> Autopilot is advanced cruise control, apart from regulatory authorities saying it’s safe compared to competitors, Tesla releases quarterly safety reports since 2019 counting the incidents with Autopilot.
So what did you do to fix the issue? Why did a second person die in the same exact way as the first person after 3 years? Were you working on the fix at all? Or did you do nothing? Just admit it if you did nothing in response to that decapitation.
You say "It's Autopilot, not FSD" as if that absolves Tesla of anything. Your marketing does not change my opinion of your technologies. It doesn't change that FSD and AP both have glaring technological flaws, doesn't change the fact that FSD is beta-quality hardware and software being tested on the general public, something the public did not agree to. It doesn't change the fact that even though they didn't agree to it, you unilaterally decided it was okay to conduct a beta test involving us. That's a huge ethical problem, and the fact you don't even see it as such blows a hole in your insistence that your colleagues take safety seriously.
It doesn't matter. I understand why you think it absolves you; because you feel that the technology is similar enough to others out there, that it's just an incremental step, and so how can Tesla be held responsible when people make a career out of fucking in their car using that technology? How can Tesla be held responsible when multiple people lose their heads due to poor choices in sensor design? Correct me if I'm off base. Why is the AP/FSD distinction so important to you?
How do you not realize it's your entire company's fault there was no other orthogonal sensor to see the tractor trailer? How do you not realize it's your entire company's fault people out there feel safe enough to use your product to watch Harry Potter or fuck while while flying down the highway, using what you call "glorified cruise control"? That's what you say it is to me, your peer, but to them you've said it was "AutoPilot (TM)". Why didn't you call it "Glorified Cruise Control" or just "Cruise Control"?
That's not on them, that's on you for unleashing this technology on us. People are always going to watch movies and fuck. That they're doing so in your beta-quality robot menace to society is not their fault. Your company specifically conditioned them to think it was okay to do this in a Tesla.
> It is shown to be safer than humans behind the wheel by quite a margin.
The passive voice is doing a lot of work here.
> There is a risk of users being too careless with FSD, which is why people we put quite some effort to getting rid of such users quickly.
Again, this just goes to show how Tesla, in fact, is not concerned about safety and security, but instead are laser focused on market dominance and pushing technology on us as fast as possible. Tesla is a look before you leap, shoot first and ask questions later kind of company. Or as I said, move fast and break things (or in this case, "put quite some effort" to patch them up after the fact).
This is a brand new technology and Tesla is rushing it out to the public as fast as humanly possible, selling it in beta quality before the technology and software is even ready. And you're telling me now that you screen users for bad behavior and ban them after the fact. It just goes to show you're treating this as some grand social experiment you feel you have the right to run on the rest of us.
Yes people are going to watch movies in their cars. They're going to fuck. Yes they will be drunk and asleep. The problem is that you don't seem to care that your customers are using your products to do all these things, and it's over the course of years.
I feel like I’m repeating myself to your constant emotional attacks of trying to make me feel guilt for 2016/ 2019 case so let me try to end it with: you’re right about one thing, AP is similar to other tech out there, it is cruise control with some extra features. If you think it is ethically wrong to put AP in the public, then every car since 2005 at least are a moral hazard, if you believe that fine I don’t. Cruise control is regulated, Tesla passed them with the highest ratings and releases safety reports since 2019 as I already said. Why the distinction is so important, most of Tesla AP doesn’t even use new tech, very little deep learning (just some CV stuff), AP still uses radar like every other car manufacturer out there and AP has a very simple state space planner which most cars use now though most Toyotas use older PID tech.
FSD beta is different, FSD is filled with new DL tech. DL are black box models that work surprisingly well but are not interpretable. They can suddenly output something nonsensical (like bing Chat did, ChatGPT surprisingly hasn’t) and you won’t even know why. There is a risk involved with putting DL based FSD out there, because you don’t know when it will fail. Tesla took that risk. Tesla however to date has had no FSD crashes that involved injuries, had 1 crash that involved the front of a Tesla being significantly damaged (which is being investigated by NHTSA as I already said), and several smaller collisions that have caused scratches on Tesla cars (at which point we promptly ban that user for life, you can see YouTube videos of this). Uber self driving killed a pedestrian, (though the paid QA driver should have been paying attention, it was not really Ubers engineers fault), Tesla actually handled the risk of using DL tech pretty well. It was a real risk, we still have no injuries and the tech keeps getting better. So yes your tiresome moral attacks don’t affect me and I prolly won’t respond again if I just have to repeat myself.
> AP is similar to other tech out there, it is cruise control with some extra features
What concerns me is that even if this is technically true (I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll assume it's correct), it is not marketed this way. First the fact that it's called "AutoPilot" rather than something like cruise control or super cruise or lane assist, etc, or whatever other car manufacturers call their systems and second the misleading statements made by Tesla executives about how FSD is "imminent" and will be available soon.
So what did you do to fix the issue? Why did a second person die in the same exact way as the first person after 3 years? Were you working on the fix at all? Or did you do nothing? Just admit it if you did nothing in response to that decapitation.
You say "It's Autopilot, not FSD" as if that absolves Tesla of anything. Your marketing does not change my opinion of your technologies. It doesn't change that FSD and AP both have glaring technological flaws, doesn't change the fact that FSD is beta-quality hardware and software being tested on the general public, something the public did not agree to. It doesn't change the fact that even though they didn't agree to it, you unilaterally decided it was okay to conduct a beta test involving us. That's a huge ethical problem, and the fact you don't even see it as such blows a hole in your insistence that your colleagues take safety seriously.
It doesn't matter. I understand why you think it absolves you; because you feel that the technology is similar enough to others out there, that it's just an incremental step, and so how can Tesla be held responsible when people make a career out of fucking in their car using that technology? How can Tesla be held responsible when multiple people lose their heads due to poor choices in sensor design? Correct me if I'm off base. Why is the AP/FSD distinction so important to you?
How do you not realize it's your entire company's fault there was no other orthogonal sensor to see the tractor trailer? How do you not realize it's your entire company's fault people out there feel safe enough to use your product to watch Harry Potter or fuck while while flying down the highway, using what you call "glorified cruise control"? That's what you say it is to me, your peer, but to them you've said it was "AutoPilot (TM)". Why didn't you call it "Glorified Cruise Control" or just "Cruise Control"?
That's not on them, that's on you for unleashing this technology on us. People are always going to watch movies and fuck. That they're doing so in your beta-quality robot menace to society is not their fault. Your company specifically conditioned them to think it was okay to do this in a Tesla.
> It is shown to be safer than humans behind the wheel by quite a margin.
The passive voice is doing a lot of work here.
> There is a risk of users being too careless with FSD, which is why people we put quite some effort to getting rid of such users quickly.
Again, this just goes to show how Tesla, in fact, is not concerned about safety and security, but instead are laser focused on market dominance and pushing technology on us as fast as possible. Tesla is a look before you leap, shoot first and ask questions later kind of company. Or as I said, move fast and break things (or in this case, "put quite some effort" to patch them up after the fact).
This is a brand new technology and Tesla is rushing it out to the public as fast as humanly possible, selling it in beta quality before the technology and software is even ready. And you're telling me now that you screen users for bad behavior and ban them after the fact. It just goes to show you're treating this as some grand social experiment you feel you have the right to run on the rest of us.
Yes people are going to watch movies in their cars. They're going to fuck. Yes they will be drunk and asleep. The problem is that you don't seem to care that your customers are using your products to do all these things, and it's over the course of years.