←back to thread

Tesla said it didn't have key data in a fatal crash, then a hacker found it

(www.washingtonpost.com)
650 points clcaev | 3 comments | 29 Aug 25 11:15 UTC | HN request time: 0.714s | source
Show context
voidUpdate ◴[29 Aug 25 12:11 UTC] No.45063021[source]▶
I'm still convinced that it being called "full self driving" is misleading marketing and really needs to stop, since it isn't according to Tesla
replies(7): >>45063088 #>>45063277 #>>45063334 #>>45063570 #>>45063571 #>>45063584 #>>45066589 #
JumpCrisscross ◴[29 Aug 25 13:03 UTC] No.45063571[source]▶
If you live in a city, please send this article to your municipal and state electeds. Tesla is lobbying for the right to train and activate its Level 4 product, marketed as Level 5, in cities where Musk is deeply unpopular. There is massive political capital to be had in banning Tesla’s self-driving features on even the flimsiest grounds.
replies(1): >>45063605 #
terminalshort ◴[29 Aug 25 13:06 UTC] No.45063605[source]▶
I would rather take a bullet than be a luddite who gets in the way of technological advancement on "the flimsiest of grounds."
replies(2): >>45063655 #>>45065870 #
1. rcpt ◴[29 Aug 25 16:05 UTC] No.45065870[source]▶
The choice isn't a bullet it's getting smashed by a "robo" taxi.

And no you wouldn't.

replies(1): >>45066208 #
2. terminalshort ◴[29 Aug 25 16:32 UTC] No.45066208[source]▶
I'm perfectly happy to take the risk of getting smashed by a robo taxi, and I do every day. Getting smashed by a robo taxi is actually a bit better than getting smashed by a human driver because at least in the case of getting smashed by the robo taxi the crash data goes into improving the system in the future.
replies(1): >>45068018 #
3. rcpt ◴[29 Aug 25 18:58 UTC] No.45068018[source]▶
Doubt.