Tesla shareholder suit says Musk and co. lied about Full Self-Driving safety

[erek]

Lame. Should just redo the entire infrastructure from the ground up and iterate the migration / rollout

Likewise, on April 22, 2019, Defendant Musk posted a nearly four-hour video under the caption "Tesla Full Self-Driving," which depicted footage of Tesla cars purportedly driving autonomously, as well as Musk and other Tesla executives discussing at length the various features of the Autopilot system, at a "Tesla Autonomy Day" event.

Though Tesla's SEC filings warned that the carmaker could face product liability claims, the lawsuit accuses Tesla of "simultaneously downplaying such risks and touting the purported safety of the Company's vehicles."

The lawsuit seeks a trial by jury and financial damages. A few weeks ago, a jury in the same federal court cleared Musk of charges in a lawsuit that alleged he harmed investors with false statements about having secured funding to take Tesla private. Even though a judge ruled that Musk's taking-Tesla-private tweets were false and reckless, the jury foreperson said the plaintiffs' case "didn't land" and seemed to be "relying on just the tweets."

Source: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...k-and-co-lied-about-full-self-driving-safety/

 

[Comixbooks]

California man's Tesla catches fire while driving on highway

https://www.foxnews.com/us/mans-tesla-catches-fire-while-driving-on-highway

 

[serpretetsky]

California man's Tesla catches fire while driving on highway

https://www.foxnews.com/us/mans-tesla-catches-fire-while-driving-on-highway

Seems unrelated to thread.

 

[Comixbooks]

Seems so

 

[scojer]

Seems so

Never a dull moment with you around, you just keep being you.



OT: I'll never trust a self driving car to be safe, because humans cannot be trusted. They'll Jaywalk, run lights and stop signs, drive drunk, high, or distracted, intentionally hit you for insurance fraud.

No amount of programming can make the car 100% safe.

 

[Darunion]

Never a dull moment with you around, you just keep being you.



OT: I'll never trust a self driving car to be safe, because humans cannot be trusted. They'll Jaywalk, run lights and stop signs, drive drunk, high, or distracted, intentionally hit you for insurance fraud.

No amount of programming can make the car 100% safe.

To be fair a similar argument has been made for calculators, computers, automatic transmissions. And agree for a while, but the ability for a computer with sensors to make decisions faster will eventually become much more reliable.

What would be nice is to see such systems made to be the best possible, instead of cheaply and profitable. I know pipe dream but the capability is there.

 

[GiGaBiTe]

computer with sensors to make decisions faster will eventually become much more reliable.

Sensors make computers less reliable. The more sensors, the lower the reliability. Sensors don't like shock, vibration, acceleration, deceleration, extreme heat, extreme cold, moisture, water, sand blasting and about a thousand other things that happen in a normal every day drive in a car. They also especially don't like salt, which is virtually the entire northeastern US.

Just take all of the normal wear and rot that happens on every other system of a car and apply it to the self driving part. It's not going to be reliable, and it will never be reliable. The older the car, the more unreliable it will be.

And with how Tesla being one of the most anti-consumer companies in the world (right up there with Apple and John Deere), good luck getting replacements for said sensors. Tesla is the old Ford meme, to fix it, remove the key and change the whole vehicle.

I'm a mechanic, you'll never convince me it will work reliably.

 

[THRESHIN]

Never a dull moment with you around, you just keep being you.



OT: I'll never trust a self driving car to be safe, because humans cannot be trusted. They'll Jaywalk, run lights and stop signs, drive drunk, high, or distracted, intentionally hit you for insurance fraud.

No amount of programming can make the car 100% safe.

Only way to make a self driving car safe is to have every vehicle on the road self driving. Not going to call it impossible, but that's one tall order thanks.

 

[Darunion]

Sensors make computers less reliable. The more sensors, the lower the reliability. Sensors don't like shock, vibration, acceleration, deceleration, extreme heat, extreme cold, moisture, water, sand blasting and about a thousand other things that happen in a normal every day drive in a car. They also especially don't like salt, which is virtually the entire northeastern US.

Just take all of the normal wear and rot that happens on every other system of a car and apply it to the self driving part. It's not going to be reliable, and it will never be reliable. The older the car, the more unreliable it will be.

And with how Tesla being one of the most anti-consumer companies in the world (right up there with Apple and John Deere), good luck getting replacements for said sensors. Tesla is the old Ford meme, to fix it, remove the key and change the whole vehicle.

I'm a mechanic, you'll never convince me it will work reliably.

That is fair, i do feel tesla is just going the wrong way with this in an effort to just be 'first' which will just muddy the waters for anyone else.

I used to work long long ago building automation sensors for a company. Doing testing involving sledge hammers against them to verify how many hits they can take or how long it can survive with molten steel splashing on it is nice, but yes when you pull some plasticky sensor off that car that got fouled from a ball of lint or crappy wire crimp, is discouraging lol.

As an electrical engineer i can completely respect your stance, but for mine, i know it "CAN" be done, it just wont be done correctly.

That said, it is easier for me to work on my newer vehicles than older ones, because i have a better understanding of current designs than older.

 

[blackmomba]

That is fair, i do feel tesla is just going the wrong way with this in an effort to just be 'first' which will just muddy the waters for anyone else.

I used to work long long ago building automation sensors for a company. Doing testing involving sledge hammers against them to verify how many hits they can take or how long it can survive with molten steel splashing on it is nice, but yes when you pull some plasticky sensor off that car that got fouled from a ball of lint or crappy wire crimp, is discouraging lol.

As an electrical engineer i can completely respect your stance, but for mine, i know it "CAN" be done, it just wont be done correctly.

That said, it is easier for me to work on my newer vehicles than older ones, because i have a better understanding of current designs than older.

But cars have had a wide variety of sensors in them for decades... Why suddenly are we questioning our ability to build accurate and resiliant sensors now in 2023?

They get a lot of hate, but Tesla at least seem to be pushing the market forward with their tech and price cuts. Meanwhile the rest of the auto manufacturers can't even deliver product and are still citing supply shortages as the blame.

 

[Darunion]

But cars have had a wide variety of sensors in them for decades... Why suddenly are we questioning our ability to build accurate and resiliant sensors now in 2023?

They get a lot of hate, but Tesla at least seem to be pushing the market forward with their tech and price cuts. Meanwhile the rest of the auto manufacturers can't even deliver product and are still citing supply shortages as the blame.

I wasn't overly. I was trying to state that just because there is a sensor doesnt mean it is going to be the weak point of it. Anything can be build robust, it is just money that gets in the way.

This type of thing just isnt going to be in a $15k kinda car, and if it is, it won't be in the same class as more expensive options (ideally).

I think of things like the xbox kinect that could read your heartrate from several peoples faces while jumping around tracking movements and it was a video game toy. Maybe the more advanced car sensors will read peoples faces and predict potential outcomes as you drive around

 

[toast0]

automatic transmissions

The jury is still out on this one. I was ok with them until I got a ZF 9HP, which I hate.

On topic, Tesla has been overselling driver assistance as self-driving or similar for a long time when it's not. I hope they're punished or the lesson for companies is it's ok to lie as long as you always do. Although shareholder lawsuits are usually not a great way to provide meaningful punishment.

 

[GiGaBiTe]

That said, it is easier for me to work on my newer vehicles than older ones, because i have a better understanding of current designs than older.

I prefer cars circa 2003 and older, because it was before the explosion of electronics being crammed everywhere.

30-40 years from now, you'll still see old beaters up to the mid 90s driving around, you won't see a 2007, 2010, 2020 something or other driving around because the parts will simply be unavailable. Hell, you can't even get parts today for in production vehicles, or things made even 10 years ago, especially on less common models. My buddy that owns a shop has had to resort to jimmy rigging things up, or fabricating one off replacements because parts are unavailable, including 3rd party aftermarket stuff.

I have an 88 Dakota, I know that truck like the back of my hand. All I need to work on it is a small socket set, an extension and a couple of screwdrivers. Don't need a $10,000 scan tool to tell me what's wrong with it, the engine bay is so open you can see what's wrong just opening the hood.

 

[Darunion]

I prefer cars circa 2003 and older, because it was before the explosion of electronics being crammed everywhere.

30-40 years from now, you'll still see old beaters up to the mid 90s driving around, you won't see a 2007, 2010, 2020 something or other driving around because the parts will simply be unavailable. Hell, you can't even get parts today for in production vehicles, or things made even 10 years ago, especially on less common models. My buddy that owns a shop has had to resort to jimmy rigging things up, or fabricating one off replacements because parts are unavailable, including 3rd party aftermarket stuff.

I have an 88 Dakota, I know that truck like the back of my hand. All I need to work on it is a small socket set, an extension and a couple of screwdrivers. Don't need a $10,000 scan tool to tell me what's wrong with it, the engine bay is so open you can see what's wrong just opening the hood.

And we did just watch a chip shortage scramble the auto industry, and any future situation that is similar will likely be worse.

We just need less copycat vehicles. Like how many 4 door 2wd sedans that only come in maybe 4 colors and look the same do we need?

Bet that dakota is fun though! After just recently getting a used newer jeep, im thinking myself of getting something older next round, cuz payments suck. But ill see how this plays out over its life to reparability. My 95 firebird i had long ago was like that, you could hear something sounding off and know what it needed.

Also until i can and legally can do something else while it drives me to work, it is useless. I wont be able to react quickly enough if i need to take over if im only half paying attention anyways. Rather just be driving instead of sitting there with hands on the wheel doing nothing.

 

[westrock2000]

What states are fully self driving cars legal?

 

[THRESHIN]

I prefer cars circa 2003 and older, because it was before the explosion of electronics being crammed everywhere.

30-40 years from now, you'll still see old beaters up to the mid 90s driving around, you won't see a 2007, 2010, 2020 something or other driving around because the parts will simply be unavailable. Hell, you can't even get parts today for in production vehicles, or things made even 10 years ago, especially on less common models. My buddy that owns a shop has had to resort to jimmy rigging things up, or fabricating one off replacements because parts are unavailable, including 3rd party aftermarket stuff.

I have an 88 Dakota, I know that truck like the back of my hand. All I need to work on it is a small socket set, an extension and a couple of screwdrivers. Don't need a $10,000 scan tool to tell me what's wrong with it, the engine bay is so open you can see what's wrong just opening the hood.

As someone who avidly repairs and maintains his own vehicles, this is both true and not. It very much depends on what you're buying - repairability is very high on my list when car shopping.

I find that some of the 03 and older vehicles can have more electronic problems. Not because there's more, but because it was all very new so they had to get their shit sorted out. ABS sensor failures come to mind with certain cars of that era ...

Are older ones easier to fix? Mostly yes. Doesn't make newer ones that hard really. It requires more research and self education is all. The nice thing is with how much is on the internet these days the answers are there. There are definitely certain brands that are an utter nightmare.... looking at you VW.

The parts complaint is true for some items but also not a fair assessment. There's still big problems with the electronics from COVID. Mostly due to their stupidity but that's besides the point.

Some cars do require very expensive scan tools, that is true. In my experience that is also in the minority. An inexpensive elm327 adapter does most of what you need for almost any car. There's also some projects out there such as FORscan for example.

Basically it comes down to buy android instead of apple.

Still I'm very much hoping that this right to repair thing catches on. maybe I won't have to go to the depths of the internet to get a service manual one day.

 

[SmokeRngs]

Only way to make a self driving car safe is to have every vehicle on the road self driving. Not going to call it impossible, but that's one tall order thanks.

This still won't work. It would require the exact same software and hardware to be running in every single vehicle which in and of itself is a guaranteed failure once you get into the type of hardware required to make this work. This still doesn't address the issue of bad, failing or failed hardware much less software issues and bugs. Add in individuals and groups who would actively interfere and interrupt the workings of this makes the problems even greater.

Self driving will never be safe nor foolproof.

 

[noko]

I prefer cars circa 2003 and older, because it was before the explosion of electronics being crammed everywhere.

30-40 years from now, you'll still see old beaters up to the mid 90s driving around, you won't see a 2007, 2010, 2020 something or other driving around because the parts will simply be unavailable. Hell, you can't even get parts today for in production vehicles, or things made even 10 years ago, especially on less common models. My buddy that owns a shop has had to resort to jimmy rigging things up, or fabricating one off replacements because parts are unavailable, including 3rd party aftermarket stuff.

I have an 88 Dakota, I know that truck like the back of my hand. All I need to work on it is a small socket set, an extension and a couple of screwdrivers. Don't need a $10,000 scan tool to tell me what's wrong with it, the engine bay is so open you can see what's wrong just opening the hood.

That OK, when my Tundra power train dies, out it goes and a small block Chevy goes in it's place with a old fashion carburetor. I will skip the points and used HEI ignition system from the 70's.

 

[toast0]

What states are fully self driving cars legal?

California, if you file for a permit with the DMV and follow reporting standards and other regulations; note that Tesla regularly sends the CA DMV letters that say their software definitely isn't self-driving while also doing PR saying it definitely is.

Arizona also allows it, but I don't know who you have to ask or what the standards are for doing it. Waymo has above board public testing fleets in both states. Lots of other companies do properly licensed testing in California. Uber self-driving was asked by California to do things right or stop, so they moved to Arizona where they killed a pedestrian crossing with a bike, because their safety driver was almost certainly not paying enough attention (some of which is a human factors design error), and their software was reclassifying the object between a pedestrian and a bicyclist and didn't take further action until too late.

 

[GiGaBiTe]

That OK, when my Tundra power train dies, out it goes and a small block Chevy goes in it's place with a old fashion carburetor. I will skip the points and used HEI ignition system from the 70's.

I'm a mopar guy, I'd drop in a 318 or 360 with a 1st gen Holley TBI. Not the most fuel efficient, but reliable.

 

[t1337duder]

Another point for the Luddites.

 

[sfsuphysics]

Never a dull moment with you around, you just keep being you.



OT: I'll never trust a self driving car to be safe, because humans cannot be trusted. They'll Jaywalk, run lights and stop signs, drive drunk, high, or distracted, intentionally hit you for insurance fraud.

No amount of programming can make the car 100% safe.

No amount of human "control" can make you 100% safe either.

Interesting you put the insurance fraud bit in though, I would think self driving cars are the last thing fraudsters would want to attack since they presumably have more cameras then the best dash cam systems around to record everything that is happening

 

[scojer]

No amount of human "control" can make you 100% safe either.

Interesting you put the insurance fraud bit in though, I would think self driving cars are the last thing fraudsters would want to attack since they presumably have more cameras then the best dash cam systems around to record everything that is happening

Insurance scammers aren't always the smartest.