[baoha]

While I'm not quite sure about Tesla's responsibility, I do think CA DOT has its part in this tragic accident. Had the attenuator been replaced right after the previous accident, it could have saved the driver's life.

Usually I don't complain much about the gov, but just look at the construction mess they've created on 101, it's been like that for more than 4 years!

[danso]

IIRC, the barrier was damaged from an accident that happened 11 days prior [0]. One or two weeks later, I remember driving past the area of the crash a Sunday or two Sundays after the Tesla fatal wreck (I vaguely remember the time period because I remember picking up a visiting friend in early April). Traffic had slowed down to a crawl for miles, and it appeared that a crew was doing work on that barrier -- I assume they were fixing/replacing the barrier.

My point is, it seems premature to blame CA DOT for its role. Do you have evidence that the delay in replacing that particular barrier was slower than the normal time window? Because it seems likely that fixing that barrier is a construction job that can only be done on a weekend, because it's impractical to jam the 101 during a weekday commute.

[0] https://abc7news.com/automotive/exclusive-i-team-investigate...

[loceng]

There should have been no delay - it is designed as a critical part of highway safety infrastructure, as the death in this situation highlights; it should have been immediately reconstructed - and hopefully this lawsuit will lead to that protocol being implemented/adhered to.

[danso]

Is there a law or regulation that mandates this? The article says Caltrans claims a storm caused the delay:

> "Once our Maintenance team has been notified, the Department's goal is to repair or replace damaged guardrail or crash attenuators within seven days or five business days, depending on weather. These are guidelines that our Maintenance staff follow. However, as in this case, storms can delay the fix."

The delay may or may not have been justified (I guess we'll find out if the family decides to sue the state). But an actual regulation is important, because not only would it provide explicit criteria to show Caltrans is in the wrong, it would've (or at least should've) meant funding and procedures are in place. There's always a tradeoff between cost and safety. If the state of California doesn't provide the funding and staffing it would require to replace this barrier with "no delay", then it seems difficult to fault Caltrans for negligence.

[loceng]

I'm not sure of the specifics - I would argue it should be mandated; at minimum they could have put barrels full of sand or water - whatever they use - as a stopgap.

[55555]

> Usually I don't complain much about the gov, but just look at the construction mess they've created on 101, it's been like that for more than 4 years!

If they finish construction then they stop getting paid.

[threeseed]

So don't blame the company whose claiming that their car can "autopilot" under all conditions.

Instead blame the road. Interesting take.

[natch]

This is a bizarrely inaccurate mischaracterization of what Tesla has ever said about autopilot.

[unityByFreedom]

Yes, nevermind the video that emphasizes "the driver is doing nothing" on their tesla.com/autopilot page since 2016, or that all vehicles come with hardware for full autonomy.

There's nothing bizarre about threeseed's characterization.

https://www.tesla.com/autopilot

[ccorda]

That is a demo of full self driving, which is a perpetually coming soon feature. You even need to pay for it separately.

The actual section on what autopilot can do and what it requires of the driver is pretty clear:

> Autopilot advanced safety and convenience features are designed to assist you with the most burdensome parts of driving. Autopilot introduces new features and improves existing functionality to make your Tesla safer and more capable over time.

> Your Tesla will match speed to traffic conditions, keep within a lane, automatically change lanes without requiring driver input, transition from one freeway to another, exit the freeway when your destination is near, self-park when near a parking spot and be summoned to and from your garage.

> Current Autopilot features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.

As a Model 3 owner, it does do those things quite accurately. Certainly more so than the MobileEye based system on our Volvo, which can't lane keep and stops abruptly.

I find it convenient and more relaxing when driving, but I heed their warning (which I also agreed to when enabling autopilot in car) and pay attention, being prepared to take over at all times.

[goshx]

Except the company never claimed that.