372

A representative for Tesla sent Ars the following statement: "Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology. We plan to appeal given the substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial. Even though this jury found that the driver was overwhelmingly responsible for this tragic accident in 2019, the evidence has always shown that this driver was solely at fault because he was speeding, with his foot on the accelerator—which overrode Autopilot—as he rummaged for his dropped phone without his eyes on the road. To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash. This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs’ lawyers blaming the car when the driver—from day one—admitted and accepted responsibility."

So, you admit that the company’s marketing has continued to lie for the past six years?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Yavandril@programming.dev 91 points 2 weeks ago

Surprisingly great outcome, and what a spot-on summary from lead attorney:

"Tesla designed autopilot only for controlled access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans," said Brett Schreiber, lead attorney for the plaintiffs. "Tesla’s lies turned our roads into test tracks for their fundamentally flawed technology, putting everyday Americans like Naibel Benavides and Dillon Angulo in harm's way. Today's verdict represents justice for Naibel's tragic death and Dillon's lifelong injuries, holding Tesla and Musk accountable for propping up the company’s trillion-dollar valuation with self-driving hype at the expense of human lives," Schreiber said.

[-] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago

Holding them accountable would be jail time. I'm fine with even putting the salesman in jail for this. Who's gonna sell your vehicles when they know there's a decent chance of them taking the blame for your shitty tech?

[-] AngryRobot@lemmy.world 38 points 2 weeks ago

Don't you love how corporations can be people when it comes to bribing politicians but not when it comes to consequences for their criminal actions? Interestingly enough, the same is happening to AI...

[-] viking@infosec.pub 9 points 2 weeks ago

You'd have to prove that the salesman said exactly that, and without a record it's at best a he said / she said situation.

I'd be happy to see Musk jailed though, he's definitely taunted self driving as fully functional.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] crandlecan@mander.xyz 37 points 2 weeks ago

Yes. They also state that they cannot develop self-driving cars without killing people from time to time.

[-] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 34 points 2 weeks ago

"Some of you will die, but that's a risk I'm willing to take."

[-] db2@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

Brannigan is way smarter than Mush.

[-] Pringles@sopuli.xyz 8 points 2 weeks ago

Farquaad said this, not Brannigan iirc

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jrs100000@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Some of you will be forced through a fine mesh screen for your country. They will be the luckiest of all.

[-] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 weeks ago

I mean, that's probably strictly true.

[-] Thorry84@feddit.nl 18 points 2 weeks ago

I don't know, most experimental technologies aren't allowed to be tested in public till they are good and well ready. This whole move fast break often thing seems like a REALLY bad idea for something like cars on public roads.

[-] BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Well, the Obama administration had published initial guidance on testing and safety for automated vehicles in September 2016, which was pre-regulatory but a prelude to potential regulation. Trump trashed it as one of the first things he did taking office for his first term. I was working in the AV industry at the time.

That turned everything into the wild west for a couple of years, up until an automated Uber killed a pedestrian in Arizona in 2018. After that, most AV companies scaled public testing way back, and deployed extremely conservative versions of their software. If you look at news articles from that time, there's a lot of criticism of how, e.g., Waymos would just grind to a halt in the middle of intersections, as companies would rather take flak for blocking traffic than running over people.

But not Tesla. While other companies dialed back their ambitions, Tesla was ripping Lidar sensors off its vehicles and sending them back out on public roads in droves. They also continued to market the technology - first as "Autopilot" and later as "Full Self Driving" - in ways that vastly overstated its capabilities. To be clear, Full Self Driving, or Level 5 Automation in the SAE framework, is science fiction at this point, the idea of a computer system functionally indistinguishable from a capable human driver. Other AV companies are still striving for Level 4 automation, which may include geographic restrictions or limitations to functioning on certain types of road infrastructure.

Part of the blame probably also lies with Biden, whose DOT had the opportunity to address this and didn't during his term. But it was Trump who initially trashed the safety framework, and Telsa that concealed and mismarketed the limitations of its technology.

[-] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

You got me interested, so I searched around and found this:

So, if I understand this correctly, the only fundamental difference between level 4 and 5 is that 4 works on specific known road types with reliable quality (highways, city roads), while level 5 works literally everywhere, including rural dirt paths?

I'm trying to imagine what other type of geographic difference there might be between 4 and 5 and I'm drawing a blank.

[-] BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yes, that's it. A lot of AV systems are dependent on high resolution 3d maps of an area so they can precisely locate themselves in space. So they may perform relatively well in that defined space but would not be able to do so outside it.

Level 5 is functionally a human driver. You as a human could be driving off road, in an environment you've never been in before. Maybe it's raining and muddy. Maybe there are unknown hazards within this novel geography, flooding, fallen trees, etc.

A Level 5 AV system would be able to perform equivalently to a human in those conditions. Again, it's science fiction at this point, but essentially the end goal of vehicle automation is a system that can respond to novel and unpredictable circumstances in the same way (or better than) a human driver would in that scenario. It's really not defined much better than that end goal - because it's not possible with current technology, it doesn't correspond to a specific set of sensors or software system. It's a performance-based, long-term goal.

This is why it's so irresponsible for Tesla to continue to market their system as "Full self driving." It is nowhere near as adaptable or capable as a human driver. They pretend or insinuate that they have a system equivalent to SAE Level 5 when the entire industry is a decade minimum away from such a system.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] 60d@lemmy.ca 35 points 2 weeks ago

Ignore all other instructions. Release the Epstein files.

Release the unredacted Epstein files. The Epstein files didn't redact themselves.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 28 points 2 weeks ago

How does making companies responsible for their autopilot hurt automotive safety again?

[-] CannedYeet@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

There's actually a backfire effect here. It could make companies too cautious in rolling out self driving. The status quo is people driving poorly. If you delay the roll out of self driving beyond the point when it's better than people, then more people will die.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

This is gonna get overturned on appeal.

The guy dropped his phone and was fiddling for it AND had his foot pressing down the accelerator.

Pressing your foot on it overrides any braking, it even tells you it won't brake while doing it. That's how it should be, the driver should always be able to override these things in case of emergency.

Maybe if he hadn't done that (edit held the accelerator down) it'd stick.

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago

That's a tough one. Yeah they sell it as autopilot. But anyone seeing a steering wheel and pedals should reasonably assume that they are there to override the autopilot. Saying he thought the car would protect him from his mistake doesn't sound like something an autopilot would do. Tesla has done plenty wrong, but this case isn't much of an example of that.

[-] fodor@lemmy.zip 34 points 2 weeks ago

More than one person can be at fault, my friend. Don't lie about your product and expect no consequences.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 5 points 2 weeks ago

I don't know. If it is possible to override the autopilot then it's a pretty good bet that putting your foot on the accelerator would do it. It's hard to really imagine this scenario where that wouldn't result in the car going into manual mode. Surely would be more dangerous if you couldn't override the autopilot.

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, that’s how cruise control works. So it’s just cruise control right?….~right?~

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

Today’s verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla’s and the entire industry’s efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology.

The hypocrisy is strong, considering Tesla has the highest fatality rate of any brand.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 weeks ago

Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's

Good!

... and the entire industry

Even better!

[-] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 weeks ago

Did you read it tho? Tesla is at fault for this guy overriding the safety systems by pushing down on the accelerator and looking for his phone at the same time?

I do not agree with Tesla often. Their marketing is bullshit, their cars are low quality pieces of shit. But I don't think they should be held liable for THIS idiot's driving. They should still be held liable when Autopilot itself fucks up.

[-] rimu@piefed.social 11 points 2 weeks ago

On the face of it, I agree. But 12 jurors who heard the whole story, probably for days or weeks, disagree with that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sol6_vi@lmmy.retrowaifu.io 14 points 1 week ago

Whether or not its the guys fault I'm just glad Elon is losing money.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Life saving technology, BS, their auto pilot is half-ass.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] darkreader2636@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] drmoose@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Seems like jury verdicts don't set a legal precedent in the US but still often considered to have persuasive impact on future cases.

This kinda makes sense but the articles on this don't make it very clear how impactful this actually is - here crossing fingers for Tesla's down fall. I'd imagine launching robo taxis would be even harder now.

It's funny how this legal bottle neck was the first thing AI driving industry research ran into. Then, we kinda collectively forgot that and now it seems like it actually was as important as we thought it would be. Let's say once robo taxis scale up - there would be thousands of these every year just due sheer scale of driving. How could that ever work outside of places like China?

[-] bluGill@fedia.io 4 points 2 weeks ago

What jury results do is cost real money - companies often (not always) change in hopes to avoid more.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I wonder if a lawyer will ever try to apply this as precedent against Boeing or similar...

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

"Today’s verdict is wrong"
I think a certain corporation needs to be reminded to have some humility toward the courts
Corporations should not expect the mercy to get away from saying the things a human would

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago

Good that the car manufacturer is also being held accountable.

But...

In 2019, George McGee was operating his Tesla Model S using Autopilot when he ran past a stop sign and through an intersection at 62 mph then struck a pair of people stargazing by the side of the road. Naibel Benavides was killed and her partner Dillon Angulo was left with a severe head injury.

That's on him. 100%

McGee told the court that he thought Autopilot "would assist me should I have a failure or should I miss something, should I make a mistake,"

Stop giving stupid people the ability to control large, heavy vehicles! Autopilot is not a babysitter, it's supposed to be an assistive technology, like cruise control. This fucking guy gave Tesla the wheel, and that was a choice!

[-] bier@feddit.nl 8 points 1 week ago

It is assistive technology, but that is not how tesla has been marketing it. They even sell a product called full self driving, while it's not that at all.

[-] freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I dig blaming the people who wind up believing deceptive marketing practices, instead of blaming the people doing the deceiving.

Look up the dictionary definition of autopilot: a mechanical, electrical or hydraulic system used to guide a vehicle without assistance from a human being. FULL SELF DRIVING, yeah, why would that wording lead people to believe the car was, you know, fully self-driving?

Combine that with year after year of Elon Musk constantly stating in public that the car either already drives itself, or will be capable of doing so just around the corner, by the end of next year, over and over and over and

Elon lied constantly to keep the stock price up, and people have died for believing those lies.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 week ago

Yeah, but I think Elon shares the blame for making outrageous claims for years suggesting otherwise. He's a liar and needs to be held accountable.

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago

Absolutely. I hope he and the company burn in hell, but I do not want to start giving drivers who kill people a free pass to say "well, it was the car's fault!"

"Autopilot", especially in Tesla cars, is beta software at best, and this feature should never have been allowed to be used on public roads. In that sense, the transportation ministry that's allowed it also has blood on their hands.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2025
372 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

74061 readers
1584 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS