• @elrik
      link
      English
      -139 months ago

      Ah so it’s marketing BS then, got it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        359 months ago

        No… it means they’re confident enough to assume the risk, Tesla is not. They’ve been using their tech in europe for a while now without issue, Teslas meanwhile still love to hit a variety of new and exciting objects.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          259 months ago

          And that’s a huge difference for consumers. I would never use a self drive feature where I am still responsible, that’s pointless and would just create more anxiety for me.

          • @elrik
            link
            English
            09 months ago

            They’re assuming liability but that doesn’t mean it’s safe or more capable than other systems.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          19 months ago

          They’re not confident enough to assume the risk if you look at the requirements you have to meet to use it. Under 40MPH on approved freeways in heavy traffic during daylight hours with clear skies and clear markers painted on the ground. This is essentially useless for a majority of people as it’s just going to inch ahead for you in gridlock traffic provided the road meets all the other requirements.

          • @elrik
            link
            English
            19 months ago

            Yeah I don’t really understand either. Under those conditions any comparable level 2 system would operate without ever requiring the driver to take over.

          • @candybrie
            link
            English
            19 months ago

            In California, that actually sounds extremely useful.