Item — HN Reader

For those not aware of the circonstances (as me), here’s Tesla defence:

> this driver was solely at fault because he was speeding, with his foot on the accelerator—which overrode Autopilot—as he rummaged for his dropped phone without his eyes on the road

There’s lots to blame in auto makers « security marketing » and phone addiction but it seems obvious that driving a 1ton+ vehicle while not constantly looking at the road can lead to bad outcomes.

I’m all in for (mass surveillance) onboard eye tracking. Make it optional with 50% bonus on your car insurance and driving state tax. I see many, many drivers every day that are looking at their phone in very inappropriate moments like intersections and line changes.

4 comments

If someone wants the circumstances they should read the article, not Tesla’s press release. Here’s what the jury said:

… while McGee was two-thirds responsible for the crash, Tesla also bore a third of the responsibility for selling a vehicle "with a defect that was a legal cause of damage"

That doesn't give the circumstances, but the judgement. The original commentor gave the circumstances.

As I wrote, the article is where to go to find the circumstances. Neither the original nor I gave the circumstances; my comment gave a counterpoint to Tesla’s assertion about fault.

Do cars normally allow people to prevent emergency braking with the throttle depressed? I haven't actually tried this for obvious reasons, but if their defense is that the safety mechanisms were disengaged with the throttle being fully depressed...

(Clarified my comment to "prevent" from "override" since overrides broadly exist - per jeroenhd's comment - but it seems in this case the argument was that the feature never engaged)

Many automatic safety features do allow user overrides, either by braking (hard) or by accelerating (fast). You may find that your accelerator pedal is harder to press than normal, or that full throttle doesn't do what it normally does. If a normal car does a Tesla and starts doing an emergency brake in the middle of the freeway for no reason, you want the driver to be able to intervene.

maybe do not call it Autopilot if it is well not auto piloting dangerous situations?

Do you usually learn about the circumstances of legal cases by reading the arguments of only one side?

Do you have an actual critique of the argument?

I was grateful for it, and at first glance, assuming Tesla’s argument is true, it’s hard to see how they are even partially responsible.