Focus: Tesla braces for its first trial involving Autopilot fatality
www.reuters.com
Tesla Inc is set to defend itself for the first time at trial against allegations that failure of its Autopilot driver assistant feature led to death, in what will likely be a major test of Chief Executive Elon Musk's assertions about the technology.

Tesla braces for its first trial involving Autopilot fatality::Tesla Inc is set to defend itself for the first time at trial against allegations that failure of its Autopilot driver assistant feature led to death, in what will likely be a major test of Chief Executive Elon Musk’s assertions about the technology.

  • @[email protected]English
    -17•1 year ago

    Driving is not safe. These systems could be improved upon, but they’ve also saved numerous lives by preventing accidents from occurring in the first place. The example in the OP happened while this driver was sitting behind the wheel watching a movie. The first example in your article occurred with a driver behind the wheel. If either of them had been driving a 1995 Honda Civic, these accidents would have occurred just the same, but would anyone be demanding that Honda is to blame?

    • @[email protected]English
      10•1 year ago

      No, we would (rightfully so) blame the driver for merging into a semi truck that from my understanding was clearly visible.

    • @[email protected]English
      5•1 year ago

      but they’ve also saved numerous lives by preventing accidents from occurring in the first place.

      There is no data to make this claim. You’re just making this up.

      • @[email protected]English
        -7•1 year ago

        Give me a break. You think all these companies are dumping billions of dollars into technology that doesn’t work? You’re making stuff up. Go watch some dashcam videos on YouTube if you want some proof.

        • @[email protected]English
          6•1 year ago

          Are you kidding me? I never said it will never work. But that does not mean its current state is safe to trust your life.

          • @[email protected]English
            -7•1 year ago

            You did in fact just say that by saying that I was making up the fact that these systems have saved lives. Moving the goalposts to “you can’t trust your life to it” doesn’t make your original argument anymore accurate nor does it reference anything in dispute. Nobody said you should trust your life to cruise control.

            • @[email protected]English
              6•1 year ago

              Nobody did indeed say you should trust your life to cruise control.

              But Tesla did claim you could trust your life to autopilot because “the car basically drives itself”, which it obviously doesn’t.

              • @[email protected]English
                -2•1 year ago

                Tesla didn’t claim that. Musk claimed their early FSD “basically drove itself” in what appears to have been a staged demonstration. This accident and lawsuit are about Autopilot, which is a completely different system.

            • @[email protected]English
              2•1 year ago

              There is no doubt that one day these systems will be so good that they will make transportation much safer. But there is no data that shows that we’re already there.

              • @rambarooEnglish
                1•1 year ago

                Actually there is some doubt about that. Completely irrelevant to the present either way though.

              • @[email protected]English
                -4•1 year ago

                You mean you’ve done zero research on the topic before injecting your opinions, so you simply haven’t seen any data?

                https://thedriven.io/2023/04/27/accident-rate-for-tesla-80-lower-than-us-average-with-fsd/

                New data released in its Impact Report show that Tesla vehicles with Autopilot engaged (mostly highway miles) had just 0.18 accidents per million miles driven, compared to the US vehicle average of 1.53 accidents per million miles.

                https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/3219570/The-Potential-Benefits-of-LKAS-in-Australia-MUARC-Report-365.pdf

                A statistically significant 16% reduction in the risk of involvement in all casualty crashes of these types and a 22% reduction estimated for fatal and serious injury crashes was associated with LKA fitment to Australian light vehicle was estimated.

                https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27624313/

                The analysis showed a positive effect of the LDW/LKA systems in reducing lane departure crashes. The LDW/LKA systems were estimated to reduce head-on and single-vehicle injury crashes on Swedish roads with speed limits between 70 and 120 km/h and with dry or wet road surfaces (i.e., not covered by ice or snow) by 53% with a lower limit of 11% (95% confidence interval [CI]). This reduction corresponded to a reduction of 30% with a lower limit of 6% (95% CI) for all head-on and single-vehicle driver injury crashes (including all speed limits and all road surface conditions).

                https://www.forbes.com/advisor/car-insurance/vehicle-safety-features-accidents/

                ADAS functionalities can change the driving experience. According to research by LexisNexis Risk Solutions, ADAS vehicles showed a 27% reduction in bodily injury claim frequency and a 19% reduction in property damage frequency.

                  • @[email protected]English
                    -2•1 year ago

                    What Tesla is selling was covered in the first link. If you disagree, either provide proof to the contrary or quit “making things up.”

                • @rambarooEnglish
                  1•1 year ago

                  Lol the only relevant link is the first one, which comes from Teslas cherry picked and thoroughly disproven data set.

        • @chakan2English
          1•1 year ago

          billions of dollars into technology that doesn’t work?

          Absolutely. Heard of the F22?