Technology

73567 readers

3352 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

L4s@hackingne.ws

1177

Tesla loses Autopilot wrongful death case in $329 million verdict (arstechnica.com)

submitted 2 days ago by some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org to c/technology@lemmy.world

174 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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?

(page 3) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

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 7 points 2 days ago (5 children)

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

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

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

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Whoa there, pardner. Boeing has people murdered when they go against the company. Tesla only kills customers (so far, at least).

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (8 children)

Don't take my post as a defense of Tesla even if there is blame on both sides here. However, I lay the huge majority of it on Tesla marketing.

I had to find two other articles to figure out if the system being used here was Tesla's free included AutoPilot, or the more advanced paid (one time fee/subscription) version called Full Self Drive (FSD). The answer for this case was: Autopilot.

There are many important distinctions between the two systems. However Tesla frequently conflates the two together when speaking about autonomous technology for their cars, so I blame Tesla. What was required here to avoid these deaths actually has very little to do with autonomous technology as most know it, and instead talking about Collision Avoidance Systems. Only in 2024 was the first talk about requiring Collision Avoidance Systems in new vehicles in the USA. source The cars that include it now (Tesla and some other models from other brands) do so on their own without a legal mandate.

Tesla claims that the Collision Avoidance Systems would have been overridden anyway because the driver was holding on the accelerator (which is not normal under Autopilot or FSD conditions). Even if that's true, Tesla has positioned its cars as being highly autonomous, and often times doesn't call out that that skilled autonomy only comes in the Full Self Drive paid upgrade or subscription.

So I DO blame Tesla, even if the driver contributed to the accident.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

FSD wasn't even available (edit to use) in 2019. It was a future purchase add on that only went into very limited invite only beta in 2020.

In 2019 there was much less confusion on the topic.

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments