Comment by nickff

Comment by nickff 2 days ago

9 replies

That seems like an awfully low bar to imprisoning people. Shouldn't executives at every company which designs or manufactures vehicles go to jail by your standard? If not, why?

flkiwi 2 days ago

Because there's a fundamental difference between "manufactures a car with well-understood features in a mature regulatory space" and "prematurely deploys untested and unprecedented functionality without oversight." If a legacy manufacturer rushed out a product that ignored regulation, for example, they should be similarly subject to prosecution.

  • nickff 2 days ago

    There's lots of oversight in the automotive space; everything from the dashboard indicators to the crash standards are tightly regulated. Perhaps the regulators should be 'better', but it seems to me that Tesla is quite compliant (as it does 'recalls' and all the like). Which regulations is Tesla maliciously failing to comply with?

    • AlotOfReading 2 days ago

      There are no requirements in FMVSS that meaningfully apply to FSD, unless you want to consider AEB part of FSD (which it isn't). Tesla voluntarily follows ISO 26262 for the parts they consider safety critical (i.e. not FSD), but that's just a generic software process standard. ISO 21448 is both uncommon in industry and voluntary. Tesla does not follow SAE J3016 terminology internally. Tesla does not follow UL4600. Tesla flouts both the CA DMV and the NHTSA reporting requirements. Etc.

      Can you point out where there's meaningful oversight that Tesla cooperates with without complaining or missing data?

antisthenes 2 days ago

Because the product here isn't the car itself.

It's FSD. Which is bought separately and advertised separately.

  • moralestapia 2 days ago

    But both are made by the same company so the liability is still on Tesla.

Spooky23 2 days ago

Sure. My Honda Accord’s cruise control is totally the same as the defective on arrival robot taxi.

  • nickff 2 days ago

    I have heard of at least one case where someone thought that cruise control could operate as an un-supervised 'autopilot' and nearly died; I believe their (almost new) RV went off some sort of cliff.

    • JohnKemeny 2 days ago

      There's a difference between someone not understanding the functionality of their car, and the CEO openly deceiving the public about the functionality of their car.

      If this RV manufacturer's CEO said that the cruise control was FSD, yes then one can understand the user's confusion.

      • Spooky23 2 days ago

        Do you mean to say it’s confusing to say “of course silly, the feature is called “Full Self Driving”, but the vehicle does not fully drive itself, your are in control!”