4 ms·

I can see you can potentially argue (unsuccessfully IMHO) that it is marketing fraud in inducing purchases of the vehicle, but I don't buy it that a single pers

by tgma 3y ago

I can see you can potentially argue (unsuccessfully IMHO) that it is marketing fraud in inducing purchases of the vehicle, but I don't buy it that a single person who actually owns the vehicle and have driven on Autopilot for more than a week is confused by the abilities of the system because the name is Autopilot. People text and drive _all the time_ on their ICE carriages without Autopilot too. Thus the claim that renaming it would have saved a life, let alone lives, is simply sensationalism.

FireBeyond 3y ago
Yeah, except of those people who have bought (at a significant price) those features, and understand that they're nowhere near their "aspirational" goals (When Tesla has been called out by the SEC and DMVs for some of Musk's more absurd statements, the company has quietly whispered to them "these are aspirational goals", and in one case, to the California DMV, "Musk's visionary statements are not reflective of engineering reality")... a significant portion of them still allow their car to do stupid/dangerous/risky things, because they believe that the car learns and adapts from this, and sends this data back to Tesla for further learning. Which it doesn't, as this article states. Those drivers are "it's okay if I run the occasional stop sign because it'll help my Tesla stop at the next one", "it's okay if I do XYZ..." when it won't do anything except put others (and themselves) at risk.
- tgma 3y ago
  The aspirational claims are not about Autopilot, but FSD (and I agree that having people pay for FSD in 2015 is borderline fraudulent. It is a consumer protection matter, not a safety matter.) Again, the statements to California DMV or SEC or Congress is one thing. Whether the owner is confused by the abilities of their vehicle post purchase and driving for a week is a distinct matter. > Those drivers are "it's okay if I run the occasional stop sign because it'll help my Tesla stop at the next one I think this is simply a made-up and ridiculous characterization. People break traffic laws all the time because they are selfish and it is convenient for themselves. Tesla drivers are no different. Have you seen a single consumer, not an employee, who does this for training data for Tesla?
  - Veserv 3y ago
    They are objectively, literally fatally confused as to the abilities of their vehicles. Tesla's systems, or any other ADAS for that matter, can not be safely used without a fully attentive driver and Tesla's system in particular further demands that you must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times. Deliberately and intentionally operating such a system without your full attention because you think it will safely drive you without your attention is like shoving your hand into a spinning saw blade. That is not to say that everybody who is injured by a spinning saw blade or by inattentive use indicates a product is fundamentally unsafe. Many people just inherently display inappropriate caution and most become complacent with dangerous devices through repeated "safe use". For a spinning saw blade, they miscalculate the risk and overestimate the safety mechanism, but they are not confused about that fact that inserting their hand into a spinning saw blade is a very bad idea. If Tesla ADAS operators only overestimated their attention then it would be comparable to a spinning saw blade, useful but dangerous. However, Tesla marketing aggressively misrepresents the capabilities of their systems and the Tesla ADAS operators routinely believe the marketing that it can safely drive without their attention; they believe you should insert your hand into a spinning saw blade and many people have literally died as a result. That is textbook fatal confusion about the abilities of their vehicles.
    - tgma 3y ago
      > They are objectively, literally fatally confused as to the abilities of their vehicles. Citation needed. > Deliberately and intentionally operating such a system without your full attention because you think it will safely drive you without your attention is like shoving your hand into a spinning saw blade. False. Objectively and manifestly so. Regardless of it being a good idea or not, one hurts you with a small probability, one almost certainly. > For a spinning saw blade, they miscalculate the risk and overestimate the safety mechanism, but they are not confused about that fact that inserting their hand into a spinning saw blade is a very bad idea. Where is the data that attributes the behavior to risk miscalculation, not the temptation of doing it despite the risk? People do stupid things all the time despite the risks. They skydive and bungie jump FFS. > If Tesla ADAS operators only overestimated their attention then it would be comparable to a spinning saw blade, useful but dangerous. However, Tesla marketing aggressively misrepresents the capabilities of their systems and the Tesla ADAS operators routinely believe the marketing that it can safely drive without their attention; they believe you should insert your hand into a spinning saw blade and many people have literally died as a result. That is textbook fatal confusion about the abilities of their vehicles. I cannot take this rant seriously; let's say we take it as true: you could substitute Tesla driving to driving any vehicle (which can be fatal) and keep the argument unchanged. Tesla has cited numbers on safety. I'd rather have a quantifiable argument about pros and cons rather than analogies comparing to saw blades.

by tgma 3y ago

FireBeyond 3y ago

Yeah, except of those people who have bought (at a significant price) those features, and understand that they're nowhere near their "aspirational" goals (When Tesla has been called out by the SEC and DMVs for some of Musk's more absurd statements, the company has quietly whispered to them "these are aspirational goals", and in one case, to the California DMV, "Musk's visionary statements are not reflective of engineering reality")... a significant portion of them still allow their car to do stupid/dangerous/risky things, because they believe that the car learns and adapts from this, and sends this data back to Tesla for further learning. Which it doesn't, as this article states. Those drivers are "it's okay if I run the occasional stop sign because it'll help my Tesla stop at the next one", "it's okay if I do XYZ..." when it won't do anything except put others (and themselves) at risk.

tgma 3y ago
The aspirational claims are not about Autopilot, but FSD (and I agree that having people pay for FSD in 2015 is borderline fraudulent. It is a consumer protection matter, not a safety matter.) Again, the statements to California DMV or SEC or Congress is one thing. Whether the owner is confused by the abilities of their vehicle post purchase and driving for a week is a distinct matter. > Those drivers are "it's okay if I run the occasional stop sign because it'll help my Tesla stop at the next one I think this is simply a made-up and ridiculous characterization. People break traffic laws all the time because they are selfish and it is convenient for themselves. Tesla drivers are no different. Have you seen a single consumer, not an employee, who does this for training data for Tesla?
- Veserv 3y ago
  They are objectively, literally fatally confused as to the abilities of their vehicles. Tesla's systems, or any other ADAS for that matter, can not be safely used without a fully attentive driver and Tesla's system in particular further demands that you must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times. Deliberately and intentionally operating such a system without your full attention because you think it will safely drive you without your attention is like shoving your hand into a spinning saw blade. That is not to say that everybody who is injured by a spinning saw blade or by inattentive use indicates a product is fundamentally unsafe. Many people just inherently display inappropriate caution and most become complacent with dangerous devices through repeated "safe use". For a spinning saw blade, they miscalculate the risk and overestimate the safety mechanism, but they are not confused about that fact that inserting their hand into a spinning saw blade is a very bad idea. If Tesla ADAS operators only overestimated their attention then it would be comparable to a spinning saw blade, useful but dangerous. However, Tesla marketing aggressively misrepresents the capabilities of their systems and the Tesla ADAS operators routinely believe the marketing that it can safely drive without their attention; they believe you should insert your hand into a spinning saw blade and many people have literally died as a result. That is textbook fatal confusion about the abilities of their vehicles.
  - tgma 3y ago
    > They are objectively, literally fatally confused as to the abilities of their vehicles. Citation needed. > Deliberately and intentionally operating such a system without your full attention because you think it will safely drive you without your attention is like shoving your hand into a spinning saw blade. False. Objectively and manifestly so. Regardless of it being a good idea or not, one hurts you with a small probability, one almost certainly. > For a spinning saw blade, they miscalculate the risk and overestimate the safety mechanism, but they are not confused about that fact that inserting their hand into a spinning saw blade is a very bad idea. Where is the data that attributes the behavior to risk miscalculation, not the temptation of doing it despite the risk? People do stupid things all the time despite the risks. They skydive and bungie jump FFS. > If Tesla ADAS operators only overestimated their attention then it would be comparable to a spinning saw blade, useful but dangerous. However, Tesla marketing aggressively misrepresents the capabilities of their systems and the Tesla ADAS operators routinely believe the marketing that it can safely drive without their attention; they believe you should insert your hand into a spinning saw blade and many people have literally died as a result. That is textbook fatal confusion about the abilities of their vehicles. I cannot take this rant seriously; let's say we take it as true: you could substitute Tesla driving to driving any vehicle (which can be fatal) and keep the argument unchanged. Tesla has cited numbers on safety. I'd rather have a quantifiable argument about pros and cons rather than analogies comparing to saw blades.