2 ms·

It never has been Tesla’s responsibility if the FSD fails (whereas for Mercedes they take responsibility)

by rvnx 3y ago

judge2020 3y ago
Did they ever figure that out? > There are few federal laws addressing automated driving. So, Mercedes Vice President of Automated Driving George Massing tells R&T, “we will probably have to deal with each individual state.” But the company plans to accept legal liability for what the car does while Drive Pilot is engaged. As far as I can tell there still isn’t some webpage where you can submit a claim to Mercedes-Benz for a failure of their self-driving tech… https://www.kbb.com/car-news/mercedes-well-be-liable-for-self-driving-cars/ https://www.kbb.com/car-news/mercedes-well-be-liable-for-sel...
- rvnx 3y ago
  In the opposite, Tesla sounds more like the type of company that would sue you if you claim autopilot brought you into a crash. Since they are technically right, as autopilot disengages before.
  - judge2020 3y ago
    > Since they are technically right, as autopilot disengages before. > To ensure our statistics are conservative, we count any crash in which Autopilot was deactivated within 5 seconds before impact, and we count all crashes in which the incident alert indicated an airbag or other active restraint deployed. https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport
olyjohn 3y ago
I'm not a Tesla fan, but Mercedes doesn't have a fleet anywhere near Tesla's. This is a well-run marketing campaign to try to get Tesla to also accept responsibility and bring prices up, IMO. Mercedes isn't really accepting liability for shit at this point, because they only have like one car with level 3 and it's a super top trim and there won't be very many people using it. Once they have a large amount of vehicles out there with this tech, then we'll see what they really accept responsibility for.
- kibwen 3y ago
  > to try to get Tesla to also accept responsibility and bring prices up If Tesla actually believed that their self-driving works (which they unequivocally and demonstrably don't, as their refusal to accept liability indicates), then it would cost them virtually nothing to accept liability. Every company that offers self-driving should accept liability to prove that they have faith in their system, and we shouldn't allow any self-driving system on the road for which this isn't the case.
code_runner 3y ago
I think the mercedes taking responsibility thing was at least partially clever marketing. there are really extreme limitations last I saw, which honestly is understandable.
- martin8412 3y ago
  The limitations are due to the legal framework Mercedes lives up to. The updated version only recently came out.
  - code_runner 3y ago
    I do think they are doing it more responsibly for sure. Just that given the limitations it’s difficult to compare the offerings at this point

It never has been Tesla’s responsibility if the FSD fails (whereas for Mercedes they take responsibility)

by rvnx 3y ago

It never has been Tesla’s responsibility if the FSD fails (whereas for Mercedes they take responsibility)

judge2020 3y ago

Did they ever figure that out? > There are few federal laws addressing automated driving. So, Mercedes Vice President of Automated Driving George Massing tells R&T, “we will probably have to deal with each individual state.” But the company plans to accept legal liability for what the car does while Drive Pilot is engaged. As far as I can tell there still isn’t some webpage where you can submit a claim to Mercedes-Benz for a failure of their self-driving tech… https://www.kbb.com/car-news/mercedes-well-be-liable-for-self-driving-cars/ https://www.kbb.com/car-news/mercedes-well-be-liable-for-sel...

rvnx 3y ago
In the opposite, Tesla sounds more like the type of company that would sue you if you claim autopilot brought you into a crash. Since they are technically right, as autopilot disengages before.
- judge2020 3y ago
  > Since they are technically right, as autopilot disengages before. > To ensure our statistics are conservative, we count any crash in which Autopilot was deactivated within 5 seconds before impact, and we count all crashes in which the incident alert indicated an airbag or other active restraint deployed. https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

olyjohn 3y ago

I'm not a Tesla fan, but Mercedes doesn't have a fleet anywhere near Tesla's. This is a well-run marketing campaign to try to get Tesla to also accept responsibility and bring prices up, IMO. Mercedes isn't really accepting liability for shit at this point, because they only have like one car with level 3 and it's a super top trim and there won't be very many people using it. Once they have a large amount of vehicles out there with this tech, then we'll see what they really accept responsibility for.

kibwen 3y ago
> to try to get Tesla to also accept responsibility and bring prices up If Tesla actually believed that their self-driving works (which they unequivocally and demonstrably don't, as their refusal to accept liability indicates), then it would cost them virtually nothing to accept liability. Every company that offers self-driving should accept liability to prove that they have faith in their system, and we shouldn't allow any self-driving system on the road for which this isn't the case.

code_runner 3y ago

I think the mercedes taking responsibility thing was at least partially clever marketing. there are really extreme limitations last I saw, which honestly is understandable.

martin8412 3y ago
The limitations are due to the legal framework Mercedes lives up to. The updated version only recently came out.
- code_runner 3y ago
  I do think they are doing it more responsibly for sure. Just that given the limitations it’s difficult to compare the offerings at this point