this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
735 points (96.8% liked)
Technology
59599 readers
3386 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
But all they did was market their pretty good lane-assist and automated braking as a magic butler that lets you nap in the driver's seat.
How could this happen??
It really shouldn't be legal to call it "full self driving" unless you can take a nap in the back seat.
It shouldn't be called "full self driving" unless the company is going to cover the collision part of my insurance.
When insurance companies start writing policies that allow me to pay less for coverage if my car operates entirely autonomously, that's when I'll start taking car automation seriously. Until then, I'll assume all of these car companies and robotaxi services are just blowing smoke up my ass trying to convince me that this is the future of driving. Sure, it might be in somebody's future, but as long as I'm liable for what my car does while it's in motion, I'm going to insist that I remain in control of the vehicle. Lane/braking assist are all wonderful, but it shouldn't be a substitute for human awareness, it should be a supplement.
It's actually not. Tesla just won't care until the feds sue them in court for it.