An Update on Last Week’s Accident
I really hate the whole Tesla angle of &quot;technically we are not lying but we know people are going to mis-remember and misrepresent what we are writing&quot;.<p>Take for instance: &gt; The driver had received several visual and one audible hands-on warning earlier in the drive...<p>What this means is that during this incident there were <i>No visual or audible clues that a crash was about to happen</i><p>What they are saying is that while he was driving there was an earlier point at which the car did not crash, where the car gave a visual and audible clues. And you have to ask? Why the hell is that relevant? It isn&#x27;t. They are stating it as a fact because they know some people will incorrectly claim that the car warned the driver prior to the crash.<p>With their eager to try to explain what happened why aren&#x27;t they talking about what actually went wrong? Why did the car drive straight into a barrier. If their claim is that it was cased by the driver not having his hands on the wheel for 5 seconds, then they need to fold the company and give up trying to create self driving cars. That is <i>Not</i> acceptable of a self driving system.<p>The fact that the barrier was damaged intensified the accident, but that does not in any way excuse their system driving straight into it. And no, you can&#x27;t get out of culpability by claiming statistical superiority. That&#x27;s like a gang-member drying to get out of jail after killing a rival gang member because his gang statistically kills fewer people. Tesla has put a product in the hands of consumers, when it kills those consumers they need to step up to the plate and be honest about their fuckups, not just blame the drivers, blame the infrastructure and point to statistics.