4 ms·

I'm not clear on what "full self driving" has to do with the article. I thought most new cars now have automatic emergency braking and many have cruise control

by vba616 4y ago

I'm not clear on what "full self driving" has to do with the article. I thought most new cars now have automatic emergency braking and many have cruise control that can bring the car all the way to a stop if the computer thinks it's necessary. At least as of a couple years ago during the covid lull before inflation went crazy, there were new cars with this tech for barely over $20K. So is there anything unique to Tesla involved here just because people like to talk about the "full self driving" branding? There could be, but I've failed to locate it in any of the articles about this disaster.

olliej 4y ago
> I thought most new cars now have automatic emergency braking and many have cruise control that can bring the car all the way to a stop if the computer thinks it's necessary. Plenty of other cars have emergency braking and have had it for years. But because those companies don't have a complete disregard for safety don't advertise "now with fully automatic braking!" and say you never have to brake yourself. They also use technology that is actually reasonably robust and reliable: radar, lidar, etc to measure obstacle distances rather than ad hoc computer vision and wishful thinking. > So is there anything unique to Tesla involved here just because people like to talk about the "full self driving" branding? Because they aggressively push their "full self driving", and their car changed lane and hard braked for no reason and on its own, and their "self driving" tech has a history of driving people into walls, trucks, emergency vehicles, and from the article thousands of reports of random braking, now causing real harm. Also dismissing "full self driving" as "branding", when the name explicitly states what it is, and they aggressively market it as being just that, and they produce fraudulent videos to act as evidence showing that it "works", is BS. No other car company is as aggressively pushing/marketing anything it produces as self driving, and no other major car company has been making objectively fraudulent claims about their self driving ability, so of course when Tesla's unsafe self driving technology causes crashes people will talk about it.
- vba616 4y ago
  I'm not dismissing your opinions, but what is there to say about them as they seem to be about hypothetical third parties' mental state? Many people besides yourself seem to see "full self driving" as a brainwashing campaign, not to mention a money grab. I probably wouldn't pay for it, and in any case wouldn't rely on it in an unreasonable way. So for me, it is branding. What I am mildly interested in (for the next time I get a new car) is whether a Tesla (say a model 3) would be more dangerous than an ordinary car if driven by the same person in the same manner. And the reporting all seems maliciously useless. I mean "useless" as opposed to "anti-Tesla" even if those might overlap. I remember the reporting about Tesla abandoning radar, and that's definitely a good reason to wonder how safe they are, but worrying isn't actionable. My perception based on "anecdata" is that an ordinary car with auto braking will probably brake hard at nothing maybe once in two years. If you're lucky, not in traffic. So, I'd like to know how Tesla compares - and of course, I wouldn't trust their PR any more than you.
  - EdwardDiego 4y ago
    In my country, under our consumer protection laws, a consumer has a right to rely on all representations made by a retailer or manufacturer. So if you represent your car as "full self driving", and then it causes an eight car pile-up, then it's very much the fault of the retailer or manufacturer. Doesn't matter if you popped up a EULA with multiple disclaimers on the car's touchscreen, if you sold it as "full self driving", and it ain't, you're on the hook. So why is Tesla not yet on the hook?

by vba616 4y ago

olliej 4y ago

> I thought most new cars now have automatic emergency braking and many have cruise control that can bring the car all the way to a stop if the computer thinks it's necessary. Plenty of other cars have emergency braking and have had it for years. But because those companies don't have a complete disregard for safety don't advertise "now with fully automatic braking!" and say you never have to brake yourself. They also use technology that is actually reasonably robust and reliable: radar, lidar, etc to measure obstacle distances rather than ad hoc computer vision and wishful thinking. > So is there anything unique to Tesla involved here just because people like to talk about the "full self driving" branding? Because they aggressively push their "full self driving", and their car changed lane and hard braked for no reason and on its own, and their "self driving" tech has a history of driving people into walls, trucks, emergency vehicles, and from the article thousands of reports of random braking, now causing real harm. Also dismissing "full self driving" as "branding", when the name explicitly states what it is, and they aggressively market it as being just that, and they produce fraudulent videos to act as evidence showing that it "works", is BS. No other car company is as aggressively pushing/marketing anything it produces as self driving, and no other major car company has been making objectively fraudulent claims about their self driving ability, so of course when Tesla's unsafe self driving technology causes crashes people will talk about it.

vba616 4y ago
I'm not dismissing your opinions, but what is there to say about them as they seem to be about hypothetical third parties' mental state? Many people besides yourself seem to see "full self driving" as a brainwashing campaign, not to mention a money grab. I probably wouldn't pay for it, and in any case wouldn't rely on it in an unreasonable way. So for me, it is branding. What I am mildly interested in (for the next time I get a new car) is whether a Tesla (say a model 3) would be more dangerous than an ordinary car if driven by the same person in the same manner. And the reporting all seems maliciously useless. I mean "useless" as opposed to "anti-Tesla" even if those might overlap. I remember the reporting about Tesla abandoning radar, and that's definitely a good reason to wonder how safe they are, but worrying isn't actionable. My perception based on "anecdata" is that an ordinary car with auto braking will probably brake hard at nothing maybe once in two years. If you're lucky, not in traffic. So, I'd like to know how Tesla compares - and of course, I wouldn't trust their PR any more than you.
- EdwardDiego 4y ago
  In my country, under our consumer protection laws, a consumer has a right to rely on all representations made by a retailer or manufacturer. So if you represent your car as "full self driving", and then it causes an eight car pile-up, then it's very much the fault of the retailer or manufacturer. Doesn't matter if you popped up a EULA with multiple disclaimers on the car's touchscreen, if you sold it as "full self driving", and it ain't, you're on the hook. So why is Tesla not yet on the hook?