[dkoston]

That actually is a part of v9 autopilot but Tesla is never going to put that in writing.

The fixing of bugs like this without admission of guilt isn’t unique to Tesla. Apple, Google, Samsung, and many others do the same.

The reason they haven’t been buried in a lawsuit is because these are driver assistance features, not self driving features. It’s the responsibility of the driver to keep control of their car at all times.

Arguing that “people think they can drive with their hands off the wheel” isn’t a real legal argument. This is why Tesla warns drivers in documentation that they need to keep control of the car at all times.

This is the same legal argument that has caused warnings in microwave manuals about not putting animals inside them to dry them out. Just because someone misinterprets the capabilities of technology they purchase doesn’t mean the technology isn’t doing what it’s designed to do.

All self driving cars and driver assistance tools will be imperfect. The question is whether or not they are statistically safer than the average human. If you are an above average driver (by your record, not your impression of yourself), these tools may be unnecessary or may actually be worse for you. It’s the average and below average people that they do wonders for.

Please stop using one or two data points to form an opinion about something that has millions and millions of data points.

[rohit2412]

> All self driving cars and driver assistance tools will be imperfect. The question is whether or not they are statistically safer than the average human

I disagree. If you're arguiung for driverless cars, the comparison should be with the average driver aided by a driver assistance system.

[dkoston]

I don’t understand what you disagree with. I’m not arguing for or against driverless cars.

I’m saying that our basis right now is whether or not driver assistance systems are making driving safer or less safe.

Driverless cars are currently only used in specific areas under tight regulation. They are not generally available and this article is about Teslas which are not self-driving, they have driver assistance features.

The original commenter above was making a remark about how the driver assistance features in a Tesla are “unsafe” due to a highway barrier accident.

I was making the counter argument that the driver was acting in an unsafe fashion by using driver assistance features as “self-driving”

I agree that if driver assistance features with a human driving are safer than driverless cars, driverless cars are not ready.

The point I was trying to make is that rather than talking about a single traffic accident, we have to look at the data. This is a law or large numbers thing, not penny press headlines.

I don’t think this a choice between driverless cars or not. We should be looking for the solutions which reduce traffic fatalities and injuries and also those which reduce the amount of hours wasted in traffic. Driver assistance features or self driving is only one angle for that. Improving road design patterns, building roads that actually follow the principles of psychology and fluid dynamics related to driving, properly maintaining roads, and other non technology related solutions are also potential factors for improvement.

[kurthr]

Exactly, the worst driver is you, when frustrated, distracted, or bored. Driver assistance means that stop&go traffic or long stretches of interstate can be made more tolerable and safe. It means rubber necking as you pass that accident on the other side of a barrier won't cause another accident on your side.

Of course reliance on this breeds complacency and allows longer commutes, but so do automatic transmissions, straight tracking wheel alignment, or cruise control. Maybe we would all drive more safely if there were giant spikes that killed us instantly rather than airbags, but we aren't going back... and hopefully one day (before I need it) we'll have true self driving.

[dkoston]

Yea, it is frustrating that these driver assistance technologies aren’t self driving. It’s also frustrating that they are over hyped.

At the moment, they are really good in certain situations (stop and go traffic, highways that are maintained properly and designed really well, roads without a lot of high speed curves, etc)

They won’t add value to many commutes but they add tremendous value to others.

Like all products, they are definitely not one size fits all

[rohit2412]

Sure then I agree with you.

I want to make clear the difference between driverless and autonomous/self-driving/assistance. The difference is frequently muddled by Tesla and Elon musk with false marketing.

[dkoston]

I totally agree that the marketing hype is ramped to the maximum. This is a result of the abysmal lack of consumer protection in US advertising laws. A large portion of advertising in the states is making overblown promises and unfortunately that is the standard. Tesla is not an outlier when it comes to over hyping their products.

Unfortunately so. I really wish advertisers were held to higher standards

[stephengillie]

I'm surprised regulators don't force Tesla to rebrand the driver assistance package to a name that doesn't deceive drivers.

[dkoston]

Would love to see that kind of consumer protection across the board. Almost every US ad looks like this these days:

100% effective, works wonders, fully natural!

(These statements haven’t been validated by any organization; our product may not be effective at all. Natural has no legal meaning but it seems good for you! Actually, our product is a placebo but thanks for throwing away your money!)