←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 | 4 comments | 29 Aug 25 11:15 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
throw7 ◴[29 Aug 25 13:47 UTC] No.45064079[source]▶
After reading the article, I am never buying a Tesla.

Props to greenthehacker. may you sip Starbuck's venti-size hot chocolates for many years to come.

replies(3): >>45064236 #>>45064544 #>>45067077 #
lexicality ◴[29 Aug 25 13:59 UTC] No.45064236[source]▶
Were you considering buying one before today? I'm curious as to what's different about this autopilot death compared to all the other autopilot deaths that have happened previously. Personally for me it was when the guy in Florida got decapitated when his car drove under a semitruck that made me never want to get in one again.
replies(3): >>45064281 #>>45064323 #>>45064909 #
sneak ◴[29 Aug 25 14:02 UTC] No.45064281[source]▶
Autopilot is opt-in. You can drive it like any other car and never use autopilot.
replies(1): >>45064320 #
lexicality ◴[29 Aug 25 14:06 UTC] No.45064320[source]▶
This is very true, but if you had to choose between two microwaves, one of which had a button that occasionally killed people and one which did not, which would you choose? Personally I would feel better buying a microwave that doesn't have the option to decapitate me, even if I would never press it.
replies(2): >>45064367 #>>45066540 #
1. MetaWhirledPeas ◴[29 Aug 25 16:56 UTC] No.45066540[source]▶
> one of which had a button that occasionally killed people and one which did not, which would you choose?

Are you proposing that other cars' lane-keep software is better? I guess you're going to figure this out somehow before buying your next car?

replies(1): >>45066867 #
2. lexicality ◴[29 Aug 25 17:20 UTC] No.45066867[source]▶
> Are you proposing that other cars' lane-keep software is better?

I'm proposing that less technologically advanced and software focused cars are less likely to unexpectedly swerve into incoming traffic for sure

> I guess you're going to figure this out somehow before buying your next car?

Do you not do research and read reviews before making large possibly life-changing purchases?

replies(1): >>45068229 #
3. MetaWhirledPeas ◴[29 Aug 25 19:17 UTC] No.45068229[source]▶
> I'm proposing that less technologically advanced and software focused cars are less likely to unexpectedly swerve into incoming traffic for sure

Lane-keeping is a pretty common feature in new cars these days. That is the 'technologically advanced' feature that we're talking about. You're going to avoid all of them?

replies(1): >>45068359 #
4. lexicality ◴[29 Aug 25 19:29 UTC] No.45068359{3}[source]▶
That's strange, why are you talking about lane keeping? I said I don't want a car with self driving capabilities that kill you.