Most active commenters
  • nemo44x(4)

←back to thread

US probes Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after fatal crash

(www.reuters.com)
410 points jjulius | 20 comments | 18 Oct 24 16:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.235s | source | bottom
1. TheAlchemist ◴[20 Oct 24 08:08 UTC] No.41893777[source]▶
Tesla released a promotional video in 2016 saying that with FSD a human driver is not necessary and that "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons". The video was staged as we've learned in 2022.

2016 folks... Even with today's FSD which is several orders of magnitude better than the one in the video, you would still probably have a serious accident within a week (and I'm being generous here) if you didn't seat in the driver's seat.

How Trevor Milton got sentenced for fraud and the people responsible for this were not is a mystery to me.

replies(3): >>41894877 #>>41895029 #>>41895579 #
2. mglz ◴[20 Oct 24 12:57 UTC] No.41895071[source]▶
> Why is he trying to buy a president in the first place?

Because he can make more money under one than the other.

replies(1): >>41895236 #
3. nemo44x ◴[20 Oct 24 13:08 UTC] No.41895131[source]▶
He’s not doing anything activists haven’t done for years to get out the vote. In college famous rock and hip hop groups would come on campus to play shows that had voter registration tables upon entry and lots of messaging about who to vote for and then being endlessly recruited to volunteer/phone bank/canvas for some group that was supporting the event.

Activism cuts both ways.

replies(5): >>41895307 #>>41895392 #>>41895436 #>>41895439 #>>41895477 #
4. throw627004 ◴[20 Oct 24 13:26 UTC] No.41895236{3}[source]▶
Obviously yeah, but I do think his odd fervor in this allows us to speculate that there are some threats to his businesses that are not well understood publicly, and that would be solved by becoming a sort of American oligarch.
replies(1): >>41902370 #
5. sschueller ◴[20 Oct 24 13:41 UTC] No.41895307{3}[source]▶
That may be but were they required to sign a PAC's pledge to enter such concert? I think this might be over the line but a court has the decide this.
6. ◴[20 Oct 24 13:56 UTC] No.41895392{3}[source]▶
7. matwood ◴[20 Oct 24 14:03 UTC] No.41895436{3}[source]▶
Direct payments do seem to be illegal in a way that having a rally or concert or canvassing are not.

https://electionlawblog.org/?p=146397

replies(2): >>41895670 #>>41903232 #
8. ◴[20 Oct 24 14:04 UTC] No.41895439{3}[source]▶
9. lawn ◴[20 Oct 24 14:08 UTC] No.41895477{3}[source]▶
Paying someone to vote a certain way is in fact illegal though.
replies(1): >>41895623 #
10. 1f60c ◴[20 Oct 24 14:27 UTC] No.41895579[source]▶
AFAIK the owner's manual says you have to keep your hands on the wheel and be ready to take over at all times, but Elon Musk and co. love to pretend otherwise.
replies(1): >>41896763 #
11. nemo44x ◴[20 Oct 24 14:34 UTC] No.41895623{4}[source]▶
You can vote for whomever you’d like. His PAC isn’t asking you to prove you voted or voted for a particular person to get the money. They’re just generating buzz and interest in the candidate they feel is better.
12. nemo44x ◴[20 Oct 24 14:42 UTC] No.41895670{4}[source]▶
You’re not obligated to do anything like vote or vote a certain way. Money is speech and it’s an advertisement.

That’s just some random blog. I’m sure Musks’s lawyers understand what they’re doing.

Frankly I find it inspiring he cares enough about our democracy to encourage people to participate in it at great expense of his own. You love to see innovation in turning out voters who may not otherwise have their voices heard.

replies(2): >>41895774 #>>41896132 #
13. shadowfacts ◴[20 Oct 24 15:01 UTC] No.41895774{5}[source]▶
It's not a random blog making some conjectures, Rick Hasen is a law professor who is an expert in this area and, moreover, he cites specifics statutes and DOJ information that's not all that ambiguous.
replies(2): >>41895860 #>>41896179 #
14. rvnx ◴[20 Oct 24 15:17 UTC] No.41895860{6}[source]▶
Yes but he didn't take into consideration that laws don't apply when you are a billionaire and that you hold both state secrets (via DoD/Starlink) and connections to foreign countries.

So Musk will be fine, especially if Trump wins.

15. CamperBob2 ◴[20 Oct 24 15:49 UTC] No.41896132{5}[source]▶
That’s just some random blog. I’m sure Musks’s lawyers understand what they’re doing.

I'm sure his lawyers know what they're doing, but did that stop their client from calling a cave diver a pedophile for objecting to his submarine design?

Musk is basically a valueless chaos monkey with a perfect 18 score in Luck. Even he doesn't know what he'll do, say, or believe next. He has the luxury of not caring because it doesn't matter anyway; he'll just continue to get away with things that would shut the rest of us down for good. Not surprising that he's found a kindred spirit in Trump.

16. nemo44x ◴[20 Oct 24 15:54 UTC] No.41896179{6}[source]▶
He gets basic facts wrong in his blog though. For instance the rewards are for referring people to sign a petition that says you support 1a and 2a. You need to be registered for your voice to count. He’s not paying them to register but rather to refer registered people to sign it. So it’s up to an individual to find registered voters to sign it so they can collect their $47 bounty per referred signee.
replies(1): >>41896876 #
17. Flameancer ◴[20 Oct 24 16:59 UTC] No.41896763[source]▶
This part doesn’t seem to be common knowledge. I don’t own a Tesla but I have been a few. From my understanding the feature as always said it was in beta and that it still required that you have your hands on the wheel.

I like the idea of FSD, but I think we should have a serious talk about how the safety implications of making this more broadly available and also compatibility with making a mesh network so FSD vehicles can communicate. I’m not well versed in the tech but I feel like it would be safer if you have like say have more cars on the road that can communicate and making decisions together than separate cars existing in a vacuum having to make a decision.

replies(1): >>41896865 #
18. y-c-o-m-b ◴[20 Oct 24 17:11 UTC] No.41896865{3}[source]▶
I've wondered about the networked vehicle communication for a while. It doesn't even need to be FSD. I might be slightly wrong on this, but I would guess most cars going back at least a decade can have their software/firmware modified to do this if the manufacturers so choose. I imagine it would improve the reliability and reaction-times of FSD considerably.
19. matwood ◴[20 Oct 24 17:12 UTC] No.41896876{7}[source]▶
> He gets basic facts wrong in his blog though.

No, he doesn't. He references the $47 as 'murky legality'. What he's stating is clearly illegal is the $1M lottery also announced by Musk.

And Musk does what he wants regardless of lawyers. Remember when he tried to back out of buying Twitter...

20. throw627004 ◴[21 Oct 24 09:46 UTC] No.41902370{4}[source]▶
It's really not much of a stretch.

In addition to the risks to Tesla raised upthread, SpaceX needs an ambitious space program, and Mars program specifically along the lines of Musk's ideas.

Capturing the US government is a great way to get there.