289
Lawsuits test Tesla claim that drivers are solely responsible for crashes
(www.washingtonpost.com)
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
289 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
59237 readers
3285 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
But does the driver have a reasonable chance with adequate timeframe to regain control?
Like what happened with Boeing 737 Max MCAS incident, Boeing expects the pilot to disengage the trim motor in mere 4 seconds, which accoriding to a pilot "a lot to ask in an overwheming situation" or something similar.
Normal people in soon-to-crash situation are likely to freeze for a second or two, and the fear kicks up. How the driver reacts next is hard to predict. Yet, at the speed most US drivers love to go (I saw 70+ mph on freeway is the norm), the time avalible for them to make an well thought out decision I guess is quite short.
You made me think about this for a second.
In my head, the reason is not specifically to punish the driver, but to make drivers always be aware and ready to take control again. Yes 100 ppl will have 1000 different ways to react to such a software error, but you need ppl to pay attention, and in law the only way is to use punishment. Obviously this needs to be well calculated but either you have multiple lines of defense (the software, the driver, maybe even additional safety features) or you have to remove the autonomous system.
People are naturally going to pay less attention the more cars drive for them. You can't partially automate steering. Driver assisted steering is as close as it can be before the liability needs to fall on Tesla and other software manufacturers. A car isn't a plane. The driver needs to be in control when split second decisions happen, like a child running after a ball.
If I'm paying for an autopilot, I'm not the pilot. I.e., the driver. The car is. And Tesla's marketing bullshit and lawyers are going to fail here. This does not fall under puffery. It's false advertising that's causing consumers to place undue trust in a product. And the insurance industry is quite concerned just where the liability falls in all of this as well. And as they're the ones currently having to pay out claims when Tesla wins, they have a vested interest seeing that Tesla doesn't.
It doesn't matter for practical purposes you can't make people pay attention as if driving without the actual engagement of driving. There is going to be a delay in taking over and in a lot of cases it wont matter by the time the human is effectively in control.