Consumer Group Wants 'Autopilot' Term Banned From Tesla Marketing

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
We've been saying this for a while now, albeit for different reasons than the consumer groups have for wanting it banned. Honestly, I have no idea why Tesla is hell bent on continuing to use the term when something like "co-pilot" would be more accurate and attract less lawsuits and complaints.

The California Department of Motor Vehicles put forth proposed regulations that would, in effect, prohibit Tesla from using the Autopilot name to market its vehicles. That was in September. Now, a consumer group is telling the DMV to get on with it. Consumer Watchdog, based in Santa Monica, contends Tesla is misleading consumers by exaggerating Autopilot’s capabilities.
 
So tired of hearing this crap. Bunch of a-holes that can't bother to read a user manual that complain that the word is confusing them.

Even Autopilot in a plane doesn't offer "complete route control and avoid all collision possibilities", it requires the pilot to remain aware of his surroundings and monitor the controls and airspace. Autopilot won't keep you from slamming into a mountain (see: Germanwings Crash), but it'll happily keep suggesting to you to gain altitude.

The full relinquishment of personal responsibility is appalling. People need to remember when they're driving they are piloting a vehicle. Stop looking at your Twitter feed, pay attention to the road, and use your goddamned turn signal.

PS - People like this are why we'll never have flying cars. Ever. E.V.E.R. If they can't handle two dimensional space, how do they expect to not slam into a high rise because they were looking at the gordita that spilled into their lap?
 
This is just stupid It's not the word that is the problem it's the context it's used in.

Only use the word autopilot if the car can truly be left unattended with the autopilot turned on.

And since they're actually working on a version that can do that, they're shooting themselves in the leg by using the word for a version that is not yet capable of that.
 
Steve said:
Only a moron would think the car drives itself, etc. etc. etc. My argument is that Tesla wouldn't even have these problems if it was simply named something else. Musk is hanging on to "autopilot" like he invented the word and we're trying to steal it.
Click to expand...
But it does drive itself. That's the problem, it just doesn't do it all the time and in all conditions.
I'll just say that "drive itself" is cruise control, breaking and steering.
 
Steve said:
We've been saying this for a while now, albeit for different reasons than the consumer groups have for wanting it banned. Honestly, I have no idea why Tesla is hell bent on continuing to use the term when something like "co-pilot" would be more accurate and attract less lawsuits and complaints.

.
Click to expand...
That's actually kind of funny since autopilot in aircraft cannot completely fly an aircraft, but a copilot should definitely be able to do all of the flying duties if need be.
 
HeavensCloud said:
Advanced cruise control, because that's all it is.
Click to expand...

Pretty much what it should be called so its easier for the general population to understand without knowing what words really mean.

As has been seed, autopilot in planes is mostly just keeping your altitude. Exactly like cruise control in cars except for maintaining height instead of speed. Sure theres higher tech ones that you program a gps route combined with other advanced sensors that can give it more functionality now. But 99% of the time the term has been in use has only been to maintain altitude, not doing the actual flying. This is just a matter of the public being dumb and projecting their own ideas of what 1 word should mean to them instead of what the actual functionality is.
 
no autopilot is fine anyone who flies can tell its pretty much what an autopilot is on an aircraft you still have babysit it it
 
I got it "Some sort of auto pilot thingy that can't really drive by itself unattended"
 
WangChung said:
PS - People like this are why we'll never have flying cars. Ever. E.V.E.R. If they can't handle two dimensional space, how do they expect to not slam into a high rise because they were looking at the gordita that spilled into their lap?
Click to expand...

I think the only possible way this will ever happen is if the flying car is in complete control and you are allowed to look at your spilled gordita avoiding the high rise. It would literally be nothing more than a coaster ride. Sit back, do nothing but watch without any control at all.
 
YOu know, the pilots have to be there and pay attention when the plane is on autopilot too
 
Everyone saying autopilot is fine because it just keeps altitude etc etc, THE GENERAL POPULATION AND PEOPLE DRIVING THESE CARS OBVIOUSLY DON'T KNOW THAT. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. We all know how to build computers here, MOST of the population does not. Get it through your head.
 
Steve said:
Only a moron would think the car drives itself, etc. etc. etc. My argument is that Tesla wouldn't even have these problems if it was simply named something else. Musk is hanging on to "autopilot" like he invented the word and we're trying to steal it.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but I also believe that 80%+ of all human beings are morons. I'm not sure the word matters as much as how it's marketed and that's totally Tesla's fault.
 
Quix said:
I agree with you, but I also believe that 80%+ of all human beings are morons. I'm not sure the word matters as much as how it's marketed and that's totally Tesla's fault.
Click to expand...
There is a reason plastic bags have the warning on them not to put them on your head.
 
Honestly it doesn't matter what you call it. Some people are just stupid. And stupid people don't bother to read user manuals. Why are we trying to save these people from themselves? It's natural selection. Once we thin the herd this will be less of a problem.
 
HeavensCloud said:
Everyone saying autopilot is fine because it just keeps altitude etc etc, THE GENERAL POPULATION AND PEOPLE DRIVING THESE CARS OBVIOUSLY DON'T KNOW THAT. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. We all know how to build computers here, MOST of the population does not. Get it through your head.
Click to expand...

Lets change technically correct terms because idiots can figures out to use the word.
Right... That is going to make communication easier. How many times have I not seen people misunderstand the difference between a logical core and a threads, because people keep saying my CPU has X threads. NO IT DOES NOT have threads, software has threads. It can EXECUTE up to a certain amount of threads at a time.
So when you are guifing person to check his threads CPU utilization, he keeps looking at core utilization instead, even though you tell him 7 time in a row that not the right info to look at.

So I would much rather run a campaign to teach people to understand the words they are using rather than dumbing down the language.


Also I really don't know what building computers have to do with knowing a car Airplane related word. Its not like "Hey i know how to build computers there for I automatically become all knowing in airplane terminologies"...
or are arguing sayung that just because you know to build computer you are some kind of unique super intelligent being. cause that seems pretty elitist in my mind
 
SvenBent said:
Lets change technically correct terms because idiots can figures out to use the word.
Right... That is going to make communication easier. How many times have I not seen people misunderstand the difference between a logical core and a threads, because people keep saying my CPU has X threads. NO IT DOES NOT have threads, software has threads. It can EXECUTE up to a certain amount of threads at a time.
So when you are guifing person to check his threads CPU utilization, he keeps looking at core utilization instead, even though you tell him 7 time in a row that not the right info to look at.

So I would much rather run a campaign to teach people to understand the words they are using rather than dumbing down the language.


Also I really don't know what building computers have to do with knowing a car Airplane related word. Its not like "Hey i know how to build computers there for I automatically become all knowing in airplane terminologies"...
or are arguing sayung that just because you know to build computer you are some kind of unique super intelligent being. cause that seems pretty elitist in my mind
Click to expand...

1. I don't disagree. America dumbs down a lot for the common people, but what can you do about it? If people don't want to learn they aren't going to learn.

2. I was simply stating that because you know what autopilot really is that doesn't mean the rest of the population does, just like you know how to build a PC, change the oil in your car, etc. Many people aren't of the same intelligence I would imagine most people on this forum are. When you surround yourself with smart people you lose sight of the rest of the people.
 
Saying that because the "plane" 'autopilots' in that way is erroneous as it's more of a 'coasting at altitude' mechanism (but people are trained to know this,, at least), where in the future, autopilot will land, takeoff, fly, and do everything for you (some already). Because of this, for the same reason, that term should not be applied to the Tesla auto cruise control feature.

We should certainly not blaming people for being stupid when it was made universally accessible by the supposedly smart engineers who built the things with the knowledge of the average IQ of the users.

When did technology become a "gotcha" where if you try something out and die, it's your fault? Come on guys, I'm an engineer, I can't speak for everyone else, but this is an ego problem with Tesla, not a college liberal redditor complaining about free tuition that they only wanted for themselves.

/2
 
The 'word' is not the issue here. As stated autopilot is not a full functional AI that can completely taxi, take off, avoid collisions, land etc. People act like they are getting into KITT.
 
Then maybe nothing that can't autopilot should be called autopilot? We aren't in 1950. Autopilot is a real thing and should apply to other real things.
 
Sort of...you should look up what the equipment can do for CAT IIIb approaches. And autopilot CAN avoid terrain if the plane is equipped appropriately (see ). The Germanwings crash was a case where a mode was used to instruct the plane to fly into the terrain (altitude hold mode). Had that plane been similarily equipped to the one in the video it certainly could have avoided the crash.

Autopilot systems very in complexity and their capabilities. It ranges from simple single axis (i.e. wing levelers) to full command and control systems (again see whats required to do CAT IIIb approaches) and everything in between. The only thing I havent heard of an autopilot being able to do is taxi and takeoff the aircraft. Though I have heard rumors about CAT IIIc (which includes taxing to a parking position) of being available "soon".

WangChung said:
Even Autopilot in a plane doesn't offer "complete route control and avoid all collision possibilities", it requires the pilot to remain aware of his surroundings and monitor the controls and airspace. Autopilot won't keep you from slamming into a mountain (see: Germanwings Crash), but it'll happily keep suggesting to you to gain altitude.
Click to expand...
 
And despite all of verbose explanations on what it's capable of, the most serious issue here, and what should happen is to give actual specific words for these improvised systems that assist in flying or driving in certain circumstances that implies the truth of its function or purpose: to assist.

auto-3
1.
a combining form representing automatic in compound words:autoalarm; autofeed; autofocus. Sometimes also taken as an adjective:
auto enlarger; auto stop control; auto dialer.

In every case of "auto" I've heard of, it does it for you, so creating an exception to that pattern is stupidity on the part of the engineer, not of the beholder.

Forget "RTFM", there is simply nothing that is automatic about either technology, and thus, neither of them should use the prefix that might confuse someone fatally who assumes the best.

You wouldn't take the "Flammable" off of a canister of gasoline and replace it with "Check contents before lighting a match" so why would you name something that helps you go in a straight line easier "autopilot".
 
To be 100% clear, I think the best solution would be for Tesla to implement a 10s hands off warning, like every other company's adaptive cruise control feature has. Their current hands off warning is worthless because it takes too long to come on. This circumvents the stupidity angle as much as possible, because it's like animal conditioning. Annoying noise => put hands on wheel.
 
Driving Assistant or Assisted Driving. How hard is it to come up with a term that doesn't state "This car will drive its self".
 
WangChung said:
So tired of hearing this crap. Bunch of a-holes that can't bother to read a user manual that complain that the word is confusing them.
Click to expand...
Tesla is making cars for humans, last I checked. Most humans don't read their car's user manual, nor are actual certified pilots familiar with advanced aircraft. Most humans think that autopilot means self-driving car, which this in no ways is, because the name literally implies it is "piloted/driven automatically". So if humans are confused, and you make your cars for humans, and a simple name change to "advanced cruise-control" will save lives, why in the WORLD would you cling to "auto-pilot" marketing?

Just change the marketing word already.

This isn't rocket science or difficult to do, and a hell of a lot more common sense simple answer than expecting average people to stop acting like average people. Change one word, or change how millions of customers behave. Hmmm....
 
Ducman69 said:
Tesla is making cars for humans, last I checked. Most humans don't read their car's user manual, nor are actual certified pilots familiar with advanced aircraft. Most humans think that autopilot means self-driving car, which this in no ways is, because the name literally implies it is "piloted/driven automatically". So if humans are confused, and you make your cars for humans, and a simple name change to "advanced cruise-control" will save lives, why in the WORLD would you cling to "auto-pilot" marketing?

Just change the marketing word already.

This isn't rocket science or difficult to do, and a hell of a lot more common sense simple answer than expecting average people to stop acting like average people. Change one word, or change how millions of customers behave. Hmmm....
Click to expand...

So your appeal is to dumb down the language to the lowest common denominator, eschewing personal responsibility of ownership and education? That's how you end up with a world described like the Up Goer Five.

https://xkcd.com/1133/

Alternatively, not all facial tissue is 'Kleenex', not all performance nitrous oxide systems are 'NOS', not all self-adhesive notes are Post-Its, etc. Lazy language/people isn't an excuse.
 
WangChung said:
So your appeal is to dumb down the language to the lowest common denominator
Click to expand...
To the average. MOST people are not pilots. MOST people don't read car manuals (especially if its not their primary vehicle and they are borrowing it). MOST people find "advanced cruise control" a better description than "autopilot". NO ONE is hurt by a simple name change, dumb or smart. Why are you being so pig headed on this no-brainer issue?

If a simple marketing slogan is hurting people, and can be changed in two seconds, why continue with it? How does anyone benefit from that? That "dumbass" that misunderstands may crash into you or your children on the road, impacting YOUR safety.
 
Tesla is just trying to pretend like it revolutionized yet something it didn't do that well.

The google car is 342952375273x better than the Tesla "autopilot", and it _actually_ autopilots, making this terminology wrong and dangerous on Tesla's part. They make good batteries, fine, and they should just stick to marketing that, otherwise they will drown in the market once their batteries are made by Japan and China for half of the price because of scandals.

The branding ego here is really stupid, and the fact that someone would defend something like this, is kind of reminiscent of the same sheepish love for Apple and how everything that comes out as "iWhatever" is automatically top of the line.

This isn't about the consumer being stupid, this is about the engineer being stupid, calling something stupid smart, then having stupid people think something stupid is smart, making this entire situation stupid. Bad engineering, through and through. A smart engineer would never call that Autopilot; only one that has a huge ego and a technical black hole of understanding would do something so foolish.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top