Family of man killed by his Model X on autopilot sues Tesla

[PlayStation 2]

I'm not one to defend Tesla, but I can't really say they're at fault unless the driver could not take control of the car if the autopilot disengaged... which, then, it would be Tesla's fault.

It sucks that people can't seem to remember that you shouldn't treat autopiloting in any car (be it a Tesla, a Cadillac CT6, whatever you wanna go with) as a fully automatic driving service but rather, as a more advanced cruise control.

[3 Lions]

3 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

They said multiple time the autopilot is not fully autonomous

So then it can't be marketed as such, it is clearly misleading. 

[Drak3]

Can we sue Tesla for false advertising yet?

[Tristerin]

3 hours ago, Sychic said:

Might be a poor joke but...

Look Ma, No hands!

 

You are my kind of peoples.

 

All I can think is - Im scared to death driving around the idiots on the highway in Manual mode.  Why the heck would I put my hands in the life of a Computer, surrounded by mundane cavemen intellects in comparison. 

[3 Lions]

Just now, gabrielcarvfer said:

It's not being marketed as fully autonomous...

 

What Elon says time and time again is that most cars already have hardware for fully autonomous operation, not that they're already fully autonomous.

But they clearly market it as 'autopilot' which it isn't. If I can't program the car to where I want to go then it isn't 'autopilot', it is just a real-life RC car controlled by a computer. 

[yolosnail]

46 minutes ago, Sauron said:

would you fly on a plane with a beta stage autopilot system

*cough* Boeing 737 Max *cough*

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, yolosnail said:

*cough* Boeing 737 Max *cough*

Yeah, that's not really a stellar endorsement of doing that on the road.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

If you have a Tesla but you assume autopilot means something else other than the features described in the ads, product page and manuals, you're irresponsible

And Tesla is guilty of false advertising.

Autopilot means autonomous piloting.

[D13H4RD]

22 minutes ago, Devin92 said:

However for majority of people, who don't follow AI technology and dont know there are different level of automation, they have the impression autopilot is a system that can drive the car for them. At least this is what the wards are suggesting. I think there's a reason why other luxury cars dont call their cruise control or forward collision system 'auto pilot'. It's trying to avoid this kind of misunderstanding and potential (and now real) law suit.

Yeah, that’s where things get really muddy.

 

It calls into question whether people really understand the limitations of Autopilot

[3 Lions]

Just now, gabrielcarvfer said:

It is an autopilot, and according to model 3 page has the following features: autosteering, navigation, you can summon your car, automatically park it and change lanes automatically.

That's complete bunkum, as I said before it's only a package of very good driver assists it is NO way shape or form 'autopilot'. 

[Thaldor]

18 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Which you can't do on a Tesla - apparently you're supposed to give it your complete undivided attention for the entirety of the voyage otherwise Tesla will refuse to accept any liability for what the system they SELL does to you. You pretty much need to pay MORE attention because you can't know when the car will decide it's a good time to swerve into a wall, whereas you can be pretty confident that your hands won't move of their own volition if you look away for a quarter of a second.

No, people are expecting the autopilot to work like a plane autopilot. If it can't do its thing without requiring full undivided attention by the driver it's not an autopilot - it's a third hand on the wheel. Of course, unlike with a plane there isn't any room for small mistakes on the road. A plane that starts slowly losing height can be corrected by the pilot even a full minute after the fact; a car that misjudges a distance will probably kill you in a few seconds. Which is why this isn't and shouldn't be advertised as an autopilot.

 

Yes, some responsibility on the driver to check the road is acceptable; it would be perfectly fine if the driver was expected to keep their eyes on the road and retake the wheel if the car behaves a bit strangely, e.g. slowing down for no reason or slowly moving too close to the other lane. That doesn't mean the system (and more importantly the system's developers) can just do whatever and blame it on the driver when things go wrong.

The thing is in planes there's pilot and co-pilot (sometimes even third operator) because there needs to be at least one person constantly monitoring the instruments and keeping sure that everything is fine and that person shouldn't in any moment loose their attention from flying the plane. Only because car autopilot needs to be more sophisticated doesn't remove the need for attention, just like in planes and ships the pilot just doesn't press the magical "autopilot"-button and kick their feets up and start fondling with their phone while chit-chatting with Karen from flightcontrol. And if people think the car autopilot works just like the plane autopilot, welcome to the real world, the plane autopilot is mostly dumber than Furby and can't even dodge storm front (not to even talk about other traffic) without manual input to change the flightplan coded into the autopilot before takeoff.

 

And yes, I think the autopilot for cars is stupid idea because it seems like a blinker is way too complicated system for frightening many drivers, not to even talk about those magical white lines that mark parking space. Hell, you couldn't probably trust a simple task of checking oil and other fluid levels to many drivers let alone the hardest and most complicated thing called tire change.

[3 Lions]

1 minute ago, Thaldor said:

I think the autopilot for cars is stupid idea because it seems like a blinker is way too complicated system for frightening many drivers,

I mean I can understand why they are trying to develop this sort of function as many people simply hate driving but currently they just aren't good enough compared to manual driven vehicles. 

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

That's not what autopilot means.

Yes, it is. Autopilot is literally "autonomous piloting" shortened.

 

3 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Yes, it is.

If you are required to perform the duty of pilot with the system engaged, it is not an autopilot. It's an assist.

[RejZoR]

59 minutes ago, Thaldor said:

Please show me one "autopilot" system that is 100% independent and still called "autopilot" and not "self-driving AI". FYI: "autopilots" don't even always have computer connected to them and mostly they don't include AI.

 

You are calling a potato tomato and arguing basicly potato is tomato because it's in the bedroom instead of kitchen or garden.

 

@Sauron

It's called autopilot because it is autopilot. Autopilots main task is to take the control of the vehicle and free the pilot/steerer/driver to do other things important for the journey, like monitoring radar, weather and radio communications. Also autopilots are quite old inventions, first ones in planes were developed 1912 and first autopilot for ships were in early-1920's. What people are mistaking as autopilot is the self-driving AI which are completely different things (autopilot being flight/sail/driving assistance and self-driving AI being displacer of a driver/pilot).

Because everyone started plastering fucking "Ai" all over everything this year, not 5 or 10 years ago even though tech hasn't really changed much at all. Secondly, AUTO literally means AUTONOMOUS, just shortened for daily use. That's not an "assist" or "aid", it means entirely self controlling protocol. Whatever isn't "autonomous" is called an "assist" or "aid" of some sort and that is even used in car industry itself (the very one we're arguing about just now). Your logic is so far off I don't think you can explain it in any direction without spewing more BS, but whatever...

 

Other car manufacturers literally call it "lane assist" or "brake assist" or some other proprietary name with explanation of being an "assist" of some sort. Go on, open webpage of any large vehicle manufacturer and read what it says. Big brands like Volkswagen Group could easily do it, but they don't for this very reason. They can't afford people getting killed because of unproven, untested tech just blatantly being used on real roads with real people. Tesla, craving for attention and tech edge over competitors did and here's the result. So, you're the one calling tomato a potato...

[Tech_Dreamer]

is there a clause in user agreement or something that say , injuries or death which arise during assisted driving is liable to the drivers discretion & risk. or something along those lines of that which lets them off the hook?

 

i mean by that standard we should sue every car manufacture for responsiveness , traction , acceleration , visibility etc  you name it , for every accident caused so far.

[D13H4RD]

30 minutes ago, Mr. horse said:

Agree, my point was that 15 years is hardly old in car terms given that cars have been around for a little over a 100 years. Yes cars have changed alot in the last 10 20 years if you option them out or have something like a Audi, but most base model strippers still lack alot of the fancy tech stuff and are not all to much different form the cars 10-15 years or so years ago in terms of tech. Other then safety and emissions tech, that has changed a whole lot across the boardI

Yep, it’s usually those that have evolved the most, with the others being mostly refinements to existing technologies.

[Sauron]

10 minutes ago, Thaldor said:

And if people think the car autopilot works just like the plane autopilot, welcome to the real world, the plane autopilot is mostly dumber than Furby and can't even dodge storm front

Which is why it shouldn't be advertised as something it isn't.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

3 hours ago, fasauceome said:

Tesla keeps having to remind people that their autopilot is just really good cruise control, and that you still are the driver.

 

3 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

They system was never shown or stated to be a driver replacement, but a way for the driver to not have to drive for 90% of the trip, but to MANAGE the driving operation for that 90%

 

2 hours ago, XR6 said:

Yes, and the reason why is because Autopilot is still just a driver assistance system. It's not a fully autonomous driving system and therefore you should not expect it to handle everything for you. All it does is take effort out of driving.

 

Then maybe, just maybe, they could call it and market it as "assisted drive", "cruise control" (hey, even "Advanced/Enhanced cruise control" ), "drive-by-wire", or a similar form that basically coincides with what they want it to mean? Rather than calling it something else and then complain that "people don't get it" when the lawsuits come in?

 

Assisted direction and ABS also make your driving easier. They're just not called "auto-direction" nor "auto-braking"

[Deus Voltage]

As much as I dislike some of Tesla's business practices, I don't think this suit will hold any waters in the court. Elon has stated several times  that autopilot is a work in progress:

Quote

Elon points out that anyone who buys a Tesla vehicle today (as they now are shipping with the Full Self-Driving computer) is buying a car that improves over time as the software is continually updated and the self-driving system improves, adding new features.

 

[Thaldor]

6 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Because everyone started plastering fucking "Ai" all over everything this year, not 5 or 10 years ago even though tech hasn't really changed much at all. Secondly, AUTO literally means AUTONOMOUS, just shortened for daily use. That's not an "assist" or "aid", it means entirely self controlling protocol. Whatever isn't "autonomous" is called an "assist" or "aid" of some sort and that is even used in car industry itself (the very one we're arguing about just now). Your logic is so far off I don't think you can explain it in any direction without spewing more BS, but whatever...

 

Other car manufacturers literally call it "lane assist" or "brake assist" or some other proprietary name with explanation of being an "assist" of some sort. Go on, open webpage of any large vehicle manufacturer and read what it says. Big brands like Volkswagen Group could easily do it, but they don't for this very reason. They can't afford people getting killed because of unproven, untested tech just blatantly being used on real roads with real people. Tesla, craving for attention and tech edge over competitors did and here's the result. So, you're the one calling tomato a potato...

Auto actually comes from automatic. But autonomous is just as good guess as autobot.

 

5 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Which is why it shouldn't be advertised as something it isn't.

Tell me what part of this:

Quote

Autopilot advanced safety and convenience features are designed to assist you with the most burdensome parts of driving. Autopilot introduces new features and improves existing functionality to make your Tesla safer and more capable over time.

Your Tesla will match speed to traffic conditions, keep within a lane, automatically change lanes without requiring driver input, transition from one freeway to another, exit the freeway when your destination is near, self-park when near a parking spot and be summoned to and from your garage.

Current Autopilot features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.

advertises something else than just a little more sophisticated plane autopilot system. Only parts that actually advertise something more consider the Full Self-driving capability (FSD) that isn't out yet.

[Fasauceome]

1 minute ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

 

 

 

Then maybe, just maybe, they could call it and market it as "assisted drive", "cruise control" (hey, even "Advanced/Enhanced cruise control" ), "drive-by-wire", or a similar form that basically coincides with what they want it to mean? Rather than calling it something else and then complain that "people don't get it" when the lawsuits come in?

 

Assisted direction and ABS also make your driving easier. They're just not called "auto-direction" nor "auto-braking"

Autopilot does not mean self driving, people assuming that is their own issue. Now, Tesla probably has to work with that and changing the name to "Assisted Driving" instead of autopilot might help, but ultimately it wasn't their responsibility to assume their name would make people completely misunderstand what the feature even does despite the (abundantly clear) instructions drivers are given when using it.

[Sauron]

3 minutes ago, Thaldor said:

Tell me what part of this:

advertises something else than just a little more sophisticated plane autopilot system. Only parts that actually advertise something more consider the Full Self-driving capability (FSD) that isn't out yet.

You'd only know that if you had some knowledge of how these systems work. It also doesn't matter if technically it isn't lying - what matters is what the public perceives and there are reports showing that the average customer is mislead.

[The Benjamins]

11 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

 

 

 

Then maybe, just maybe, they could call it and market it as "assisted drive", "cruise control" (hey, even "Advanced/Enhanced cruise control" ), "drive-by-wire", or a similar form that basically coincides with what they want it to mean? Rather than calling it something else and then complain that "people don't get it" when the lawsuits come in?

 

Assisted direction and ABS also make your driving easier. They're just not called "auto-direction" nor "auto-braking"

Maybe Tesla can call it after the assisted flying system in planes to not confuse people. What was that called again? 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

14 minutes ago, fasauceome said:

Autopilot does not mean self driving, people assuming that is their own issue. 

 

5 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

Maybe Tesla can call it after the assisted flying system in planes to not confuse people. What was that called again? 

 

Let's go over this again: you are telling me Tesla is surprised that people thought "autopilot" meant "self-driving"... after decades of seeing how regular folks think "autopilot" means "self-driving planes"? In other words, to use the name that is proven to confuse people?

[Fasauceome]

2 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

 

 

Let's go over this again: you are telling me Tesla is surprised that people thought "autopilot" meant "self-driving"... after decades of seeing how regular folks think "autopilot" means "self-driving planes"? In other words, to use the name that is proven to confuse people?

Again, the name is completely inconsequential, if people assume it means something and then ignore the directions given to the driver, that is user error, plain and simple.