. It seems to me that initiation of this mess was Tesla's fault. At the same time this pile up was fault of later cars not paying attention.