Fellas, the "Torment Nexus" tweet was supposed to be a joke.
And yet, they all got recalled when we realized they "sometimes" administer a lethal dose of radiation by mistake. Or do you think they should have continued operating? What was the "acceptable maximum rate at which your products can kill people" for them? Because I'd argue it's zero. And it should be zero for Teslas or any cars that have something called "autopilot".
A self-driving car that kills less people per mile than a reasonably selected cohort of human drivers is probably a good thing.
>>A self-driving car that kills less people per mile than a reasonably selected cohort of human drivers is probably a good thing.
Hard disagree, and I honestly hate it when people make that argument. The number should be zero.
Are you suggesting that we could use such a system but shouldn't be happy with it until it reaches zero deaths? In which case I couldn't agree more.
Or are you suggesting that we shouldn't use a technology that is vastly safer than human drivers, but still causes a nonzero amount of deaths?
Absolutely this one. And the key word here is "causes" - if the deaths are being caused by mistakes of the algorithm(and by extension - their creators) then every single one of these systems should be disabled and pulled out from sale until it can be addressed, in the same way a plane autopilot would be. I suspect we will disagree on this.
Perhaps look at it this way - when I buy an automatic pressure cooker, I need it to explode exactly zero times, not "less than manual pressure cookers". If my car drives into a concrete barrier because it thought it's actually a perfectly straight road g - I really really don't care that on average fewer people have died while using it than when driving themselves. It's unsafe and it should be forbidden from sale and use on public roads.
Regulating products based on the potential to kill, maim, or injure, is not a terrible idea.
It’s why we require more training of people who fly 747, then people who operate cars.
But if it was going to work, we’d have to do it without carve outs - if it only applies to some products, then it’s really just politics.
If Tesla’s auto pilot is really so safe that it needs little or no regulation, then by definition, regular cars are so dangerous that they should be banned or require much more regulation. But I only ever hear the first half of this argument, which makes me worry this is not really an argument about safety.
Which is what the Autopilot function does in a Tesla, so I find it to not be a misleading name.
> Having an "Autopilot" mode people get killed by because it doesn't actually drive the car should've been plenty.
Just like you need a pilot paying attention even when a plane is using autopilot, you need a driver paying attention when a Tesla is on Autopilot.
Where is the incongruence?
...
> I have no expertise in piloting or the details of autopilot
You're changing your story from "they have the same functionality" to "they're both the same because they aren't fully autonomous".
> feel free to interpret it that way if it makes you feel better.
Have a good night.
I wrote:
> That name actually seems consistent with the plane use of autopilot,
But sure, Tesla's autopilot is the same as a plane autopilot in all the other respects.
This is irrelevant to the branding. Just as autopilot in a plane assists pilots in ideal conditions, Autopilot mode in a Tesla assists drivers in ideal conditions.
As an aside, Autopilot mode in Tesla monitors the driver’s eyes to ensure they are looking at the road, and quite a few steps are taken to ensure drivers know that it is not a self driving feature, but merely assisted driving. Again, the broader point being that autopilot is not known to fly planes end to end, so there should be no confusion due to the name that Autopilot in a Tesla will drive end to end.
Is the public broadly aware of that?
There's a colloquial phrase in American English, "to be on autopilot", meaning when a person acts without awareness of what they're doing, often used when somebody makes a stupid mistake during a lapse of attention.
I don’t see why not. I didn’t go to pilot school or have any plane related interests, but from movies and tv shows and the fact that there are 2 or more pilots on every plane, it would be prudent to assume there are limitations.
The colloquialism of a person being on autopilot and making mistakes seems apt here, too. You use the Autopilot function in the car, and you don’t pay attention, then you will get in trouble.
And as many, many, many videos of pornhub attest, you can do plenty of other activities for a long time without autopilot giving a crap. Maybe that's the drivers messing with the sensors somehow, but it's obviously possible.
>>Autopilot mode in a Tesla assists drivers in ideal conditions.
That sounds like an absolute cop out if you don't mind me saying so. It's not how the feature is perceived, and again it goes back to what I said earlier - drivers should have to receive actual, real sit-down-with-a-book training to use this feature.
Drivers messing with sensors is irrelevant to Tesla informing drivers of the limitations, which the car clearly does.
>That sounds like an absolute cop out if you don't mind me saying so. It's not how the feature is perceived, and again it goes back to what I said earlier - drivers should have to receive actual, real sit-down-with-a-book training to use this feature.
Doesn’t seem like you have used a Tesla. There is no way a reasonable person can perceive Autopilot as a feature where the car drives itself point to point. Tesla locks you out of you Autopilot look away too much, and they make it clear how it is gimped in case you want to spend $200 per month for their “Full” Self Driving feature.
Also, plenty of other companies offer the same feature under a different name like lane assist and enhanced cruise control, and they don’t even monitor the driver’s eyes.
And I hope no one does. But I'm sure we both agree that any reasonable person should be able to expect a Tesla to drive itself on a straight road without driving into a truck stopped sideways on said road. Or not be confused in really weird and unusual situations like driving against the sun on a bright summer day.
>>Drivers messing with sensors is irrelevant
Which again, I have no proof was done in those cases, but it's certainly a trend on social media and on other kinds of websites to show all the activities that you can do while the car is "clearly" driving itself. And even outside of things clearly done for attention, there isn't a lack of reports of people being arrested for reading, watching films, playing games and yes, being fully asleep in Teslas behind the wheel. We're not talking about influencers farming likes, we're talking normal people.
>>Also, plenty of other companies offer the same feature under a different name like lane assist and enhanced cruise control, and they don’t even monitor the driver’s eyes.
Uhm....good? That's great in fact?
No, which is why it tells you to keep your eyes on the road and pay attention. It’s literally a bunch of cheap cameras and some software trying to draw some lines and keep the car between them and a certain distance behind whatever is in front of it.
>Which again, I have no proof was done in those cases, but it's certainly a trend on social media and on other kinds of websites to show all the activities that you can do while the car is "clearly" driving itself. And even outside of things clearly done for attention, there isn't a lack of reports of people being arrested for reading, watching films, playing games and yes, being fully asleep in Teslas behind the wheel. We're not talking about influencers farming likes, we're talking normal people.
And you can do the same with any other car that has lane assist or whatever feature name that keeps the car in a lane and automatically brakes and accelerates.
> Uhm....good? That's great in fact?
What is the logic here? You are complaining about Tesla Autopilot being unsafe, but also complaining about the thing that makes Tesla Autopilot safer than other automakers’ lane assist/braking feature?
Sorry, I should have made it clearer perhaps 3 posts ago. My #1 issue is with Tesla calling it autopilot and selling a "full self driving" upgrades for real money even though they don't exist. Call it "smart lane assist" and I'll shut up.
If you care why - because while you and I might understand that "it's just a bunch of cheap cameras keeping your car in the lane" - the public perception clearly doesn't see it that way. People cut naps behind the wheel of teslas far often than they do behind the wheels of Volvos of Peugeots, despite both of them sporting very advanced adaptive cruise systems. And we can say ok, but these people are dumb - sure, they definitely are, but I think pretending like Tesla's marketing isn't playing at least some part of it is just dishonest.
> People cut naps behind the wheel of teslas far often than they do behind the wheels of Volvos of Peugeots, despite both of them sporting very advanced adaptive cruise systems.
Need a source on this one. You’d have to be a suicidal maniac to cut a nap on Autopilot, it doesn’t change lanes, it doesn’t stop for traffic lights or red lights or construction signs, and the Tesla very clearly tells you it won’t.
And yet....
https://www.lakemchenryscanner.com/2025/10/26/barrington-hil...
https://abc7chicago.com/post/tesla-driver-caught-sleeping-au...
https://robbreport.com/motors/cars/canadian-police-arrest-sl...
I can keep going, searching google for "tesla driver arrested while asleep" yields at least 20+ results, I didn't keep looking past page 3.
As to whether that's more or less common with Volvo or any other brand.....that I can't tell you, you got me there, I don't know if there are public stats on this. But(anecdote) I have never seen a news article about non-Tesla drivers asleep behind the wheel on autopilot-like systems.
Here’s a video of the new mode, it seems pretty normal, you wouldn’t bat an eye to a friend driving in the exact same way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8uIPsaF-yY
Not that I would trust it with my life at this point in time, but the claims do seem exaggerated.
Won't anyone think of the children?
Centigonal•3mo ago
vichle•3mo ago
paradox460•3mo ago
potato3732842•3mo ago
dzhiurgis•3mo ago
ajross•3mo ago
They just named the low threshold case after a fun driving movie because joke. Is that really so hard to believe?
Centigonal•3mo ago
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/tesla-cars-traffic-la...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tesla-fsd-nhtsa-investigation-t...
https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-risky-deaths-cra...
https://futurism.com/tesla-change-name-full-self-driving-chi...
https://www.jalopnik.com/1878905/ncap-downgrades-tesla-safet...
https://www.theverge.com/news/692639/tesla-robotaxi-mistake-...
ajross•3mo ago
Centigonal•3mo ago
Must Tesla's actions be judged in a vacuum devoid of past context?
magnetowasright•3mo ago
[0] https://www.tesla.com/support/recall-rolling-stop-functional...