The safety board confirmed Tesla's account of the crash, which the company shared days after it happened last month.
  • [deleted]@piefed.worldEnglish
    16 days

    Full Self-Driving (Supervised)

    So not actually FULL anything and Tesla should be held accountable for creating safety issues due to false advertising.

    The driver is to blame for their actions, but not the only one to blame.

    • Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      16 days

      the driver of a Tesla who crashed into a house in June had pressed the accelerator pedal to 100%, overriding the company’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) software.

      Yes the naming convention is dumb but it wasn’t at fault here.

      • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        16 days

        Can we trust that pedal didn’t malfunction this time and was actually pressed?

        • kn33@lemmy.worldEnglish
          16 days

          Even if that was the case, the driver should’ve pressed the brakes which would’ve overrode the accelerator.

  • wasabi_noir@lemmy.zipEnglish
    16 days

    I don’t trust anything that makes Tesla look innocent. This administration is too full of fucking shit and bending over backwards too far to tongue musks asshole already I wouldn’t be the least bit shocked to hear that NTSB is fully fucking compromised and corrupt as fuck.

  • frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io
    16 days

    Shouldn’t the so-called smart technology pick up on the fact that you are driving full speed into a house? Is that not an easy error to avoid?

    • Ava@piefed.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      16 days

      I mean, I think the reasons that automated systems should allow for overrides by human operators should be pretty apparent.

    • Blaster M@lemmy.worldEnglish
      16 days

      It’s a skill issue on the driver’s part… or do you want the Tesla to come to a screeching halt on the highway every time the cameras white out from the sun?

      • SirActionSack@aussie.zoneEnglish
        16 days

        I want vehicles that rely on cameras for detecting obstacles to be banned.

        Anything that uses reasonable object detection methods should be banned if it lets you drive into a house. My Kia won’t let me drive into a house.

    • Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      16 days

      With how all cars are connected these days, we could easily throttle them using GPS data depending on the road you’re on. I don’t really get why cars can even go so fast in general, max should be twenty over the highway limit.

      Nobody really wants that though I’m guessing.

      • Blaster M@lemmy.worldEnglish
        16 days

        When you car slams on the brakes suddenly because it thinks you’re suddenly driving on the jog road next to the highway, don’t complain to me.

        • Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          16 days

          The same applies to stopping it from driving full speed into a house. Hence why I said most don’t want that. Some clear drawbacks.

          That being said, putting a max speed that is only a bit above highway speed is an easy win imo.

          • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            16 days

            Slamming the brakes on the highway because either map data is incorrect, it misread a sign, or GNSS is misplacing the car is not a drawback, it’s a massive fucking safety hazard.

              • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                15 days

                No a drawback would be a minor nuisance. You can live with a drawback. That would not be a minor nuisance and definitely not something you could live with.

  • ∟⊔⊤∦∣≶@lemmy.nzEnglish
    16 days

    ‘The family of the victim has since sued the alleged driver.’

    Sorry, but this is getting ridiculous. You can’t be accused of driving. It’s not ‘alleged.’