One small factor that Tesla drivers may not grasp about this "recall" judging from some of the comments --- having an accident with "autopilot" engaged will now become more the driver's fault.
> having an accident with "autopilot" engaged will now become more the driver's fault.
As a condition of the recall? I'm not understanding. I'm not a fan of this whole "autopilot needing driver intervention to avoid danger" product launch at all. It's absurd. Either limit it to just highways and focus on that model, prohibiting it from city traffic, or just limit use to some other context-specific form. I don't even trust my new Mercedes to slow down on cruise control when cars are too close and that's an insanely simple feature.
Rather than promoting the "self driving" feature and trying to charge extra for it, the car itself will now warn the driver it is not be used without human supervision and engagement.
I'm sorry but what does driver safety have to do with climate change? Just because the company involved happens to be Tesla you assume this is an attack in EV's? This is about driver safety technology, NOT propulsion method.
I mean, if this was supposed to be an article about driver safety technology, the author would talk about recent Cruise news and probably have better sources than mostly Reddit quotes.
Rolling Stone quality has definitely gone way down in recent years. To me, it seems more like the trend of Elon/Tesla admonition pieces for clicks, or more so to paint all Tesla owners as a bunch of irresponsible people. The rage bait is tiring... I want journalism
So there’s the general “why is this called a recall when it doesn’t have to go to a shop” complaint for which the answer is “recall is the legal term for what happens” and that is what forces action.
Then there are people complaining about not being able to use AP as much with the car actually enforcing the stated requirements of using AP, which seem to imply an admission that you were knowingly using a vehicle in an unsafe manner. The rules for using AP “safely” is that you must be just as engaged and focused as you would be if you were driving the car. Never mind that decades of air safety have determined that that isn’t physiologically possible, those instructions exist, and they exist for a reason. Namely that AP is not safe, and Tesla wants to insulate themselves from liability by claiming that the person in the drivers seat is the one responsible when AP fails. If AP were safe it would not require those terms. If AP were safe and effective as claimed Tesla would not spend so much time faking videos. If Tesla actually expected people to follow those rules their CEO would not post videos of himself not doing so. Tesla claimed these were the rules, and claimed to enforce them, but demonstrably did not.
I think a reasonable complaint would be “I paid extra for AP but now I can’t use it, how do I get a refund?”
> I think a reasonable complaint would be “I paid extra for AP but now I can’t use it, how do I get a refund?”
I think a more reasonable complaint would be "Why tf would I want to use it?". It sounds like the same as trying to teach a 16yo with a permit how to drive for the first time, but instead all the time, which is incredibly stressful. So I'm just to sit there gripping my seat for dear life while this inadequately trained driver does things requiring direct intervention?
Is there any public data how the "autopilot jail" decision was decided? I.e. - 80% of the prior accidents were caused by drivers that got >5 autopilot disengagement strikes?
12 comments
[ 5.8 ms ] story [ 58.8 ms ] threadAs a condition of the recall? I'm not understanding. I'm not a fan of this whole "autopilot needing driver intervention to avoid danger" product launch at all. It's absurd. Either limit it to just highways and focus on that model, prohibiting it from city traffic, or just limit use to some other context-specific form. I don't even trust my new Mercedes to slow down on cruise control when cars are too close and that's an insanely simple feature.
Ignore this at your peril --- and liability.
I'm not saying that had a meeting and asked how can we accelerate climate change. But that seems like their goal.
Rolling Stone quality has definitely gone way down in recent years. To me, it seems more like the trend of Elon/Tesla admonition pieces for clicks, or more so to paint all Tesla owners as a bunch of irresponsible people. The rage bait is tiring... I want journalism
Holy shit, this is a fantastically disingenuous statement.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/26/style/jay-penske.html
Then there are people complaining about not being able to use AP as much with the car actually enforcing the stated requirements of using AP, which seem to imply an admission that you were knowingly using a vehicle in an unsafe manner. The rules for using AP “safely” is that you must be just as engaged and focused as you would be if you were driving the car. Never mind that decades of air safety have determined that that isn’t physiologically possible, those instructions exist, and they exist for a reason. Namely that AP is not safe, and Tesla wants to insulate themselves from liability by claiming that the person in the drivers seat is the one responsible when AP fails. If AP were safe it would not require those terms. If AP were safe and effective as claimed Tesla would not spend so much time faking videos. If Tesla actually expected people to follow those rules their CEO would not post videos of himself not doing so. Tesla claimed these were the rules, and claimed to enforce them, but demonstrably did not.
I think a reasonable complaint would be “I paid extra for AP but now I can’t use it, how do I get a refund?”
I think a more reasonable complaint would be "Why tf would I want to use it?". It sounds like the same as trying to teach a 16yo with a permit how to drive for the first time, but instead all the time, which is incredibly stressful. So I'm just to sit there gripping my seat for dear life while this inadequately trained driver does things requiring direct intervention?