undefined | Better HN

0 pointsantisthenes11mo ago0 comments

Theranos never went public, so the quote about markets doesn't apply.

I do agree with the general sentiment, however. If FSD kills a person, many executives, including the top dog, need to go to jail.

0 comments

xnx11mo ago

> If FSD kills a person, many executives, including the top dog, need to go to jail.

It would be great to have that level of accountability.

Drunk drivers that kill people barely go to jail: https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/man-gets-10-days-in-jai...

FireBeyond11mo ago

It's a quip, but scarily accurate - it has been said multiple times, "If you want to murder someone and get away with it, hit them with your car."

Zigurd11mo ago

So that's what the lying cops at the Canton PD got wrong!

honeybadger111mo ago

FSD saves people, naysayers here of the technology are like bureaucrats, raising a problem for every solution.

Veserv11mo ago

FSD, in particular, already did definitively kill a person between 2022-08 and 2023-08 [1]. Still going strong.

Note that this is distinct from the tens of publicly documented fatalities on Tesla Autopilot.

[1] https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2022/INCR-EA22002-14496.pdf

jjav11mo ago

> If FSD kills a person, many executives, including the top dog, need to go to jail.

Remember that Musk (through "doge") just illegally dismantled the agencies that might've been able to hold Tesla accountable for safety violations.

moralestapia11mo ago

>[...] the quote about markets doesn't apply

I'm about to blow your mind.

https://www.blackrock.com/se/individual/themes/discovering-p...

nickff11mo ago

That seems like an awfully low bar to imprisoning people. Shouldn't executives at every company which designs or manufactures vehicles go to jail by your standard? If not, why?

flkiwi11mo ago

Because there's a fundamental difference between "manufactures a car with well-understood features in a mature regulatory space" and "prematurely deploys untested and unprecedented functionality without oversight." If a legacy manufacturer rushed out a product that ignored regulation, for example, they should be similarly subject to prosecution.

nickff11mo ago

There's lots of oversight in the automotive space; everything from the dashboard indicators to the crash standards are tightly regulated. Perhaps the regulators should be 'better', but it seems to me that Tesla is quite compliant (as it does 'recalls' and all the like). Which regulations is Tesla maliciously failing to comply with?

AlotOfReading11mo ago

There are no requirements in FMVSS that meaningfully apply to FSD, unless you want to consider AEB part of FSD (which it isn't). Tesla voluntarily follows ISO 26262 for the parts they consider safety critical (i.e. not FSD), but that's just a generic software process standard. ISO 21448 is both uncommon in industry and voluntary. Tesla does not follow SAE J3016 terminology internally. Tesla does not follow UL4600. Tesla flouts both the CA DMV and the NHTSA reporting requirements. Etc.

Can you point out where there's meaningful oversight that Tesla cooperates with without complaining or missing data?

antisthenesOP11mo ago

Because the product here isn't the car itself.

It's FSD. Which is bought separately and advertised separately.

moralestapia11mo ago

But both are made by the same company so the liability is still on Tesla.

Spooky2311mo ago

Sure. My Honda Accord’s cruise control is totally the same as the defective on arrival robot taxi.

nickff11mo ago

I have heard of at least one case where someone thought that cruise control could operate as an un-supervised 'autopilot' and nearly died; I believe their (almost new) RV went off some sort of cliff.

JohnKemeny11mo ago

There's a difference between someone not understanding the functionality of their car, and the CEO openly deceiving the public about the functionality of their car.

If this RV manufacturer's CEO said that the cruise control was FSD, yes then one can understand the user's confusion.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

xnx11mo ago

> If FSD kills a person, many executives, including the top dog, need to go to jail.

It would be great to have that level of accountability.

Drunk drivers that kill people barely go to jail: https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/man-gets-10-days-in-jai...

FireBeyond11mo ago

It's a quip, but scarily accurate - it has been said multiple times, "If you want to murder someone and get away with it, hit them with your car."

Zigurd11mo ago

So that's what the lying cops at the Canton PD got wrong!

honeybadger111mo ago

FSD saves people, naysayers here of the technology are like bureaucrats, raising a problem for every solution.

Veserv11mo ago

FSD, in particular, already did definitively kill a person between 2022-08 and 2023-08 [1]. Still going strong.

Note that this is distinct from the tens of publicly documented fatalities on Tesla Autopilot.

[1] https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2022/INCR-EA22002-14496.pdf

jjav11mo ago

> If FSD kills a person, many executives, including the top dog, need to go to jail.

Remember that Musk (through "doge") just illegally dismantled the agencies that might've been able to hold Tesla accountable for safety violations.

moralestapia11mo ago

>[...] the quote about markets doesn't apply

I'm about to blow your mind.

https://www.blackrock.com/se/individual/themes/discovering-p...

nickff11mo ago

That seems like an awfully low bar to imprisoning people. Shouldn't executives at every company which designs or manufactures vehicles go to jail by your standard? If not, why?

flkiwi11mo ago

nickff11mo ago

AlotOfReading11mo ago

Can you point out where there's meaningful oversight that Tesla cooperates with without complaining or missing data?

antisthenesOP11mo ago

Because the product here isn't the car itself.

It's FSD. Which is bought separately and advertised separately.

moralestapia11mo ago

But both are made by the same company so the liability is still on Tesla.

Spooky2311mo ago

Sure. My Honda Accord’s cruise control is totally the same as the defective on arrival robot taxi.

nickff11mo ago

I have heard of at least one case where someone thought that cruise control could operate as an un-supervised 'autopilot' and nearly died; I believe their (almost new) RV went off some sort of cliff.

JohnKemeny11mo ago

There's a difference between someone not understanding the functionality of their car, and the CEO openly deceiving the public about the functionality of their car.

If this RV manufacturer's CEO said that the cruise control was FSD, yes then one can understand the user's confusion.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse