Tesla Wrongful Death Lawsuit

[EAGLE5]

Tesla's statistics are questionable. I don't trust them. It's a dysfunctional company.

I use lane assist and radar cruise on my Jaguar. It takes a load off the driver while requiring a zone-out amount of attention. Tesla's may be too uncanny valley for their own good.

That said, I'm seriously thinking of getting a Model 3 Performance or Model S 100D. I just got into the twin today after a few hours of beating the snot out of the Jag, and electric power is just plain better for the driving I do daily. I could see the truck at least. Not sure about the twin. Ugh!

[TachyonBomb]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

If Tesla could demonstrate that their autopilot was statistically safer than getting into a car with a human driver then of course yes. The risk will never be zero. Obviously if they are ready to invest in a fleet of self-driving, expensive (Tesla) taxis then I would say they must have confidence in the statistics and technology.

I guess in the future "safer" would have to be more clearly defined.

Most human accidents have little to no serious injury. Those accidents would have to disregarded and only fatal accidents could be considered. Since autopilot software drives at or below the speed limit (in a Tesla) we would then have to only consider human caused accidents which were fatal at or below the posted speed limit. After a few other variable get taken out like fatal accidents caused by humans having a heart attack or stroke, street racing etc... we would be left with a much smaller pool of human caused comparables.

(human caused fatal accidents)/(Number of human operated cars on road)

to weigh against the

(handful of fatal Tesla autopilot accidents)/(Number of autopilot Teslas on the road)

I've been around Teslas autopilot enough to have some confidence in the software while on long uneventful freeways. Still not as much confidence as a human operated yet.

From what I've seen, the real danger is going to come when Tesla releases the street autopilot function publicly and the auto pilot reacts in a way that another driver on the road would not find natural or expect, or if the autopilot reacts to fast and the human operated cars around it can't react fast enough. City streets a lot more variables than a freeway.

[TachyonBomb]

Originally Posted by jsimon7777

Tesla's statistics are questionable. I don't trust them. It's a dysfunctional company.

I use lane assist and radar cruise on my Jaguar. It takes a load off the driver while requiring a zone-out amount of attention. Tesla's may be too uncanny valley for their own good.

That said, I'm seriously thinking of getting a Model 3 Performance or Model S 100D. I just got into the twin today after a few hours of beating the snot out of the Jag, and electric power is just plain better for the driving I do daily. I could see the truck at least. Not sure about the twin. Ugh!

Man, if only NDA's could talk.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by TachyonBomb

I guess in the future "safer" would have to be more clearly defined.

Humans are terrible at assessing risk. I wouldn’t trust myself to be able to calculate the probability difference. The fact is that humans get distracted, are impaired (have a stroke, are drunk, are tired, are old), are too aggressive, drive too close, drive too fast, etc. I would probably trust an autonomous system more than a human driver. A Tesla is a safer vehicle in a crash test so there is that too. Currently there is no autonomous system in Tesla’s, so I tend to think the autonomous system would be safer than this one foot in one foot out system that isn’t being used appropriately.

[Impureclient]

When self driving cars kill people and they are at fault, can the car get jail time?

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Impureclient

When self driving cars kill people and they are at fault, can the car get jail time?

Crime implies an intent or disregard to harm or some type of negligence. The negligence would fall on the manufacture unless the error was with maintaining equipment on the car, which would fall on the owner. A gas pedal that sticks across multiple models is negligence on the manufacturer. A car that crashes because its brake pads were completely worn is negligence on the owner.

The car can’t get jail time. There was no intent or motive. There was no negligence on behalf of the car. It was executing programming. At worst it would be found faulty and repaired, or it would be considered a public hazard and dismantled.

[Impureclient]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

At worst it would be found faulty and repaired, or it would be considered a public hazard and dismantled.

[IMG][/IMG]

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by TachyonBomb

Man, if only NDA's could talk.

About Tesla? Lots of people blab. The place is a clusterfuck in many ways. Some amazing engineering, though.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

The car can’t get jail time. There was no intent or motive. There was no negligence on behalf of the car. It was executing programming. At worst it would be found faulty and repaired, or it would be considered a public hazard and dismantled.

Actually while I agree the car won't get jail time, there is a very good possibility a self-driving car could very well have what could be classified as motive or intent.

There will have to be "fail safe" choices made by an autonomous car. Do I run into a bus or a "soft target" on the side of the road? If the programming is self-preservation, or save the life of the passenger at all cost, it will choose the soft targets (the kids getting on the bus) on the side of the road rather than the bus, which could very well be empty.

Now that I think about it though, it is more likely a self-driving Mustang would use that logic rather than a Tesla...but that's a whole other discussion.

[Atmo]

Originally Posted by jsimon7777

About Tesla? Lots of people blab. The place is a clusterfuck in many ways. Some amazing engineering, though.

Some amazing accounting practices too. Relying on unsustainable taxpayer financed pollution credits booked as revenue to give the appearance of profitability only fuels the fires, so to speak, of investor (and SEC) suspicion about Tesla's financial and managerial viability.

Autonomous car liability is one of the main reasons given by TMNA's CEO of their slow walk approach to rollout. They know they'll be sued from every direction if/when an event occurs. For a glimpse of what's to come, watch Boeing's 737 Max debacle play out.

The family estate of the doomed Tesla driver has IMO a better than even chance of a massive damage judgment against Tesla for several reasons. Just roll the video of Musk making outrageous statements, stupid actions, and exploding cars to influence a carefully selected jury that prioritizes emotion over fact. Whistleblowers will be found. Given today's anti-business attitudes pervading society, this lawsuit has legs.

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by Atmo

Some amazing accounting practices too. Relying on unsustainable taxpayer financed pollution credits booked as revenue to give the appearance of profitability only fuels the fires, so to speak, of investor (and SEC) suspicion about Tesla's financial and managerial viability.

Autonomous car liability is one of the main reasons given by TMNA's CEO of their slow walk approach to rollout. They know they'll be sued from every direction if/when an event occurs. For a glimpse of what's to come, watch Boeing's 737 Max debacle play out.

The family estate of the doomed Tesla driver has IMO a better than even chance of a massive damage judgment against Tesla for several reasons. Just roll the video of Musk making outrageous statements, stupid actions, and exploding cars to influence a carefully selected jury that prioritizes emotion over fact. Whistleblowers will be found. Given today's anti-business attitudes pervading society, this lawsuit has legs.

Musk is internationally known as a blowhard. It all depends on the judge and jury. Some people believe anything.

But how stupid does a guy have to be to use autopilot when he knows it's not going to work there? Sounds like suicide or personal negligence to me. I wonder if the family had debts. Lots of ways a lawsuit can go.

I spent last night looking into the Model 3 and S. Man, the PDL Teslas are fucking rockets. Compared to the I-Pace, do I want luxury and comfort with blistering acceleration or near-luxury and comfort with rocketship acceleration? I know that acceleration is addictive. I can totally see why people make these high twin HP builds and can't get satisfied with a mere 260WHP or even 400WHP.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Actually while I agree the car won't get jail time, there is a very good possibility a self-driving car could very well have what could be classified as motive or intent.

Yes, there are some ethical scenarios, but it doesn’t really change much for the car or even the programmers unless society wants to vet all those scenarios—unlikely.

[TachyonBomb]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Humans are terrible at assessing risk. I wouldn’t trust myself to be able to calculate the probability difference. The fact is that humans get distracted, are impaired (have a stroke, are drunk, are tired, are old), are too aggressive, drive too close, drive too fast, etc. I would probably trust an autonomous system more than a human driver. A Tesla is a safer vehicle in a crash test so there is that too. Currently there is no autonomous system in Tesla’s, so I tend to think the autonomous system would be safer than this one foot in one foot out system that isn’t being used appropriately.

There is a fully autonomous system in all models. For both freeway and street. I've seen it and was in the drivers seat while it was operating on public streets. The function is turned off for public use but is already build in every cars software.

If anyone wants a mental picture of the city street experience, think about the Indiana Jones or Mr. Toads Wild Adventure rides at Disneyland but a little smoother and a lot faster.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Yes, there are some ethical scenarios, but it doesn’t really change much for the car or even the programmers unless society wants to vet all those scenarios—unlikely.

Where it gets sticky is that there is no "heat of the moment" decisions for automation. Everything is intentional, and was at some level programmed or decided in advance even if it is AI. It "learned" based on what it was taught. It has no moral conscious.

Almost no moral person would plow into a group of school kids intentionally over something else, even if it meant damage to themselves. A truly autonomous car would have to have been programmed or would have to have "learned" something to handle this scenario even if its just a generic algorithm to handle situations not thought of by the programmers or something the AI had not encountered before.

I don't remember who said it but I like the quote that "We won't have truly autonomous cars until you get in the car and say "take me to work" but it decides to go to the beach instead". That's the kind of thinking I want my car to do!