3 ms·
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 you
by 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 agoIn 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?