6 ms·

Many people are saying Tesla FSD is far more advanced, and I've seen videos of A Tesla driving around LA for 2 hours completely autonomously so I agree Tesla FS

Many people are saying Tesla FSD is far more advanced, and I've seen videos of A Tesla driving around LA for 2 hours completely autonomously so I agree Tesla FSD is the world leader by far and blows what Mercedes has built out of the water. However Mercedes are taking liability whilst their system is in use which implies Tesla takes no liability whilst their system is in use. I'm surprised Tesla is scared to take legal responsibility for their system and I am surprised lawmakers are allowing autonomous systems when the manufacturer doesn't believe in it enough to take responsibility whilst it's in use. How is Tesla getting away with this? Of course they can beat the competition especially if they do not need to take legal responsibility for any deaths/accidents that occur when it's in use.

notyourwork 3y ago
If I were Tesla why would I take responsibility for something no one is forcing me to take responsibility for? Lawmakers are responsible for this charade and its embarrassing to me that a company can be so misleading with marketing and get away with it.
- TulliusCicero 3y ago
  Because it means the feature is actually useful. If the human "driver" is liable for what an autonomous car does, it means you have to watch the car like a hawk. At that point, may as well be driving.
- wahnfrieden 3y ago
  Both state and capital can be bad at the same time y’know
- prmoustache 3y ago
  I wouldn't do any business with you for example if that is your default level of ethics.
  - notyourwork 3y ago
    It's not about me. This is exactly what Tesla is doing and for some reason no one seems to care and continues to hand Tesla money for subpar quality cars with fake FSD. I don't get it.
  - jchoca 3y ago
    You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately.
    - worik 3y ago
      > You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately. Thank goodness you are incorrect. Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable. That is my experience. The sharks that rise to the top of billion dollar companies I only see in the news. My impression is that they are generally mentally disturbed (Elon Musk's "jokes" on Twitter about taking Tesla private is a case in point). But I hope that is a selection bias from the news cycle. Still waiting for the evidence....
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - jchoca 3y ago
        Maybe "most companies" was the wrong choice of wording. How about "most large companies that actually influence the world?" >Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable. It doesn't matter if the people you've anecdotally dealt with are ethical. It doesn't even matter if most of the people "in business" are ethical. The incentive structure to make the right choice for large public companies, or even venture-backed private ones just isn't there. I wish I was incorrect, but I'm not. If I was, we wouldn't still have companies producing fossil fuels, animal agriculture, or surveillance capitalism.
  - GreedClarifies 3y ago
    OK then don't! That's the magic of the market! People have different values.
radomir_cernoch 3y ago
> [...] blows what Mercedes has built out of the water. Mercedes FSD prototype, 10 years ago: https://youtu.be/G5kJ_8JAp-w https://youtu.be/G5kJ_8JAp-w
- elif 3y ago
  In that video they mention doing localization based upon a prebuilt map of the route by matching images to the model 10 times per second. That is by definition, not FSD. That is like the system announced today, a limited route autonomy. For comparison, FSD v3 (they are shipping v4 in every vehicle now) performs localization 2,000 times per second based upon a hybrid model of every road in open street maps and a generalized model of roads. That is why it is FULL. Even if you are on an unmapped brand new road built yesterday, it will know how to drive appropriately.
  - akmarinov 3y ago
    They aren’t shipping v4 in the model 3, so no on the “every vehicle”
    - elif 3y ago
      https://www.teslaoracle.com/2023/06/07/tesla-model-3-highland-spotted-in-california-with-hw4-cameras-and-rear-diffuser-visible/ https://www.teslaoracle.com/2023/06/07/tesla-model-3-highlan...
      - akmarinov 3y ago
        That’s not shipping… If you buy a model 3 TODAY you get V3
        DarmokJalad1701 3y ago
        Not on the 3. But they are shipping it with the Model Y. https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/tesla-now-shipping-model-y-with-hardware-4-hw4/ https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/tesla-now-shipping-model-y-...
elif 3y ago
The responsibility already isn't on the car occupants, it is on the occupants' insurance carrier. The only way to meaningfully diminish responsibility on the car occupants is to lower insurance premiums. To that end, Tesla is offering insurance directly to consumers now, offering lower premiums based upon driver safety system utilization. In my case it would cut my insurance rates in half.
ajross 3y ago
> However Mercedes are taking liability whilst their system is in use Are they? This press release doesn't actually say so. There was an announcement a while back when they deployed this system in Germany, but that's obviously a different legal environment. FWIW, this is mostly spin anyway. Liability isn't generally something that is granted, it's either there or not. If Tesla FSD causes an accident, they can absolutely be sued for that in the US. And they have been on a handful of occasions (Successfully even, I think? Pretty sure there were settlements in some of the early AP accidents?). The reason that "Tesla is liable for accidents" doesn't make news is... that there are vanishingly few AP/FSD accidents. The system as deployed is safe, but that doesn't match people's priors so we end up in arguments like this about "accepting liability" instead of "it crashed".
- enragedcacti 3y ago
  [1] (2) (A) “Autonomous vehicle” means any vehicle equipped with autonomous technology that has been integrated into that vehicle that meets the definition of Level 3, Level 4, or Level 5 [2] (c) The manufacturer has in place and has provided the department with evidence of the manufacturer's ability to respond to a judgment or judgments for damages for personal injury, death, or property damage arising from the operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=38750 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... [2] https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/file/adopted-regulatory-text-pdf/ https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/file/adopted-regulatory-text-p... > FWIW, this is mostly spin anyway. Liability isn't generally something that is granted, it's either there or not. Mercedes is releasing an L3 product in a jurisdiction where operation of L3 products is insured by the manufacturer. That is substantially different than "someone could sue them and maybe maybe maybe win" > The reason that "Tesla is liable for accidents" doesn't make news is... that there are vanishingly few AP/FSD accidents. There have been 736 known AP/FSD crashes and 17 deaths. The reason that "Tesla is liable for accidents" doesn't make news is that they aren't legally liable for their level 2 system under existing AV regulation. https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/theres-been-a-whopping-736-tesla-crashes-involving-autopilot-mode-since-2019-report-finds/ar-AA1cnzgH https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/theres-been-a-whopping-...
zaroth 3y ago
Mercedes could also ship their own L2 AutoPilot without having to take legal responsibility. Their customers would love it as much as Tesla drivers love theirs. The thing is, they just aren’t capable of it.
- amf12 3y ago
  Or Mercedes has certain reputation to maintain. This is not a dig at Tesla, but Mercedes not shipping L2 AP doesn't imply they aren't capable of it.
- bobsoap 3y ago
  Mercedes has been shipping their L2 system since 2013, at least in Europe.
- kelnos 3y ago
  Huh? The L2 system on my 2022 Mercedes works just fine. And I'm sure that's not the first model year where it was present.

notyourwork 3y ago

If I were Tesla why would I take responsibility for something no one is forcing me to take responsibility for? Lawmakers are responsible for this charade and its embarrassing to me that a company can be so misleading with marketing and get away with it.

TulliusCicero 3y ago
Because it means the feature is actually useful. If the human "driver" is liable for what an autonomous car does, it means you have to watch the car like a hawk. At that point, may as well be driving.
wahnfrieden 3y ago
Both state and capital can be bad at the same time y’know
prmoustache 3y ago
I wouldn't do any business with you for example if that is your default level of ethics.
- notyourwork 3y ago
  It's not about me. This is exactly what Tesla is doing and for some reason no one seems to care and continues to hand Tesla money for subpar quality cars with fake FSD. I don't get it.
- jchoca 3y ago
  You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately.
  - worik 3y ago
    > You say that, but it’s how most companies operate unfortunately. Thank goodness you are incorrect. Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable. That is my experience. The sharks that rise to the top of billion dollar companies I only see in the news. My impression is that they are generally mentally disturbed (Elon Musk's "jokes" on Twitter about taking Tesla private is a case in point). But I hope that is a selection bias from the news cycle. Still waiting for the evidence....
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - jchoca 3y ago
      Maybe "most companies" was the wrong choice of wording. How about "most large companies that actually influence the world?" >Most people in business, like most people generally, are ethical human beings. Good to deal with, trust worthy and reliable. It doesn't matter if the people you've anecdotally dealt with are ethical. It doesn't even matter if most of the people "in business" are ethical. The incentive structure to make the right choice for large public companies, or even venture-backed private ones just isn't there. I wish I was incorrect, but I'm not. If I was, we wouldn't still have companies producing fossil fuels, animal agriculture, or surveillance capitalism.
- GreedClarifies 3y ago
  OK then don't! That's the magic of the market! People have different values.

radomir_cernoch 3y ago

> [...] blows what Mercedes has built out of the water. Mercedes FSD prototype, 10 years ago: https://youtu.be/G5kJ_8JAp-w https://youtu.be/G5kJ_8JAp-w

elif 3y ago
In that video they mention doing localization based upon a prebuilt map of the route by matching images to the model 10 times per second. That is by definition, not FSD. That is like the system announced today, a limited route autonomy. For comparison, FSD v3 (they are shipping v4 in every vehicle now) performs localization 2,000 times per second based upon a hybrid model of every road in open street maps and a generalized model of roads. That is why it is FULL. Even if you are on an unmapped brand new road built yesterday, it will know how to drive appropriately.
- akmarinov 3y ago
  They aren’t shipping v4 in the model 3, so no on the “every vehicle”
  - elif 3y ago
    https://www.teslaoracle.com/2023/06/07/tesla-model-3-highland-spotted-in-california-with-hw4-cameras-and-rear-diffuser-visible/ https://www.teslaoracle.com/2023/06/07/tesla-model-3-highlan...
    - akmarinov 3y ago
      That’s not shipping… If you buy a model 3 TODAY you get V3
      - DarmokJalad1701 3y ago
        Not on the 3. But they are shipping it with the Model Y. https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/tesla-now-shipping-model-y-with-hardware-4-hw4/ https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/tesla-now-shipping-model-y-...

elif 3y ago

The responsibility already isn't on the car occupants, it is on the occupants' insurance carrier. The only way to meaningfully diminish responsibility on the car occupants is to lower insurance premiums. To that end, Tesla is offering insurance directly to consumers now, offering lower premiums based upon driver safety system utilization. In my case it would cut my insurance rates in half.

ajross 3y ago

> However Mercedes are taking liability whilst their system is in use Are they? This press release doesn't actually say so. There was an announcement a while back when they deployed this system in Germany, but that's obviously a different legal environment. FWIW, this is mostly spin anyway. Liability isn't generally something that is granted, it's either there or not. If Tesla FSD causes an accident, they can absolutely be sued for that in the US. And they have been on a handful of occasions (Successfully even, I think? Pretty sure there were settlements in some of the early AP accidents?). The reason that "Tesla is liable for accidents" doesn't make news is... that there are vanishingly few AP/FSD accidents. The system as deployed is safe, but that doesn't match people's priors so we end up in arguments like this about "accepting liability" instead of "it crashed".

enragedcacti 3y ago
[1] (2) (A) “Autonomous vehicle” means any vehicle equipped with autonomous technology that has been integrated into that vehicle that meets the definition of Level 3, Level 4, or Level 5 [2] (c) The manufacturer has in place and has provided the department with evidence of the manufacturer's ability to respond to a judgment or judgments for damages for personal injury, death, or property damage arising from the operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads [1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=38750 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... [2] https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/file/adopted-regulatory-text-pdf/ https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/file/adopted-regulatory-text-p... > FWIW, this is mostly spin anyway. Liability isn't generally something that is granted, it's either there or not. Mercedes is releasing an L3 product in a jurisdiction where operation of L3 products is insured by the manufacturer. That is substantially different than "someone could sue them and maybe maybe maybe win" > The reason that "Tesla is liable for accidents" doesn't make news is... that there are vanishingly few AP/FSD accidents. There have been 736 known AP/FSD crashes and 17 deaths. The reason that "Tesla is liable for accidents" doesn't make news is that they aren't legally liable for their level 2 system under existing AV regulation. https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/theres-been-a-whopping-736-tesla-crashes-involving-autopilot-mode-since-2019-report-finds/ar-AA1cnzgH https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/theres-been-a-whopping-...

zaroth 3y ago

Mercedes could also ship their own L2 AutoPilot without having to take legal responsibility. Their customers would love it as much as Tesla drivers love theirs. The thing is, they just aren’t capable of it.

amf12 3y ago
Or Mercedes has certain reputation to maintain. This is not a dig at Tesla, but Mercedes not shipping L2 AP doesn't imply they aren't capable of it.
bobsoap 3y ago
Mercedes has been shipping their L2 system since 2013, at least in Europe.
kelnos 3y ago
Huh? The L2 system on my 2022 Mercedes works just fine. And I'm sure that's not the first model year where it was present.