Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Leiryn t1_ityr36b wrote

Cool, wake me when something actually happens. We all know rich people and big companies are untouchable no matter what they do

41

User9705 t1_itywjl2 wrote

Ya the punishment will be a one way trip to Mars, the future of soon to be early belters once the rich move in.

6

Foe117 t1_itykumf wrote

This probe is over 1 year old, nothing has happened, someone wants the stock down.

34

[deleted] t1_ityoiq9 wrote

[removed]

7

SixPooLinc t1_itytq61 wrote

Just because it's about Musk doesn't make an article about a year old investigation any more relevant.

4

Physical-Bill7793 t1_ityu5ff wrote

The article appears to be grasping for straws with a year old news. Hope the stock goes down for my entry... Tesla is not going anywhere next 10 years

7

thruster_fuel69 t1_itzuzie wrote

Can confirm, hate Elon love tesla. He's great at disrupting, massively bad at maintaining and growing in calm times.

Super excited to buy a tesla for Christmas though, honestly the best car rn.

−5

tmp04567 t1_itycza2 wrote

It's currently a driving assist (it can do a lot but not everything, esp off roading). Maybe they shouldn't call it a self driving yet. Maybe in 10+ years. Imho it's an advertizing and naming issue. They're at the edge of tech and progressing, but only so much can be done today. A driver need to stay at the wheel to avoid eventual mistakes.

> Tesla, which disbanded its media relations department in 2020, did not respond to written questions from Reuters on Wednesday.

Tssk tssk

13

supercali45 t1_ityi8ej wrote

Doesn’t stop Musk from pumping that lie over and over .. it’s cumming it’s cumming and his lemmings lap it all up over their lips and faces

6

WilliamMorris420 t1_ityj46w wrote

Tesla's Full Self Driving has been commimg later this year or early next year for about the last ten years.

8

random-incident t1_itysbwx wrote

Do you think the hardware is the limiting factor?

−1

ScenicAndrew t1_iu1rggx wrote

Yes, Tesla cars are straight up not equipped to see the world better than a person in the driver seat can, which is kind of sad because human drivers actually have very limited vision. Luckily other autonomous cars are equipped differently.

2

random-incident t1_iu2djtq wrote

Who is the closest to actual full self driving?

1

ScenicAndrew t1_iu31nce wrote

Google Owned company waymo probably on account of them being street legal, had a big study that showed they're quite possibly already past the "better than people" phase, and definitely have better public image so adoption might go easier. But I don't follow all the players. Who knows maybe apple gets there first.

1

Sampson437 t1_itz3k78 wrote

I remember when r/technology had cool stuff about new cool technology.

4

Plzbanmebrony t1_itya7ze wrote

Nothing will happen because the limits are spelled out. It doesn't help about the misinformation about how functional it is.

1

simple_test t1_ityezwy wrote

The article says the opposite. The supposed misinformation being from Tesla.

1

ElectronicHorse3219 t1_iu1ms0z wrote

There are warnings everywhere. Article is garbage.

−1

simple_test t1_iu1xpmz wrote

They literally said the human is required only for legal reasons. So what if they also had warnings? Doesn’t mean they didn’t mislead elsewhere.

1

Plzbanmebrony t1_ityhm93 wrote

No misinformation spread on here. Bugs and shortcomings years after being fix are talked about as if still there. No one has a firm gasp on how functional the current FSD is.

−8

Sea_Perspective6891 t1_ityao1h wrote

It is also still in beta which allot of people seem to forget.

−5

Snoo93079 t1_ityf9ke wrote

Just calling things beta doesn't free you from responsibility.

24

XxRocky88xX t1_ityfkys wrote

Yeah it’s a lot different when it’s just a game and the unfinished state doesn’t matter.

Kinda need to have a functioning product when you’re dealing with something automated 2 ton death machines

12

Tarcye t1_ityk40f wrote

Nor have I ever been asked if I wanted to be a part of this beta. or other people too.

Kind of the problem. As someone who rides a motorcycle in the summer months Tesla's are the single biggest danger for me followed by Chevy Suburbans.

IF you ride a motorcycle you are naturally assuming more risks. That's just the way it is. But I've had so many close calls when it comes to Tesla's some with FSD some without, that I've started to adopt a "Get the fuck away" Rule when I see a Tesla.

I will always put another car between myself and a Tesla.

4

Cryonix12 t1_itz0odh wrote

How did you know they Teslas were running fsd when having these close calls?

−2

grizzly_teddy t1_itzn23l wrote

Yes they also require you to put hands on the wheel, have lots of warnings telling you about limitations, etc.

2

Sea_Perspective6891 t1_itztnd8 wrote

Not saying it does. But people shouldn't attack a product if its unfinished. The people using FSD are just beta testing it so it won't be perfect for some time. I also expect the final product will still have issues. The beta title is mostly just a disclaimer that is supposed to prevent this kind of stuff.

2

Snoo93079 t1_iu01djf wrote

People should attack a product if it putting people in danger, which this is.

2

aidanpryde98 t1_iu0x8cx wrote

What's the problem?

Self driving is a year away. ™

1

Teamnoq t1_iu2idy8 wrote

Weird it’s not mentioned on Twitter.

1

Supaklump t1_itz4cpl wrote

No way. Attacked again because he’s buying twitter. Nobody saw this coming.

−3

CrypoFiend t1_itykv12 wrote

Sponsored by vehicle manufacturers who refuse to research auto pilot.

−7

DragoBTC t1_ity5s1y wrote

Except they don't claim that.... 🤣 Waste of tax dollars investigating a product that actually saves lives. Go to Idiots in cars subreddit. Autopilot doesn't do any of that. Humans do

−56

[deleted] t1_ity6p8q wrote

[removed]

33

DragoBTC t1_ity7a9y wrote

It's a name, given to the software, not what the product actually does. I guess they could rename it, but no where do they say it actually does it. I own one and bought it. No where does it say it does it. Let's see where the DOJ goes with this.

−51

pandemicpunk t1_ity8gsf wrote

> It's a name, not what the product actually does.

False advertising then. Reading you loud and clear.

31

[deleted] t1_ity8ccb wrote

[removed]

21

Western-Image7125 t1_ity9kpl wrote

Bro you’re getting into a nuanced argument with a guy whose name is DragoBTC. AssPennies is still a much better name - cuz everyone loves Ass but you have to be a special kind of moron to still love bitcoin

12

WilliamMorris420 t1_ityjekh wrote

But he can't change his name. There are people who transitioned their gender years ago. Still using the same username that references their old gender because thry can't change it and have too much karma on their main account, to lose it. As once you get over 100K comment or post. Reddit gets a bit more interesting.

0

[deleted] t1_ity92le wrote

[removed]

−25

thisispainful76 t1_ity9tl7 wrote

You know in lots of places those products you describe are illegal.

3

JacksonCM t1_ityabaf wrote

> it’s a name given to the software, not what the product actually does

”Burrito” is just a name I give to my product even though it’s actually a bagel lmao

5

simple_test t1_ityf4u6 wrote

The article clearly proves you are wrong - Tesla itself claims that the driver is there only for “legal reasons”.

4

ShillingAndFarding t1_itycdyl wrote

If I produced a “high protein, calorie dense recipe” energy bar would that be reasonably interpreted as a description or simply the name of the recipe.

1

UsedToBsmart t1_ity6eto wrote

There are a few examples in the story where Tesla/Musk are saying it’s self driving, including this one:

A video currently on the company’s website says: “The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself.”

The issue isn’t that the functionality caused some crashes, the issue is that it’s being sold as something that it’s not.

EDIT: here the video on Tesla’s website showing the driver “only being in the drivers seat for legal reasons”:

https://www.tesla.com/autopilot

16

grizzly_teddy t1_itzn8am wrote

> The car is driving itself.

That's not inaccurate... it IS. Does it say, "It can always drive itself always under any and all conditions"?

0

UsedToBsmart t1_itzybr5 wrote

You missed the first two sentences. You know where it says the driver is ONLY there for legal reasons and is doing nothing.

1

Bubbagumpredditor t1_ity68dn wrote

Except they clearly do, other than in the legal fine print at the bottom.

14

DragoBTC t1_ity6h9b wrote

Can you show me where they do? They don't even advertise. Literally do not give money to any media outlet. GM, Ford, Oil companies, politicians, etc do. Show me where they actually do. I'll wait.

−13

tboutin t1_itybbyu wrote

Why are you defending them so much? Are you an employee at Tesla or something? These cars aren't saving lives

5

DragoBTC t1_itz47fc wrote

I own one because it's the safest car made. Statistics don't lie. Guess you never have known anyone to die in a car accident or been in one.

0

Martin8412 t1_itzpm6u wrote

It's the safest car according to Tesla.

1

ranguyen t1_iu0yi43 wrote

It's the safest car in the world according to government agencies actually.

1

tboutin t1_iu0lhvn wrote

No I haven't because modern cars are safe. You just proved my point.

1

tboutin t1_iu0lnht wrote

How safe is it when you are in the middle of the highway with no charging station in miles? You'll be fucked. And good luck pushing that thing

1