Craig Doty II, a Tesla owner, narrowly avoided a collision after his vehicle, in Full Self-Driving (FSD) mode, allegedly steered towards an oncoming train.
Nighttime dashcam footage from earlier this month in Ohio captured the harrowing scene: Doty’s Tesla rapidly approaching a train with no apparent deceleration. He insisted his Tesla was in Full Self-Driving mode when it barreled towards the train crossing without slowing down.
So tired of the same arguments. They don’t mean anything in the real world. Complain all you want about what the shit is called, it makes no real world difference.
Legally, the driver is responsible for the fucking vehicle and these articles and comments like yours just give the impression you think they shouldn’t be responsible because of what it’s called. You’re giving shitty drivers a pass because they’re actively being stupid and you don’t like what Tesla names the software. That is the stupidest take in the world.
Go ahead in a court of law and claim you are not responsible for an accident that happens while FSD is activated and let’s see whether the name matters for your liability.
I notice you danced around the question of whether it was a lie to focus on bullshit legal stuff, which isn’t the arbiter of truth and reality. As I once heard a judge say, “You don’t come here for justice, you come here for a judgment.”
Anyway since you think it matters, the lawsuit you’re talking about is happening and a judge has ruled that the case has merit to continue: https://www.reuters.com/legal/tesla-must-face-vehicle-owners-lawsuit-over-self-driving-claims-2024-05-15/
Merit to continue just means it’s not clearly a bullshit lawsuit that should be thrown out to avoid wasting court time. Your linked lawsuit also is not about whether someone is legally responsible for a vehicle driving itself, it is again about the marketing.
I don’t give a shit whether their marketing is a lie. Marketing is not the issue at hand, as much as you all want it to be for whatever reason instead of actually blaming the shitty drivers. It has no bearing on whether someone is responsible for the vehicle they are in the driver seat of hitting something or someone.
Why do you not want to put any blame on these drivers? Drivers that ignore the warning when they turned on the function in the first place and that warns them every time they turn it on to still pay attention. Why are you so insistent that the blame should be on Tesla because of what they call it?
Makes me start to think you’re that type of driver and trying to justify your belief that you shouldn’t be responsible for the actions of a 2 ton murder machine traveling at high speed that you are in control of.
I mean clearly. “Full self-driving” is marketing, and it is a lie. That’s the point being made here. You don’t have to care about it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a lie.
I’m not not blaming the drivers. They were foolish enough to buy a Tesla and trust it with their lives for a start. But I am also blaming the marketing. Two things can be true.
You do know that marketing is, by its very definition, in practice all lies, right?
Wanna rent a VPN with military-grade encryption?
So you admit that this is in fact a lie?
“Hey, every psychopathic corporate entity that functionally runs our society lies to us all the time,” is not a great sales pitch for why this psychopathic corporation should get a pass for its specific lies.
This is the depth capitalism apologists will stoop to with absolutely no self awareness.
I don’t have to admit to anything because a) i’m not on trial, b) don’t work or care for Tesla and c) don’t give a rat’s ass about your opinion on me :)
Marketing is and always has been mostly lies or half-truths. Yes, legislation has mitigated that to some extent but marketing is still marketing. You’d have to be cognitively impaired to take all that advertising to the letter (come to think of it, maybe that’s why coffee in some countries comes with a warning saying it’s hot… or microwave instructions must specify they’re not suitable for pets).
You’d be kinda excused for believing in all the hype when AI/Tesla were just hitting the scene but nowadays? Get a grip.
Bitch all you want about how Tesla misleads or mismarkets their products (they do, anyone with two brain cells knows that) but if you’s gonna use that as an excuse to trust a car to drive 100% independently and flawlessly because they said so… it’s totally on you. Or your corpse.
You don’t have to admit to anything, but you just did.
See? That’s what I would call an “admission”.
I… don’t? I already said that if you’d been paying attention. It also does not release Tesla and Musk from culpability for lying to people about their product, many of whom went on to become corpses as a result of their negligent and malicious lies, many of them well before Tesla and Musk lost their credibility. I would also say that if your business model relies on selling dangerous bullshit to gormless rubes, then if those gormless rubes get killed by your dangerous bullshit, then you are culpable for that dangerous bullshit by virtue of targetting the gormless rubes.
EDIT: Let’s not forget the bystanders who were killed by the dangerous bullshit along with the gormless rubes. People’s actions affect more than themselves. This is part of living in a society, which should actually protect its members and not leave them to the machinations of the worst psychopaths. You know, if it’s going to be a society worth living in.
Scammers target the mentally infirm by deliberately making their communications extremely unprofessional and laden with grammatical errors, that doesn’t mean we blame those people for being scammed.
Also if you have to invent an imaginary version of the other person - someone who drives a Tesla and believes it is actually fully self driving in this case - in order to make your point, then it’s probably not a very good point.
Did i now… if you say so… keep’em internet points, i attach no value to them. 😘
The second sentence is a fallacy.
And it does matter that the company is calling it full self driving while it doesn’t fully self drive. That it would have that capability is something Musk has promised for many years. It’s also a reason that Tesla stock is worth so much.
That’s would be a very specific case. Tesla has been reminded multiple times that they need to take into account how people use their vehicles. The company is also under investigation for possible fraud because they are selling something that doesn’t do what people would respect it to do.
You’re focusing on one thing, but there’s multiple ways that the company could be liable. There’s been multiple articles explaining that the company is either under investigation or that the company has been warned to change things or else.
Well put. It’s a funny thing, words have meaning and if you advertise your products with those words, some portion of the population (gasp!) might believe you!
How does it not fully self drive? What’s your definition of full self driving then?
Mercedes Drive Pilot is Level 3 and even it will prompt you to take over when necessary, does it not fully self drive then either? What about Waymo/Cruze? They have remote operators controlling the vehicles when they get stuck. Not fully self driving either? Is the standard that it needs to be absolutely flawless and never fail or what is it?
Uh. They mean everything in the real world? You get sued for false advertising and fraud. Fox News got sued heavily for knowingly lying about voting machines. There’s a reason that companies have PR departments. Words matter a lot in the real world.
Are the drivers stupid? Sure. They believed the FSD claim after all. But that doesn’t mean Tesla is off the hook. Deceiving stupid people is still deceit.
Hey everyone, Elon’s come to lemmy!