Tesla will investigate why the FSD failed to disengage right before crossing the stop line.
this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2026
258 points (99.6% liked)
Boycott US
2730 readers
134 users here now
Overview:
The community dedicated to boycotting the US until they stop fascism, restore full democracy and start following international law.
Americans have a moral obligation to resist Donald Trump and project 2025 at every turn.
America is a flawed democracy currently being ruled by oligarchs. Stop the backslide! Dont let America become the next Hungary.
America needs to challenge the court rulings of citizens united v. fec and shelby county v. holder, protect the media, implement independent district drawing, and the single transferable vote so they don't end up having people stay home in life-changing elections because they cannot vote for their favourite candidate.
Join 50501.chat to fight back!
Related communities:
Boycott:
!buycanadian@lemmy.ca
Activism:
!antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
So who pays the civil suit to the survivors of the victim, and who is charged? Who's intelligence is a danger to society? Note that once these regulations are figured out, then we are at the mercy of be tracked everywhere we go. Flock cameras will not be the issue when it comes to privacy and the human right of movement.
This was the big discussion back when I still worked in insurance while years ago. The discussion was that insurance companies would not accept liability for the owners of self-driving cars because its not the driver creating the risk, but the car company and its programmers, but that car producers would have to insure their own vehicles. The discussion was how the industry will have to adapt to survive this change.
Current models of insurance (and prices) is based on statistics, including the driver's age, gender, location, and characteristics of the vehicle (make, model, age). Some companies give discounts if you are willing to give them telemetry on your driving habits. (Personally, I'm not willing, but at least that's based on you individually rather than a statistical average version of you. )
Those all to out the window when the car is self-driving. Driving behaviour is determined by the competence of the programmers who programed the car, which is entirely opaque to the public and insurers. An update can totally change the driving behaviour anytime, in ways no one can know. That is not an acceptable risk to a risk-calculating industry.
When I was still around the industry, the current issue was exactly when did policy coverage start and stop for ride share drivers (the moment they accept a ride in an app or when a passenger enters the vehicle?). I have not seen a policy for a vehicle that has some autonomous mode, but I would imagine that, in these years since, wordings have been added that state a policy does not cover the owner when FSD is engaged. But I also haven't seen that car companies are actually offering insurance either.
So, owner or car company? Maybe both, but there's a reason that Tesla specifically states that drivers have to maintain control of the vehicle, for exactly this reason: to disclaim responsibility.
load more comments
(1 replies)
So who pays the civil suit to the survivors of the victim, and who is charged?
the person sitting in the driver seat.
He can try and sue Tesla, but they will pull out a book of fine print on the FSD EULA.
He should sue both to make sure their likely non-culpability is part of the same suit as suing the driver. Otherwise he risks the driver having an easier job painting it as entirely Tesla's fault in order to weasel out of it.
I'd sue both if I were the family. The idiot for trusting and misusing the tech against it's eula and features, AND, the company so conceited they call it full self drive, suckering the stupids and creating accidents.
They're both equally culpable imho.
They'll still blame it on the driver.
As they should, but Tesla should be punished as well.
Tesla calls it "full self-driving". If anybody should be punished, it should be Tesla. Words have meaning, and while legally you can cover your ass by having in the fine print "not actually full self-driving", morally these shits are utterly repugnant and should have their company shut down, sold off piece by piece, with the proceeds going to their victims.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Over 40 Tesla owners caught sleeping the wheel.
It's the gun makers vs gun owners argument. Just fucking ban FSD.
Or don't ban it but make the provider fully liable
Make it a (and I cant believe I'm going to say this) subscription model.
It costs $X a year for self driving, requires an annual inspection and if using it correctly in accordance with manufacturers instructions the manufacturer has to carry the insurance and liability when its in use.
Until the manufacturer is willing to take the liability on I have ZERO faith in self driving tech.
I feel like it's one of those cases where both the interest & liability is a public issue. This is a perfect case for a public service, and not one for a "go fast and break things" & enshittification economic model
But I fear that both the US (duh) and Europe are way too neoliberal to ever consider this seriously
They do call it “Full Self Driving (Supervised)”, and say the driver has to be continually alert and ready to intervene, but the name plus Elron promising full autonomous capability for 10 years has been misleading.
Nothing wrong with that, they are still responsible for the movement of rhe car.
However, Tesla still needs to be responsiblw for false advertising
load more comments
(25 replies)
as they should. no reasonable driver thinks they are not responsible for their vehicle just because they were sold fancy lane keep assist.
any driver who thinks that is a dumbass and shouldn't have a license
Tesla is also guilty, and the driver can take it up with them.
That's really my point, that Tesla is guilty too, but they will say the fault is wholly with the driver. I'm surprised they even preserved enough evidence to show it was using FSD or Autopilot. In the past they've had FSD disengage 300 milliseconds before an accident and then they said it wasn't on at the time.
I mean it is their fault.
If they turn it on and stop watching then that's on them. Doesn't matter what tesla says, its in the news enough that it is vaporware and dangerous. You are at fault if you push the button and something bad happens.
You are at fault if you push the button and something bad happens.
There's plenty of fault to go around. We can blame the bad driver and Tesla's bad AI. And there are already legal mechanisms in place to hold both of them responsible.
IMO, implying that folks are responsible (to the point of liability) for following the news closely enough to see whether the manufacturers of the products they own have lied to them sets a dangerous precedent. That would mean you not only have to research your purchases beforehand to make good economic decisions for yourself, you also lock yourself into some unknown period of ongoing investigation with unknown depth to keep from being liable for someone else's failures. It's one thing if what is being marketed and sold is comprehensive driving assistance theoretically requiring no driver input, it's another when it's called full self-driving and the CEO makes overreaching claims about its capability. It's been repeatedly ruled that corporations can't bury clauses that fundamentally alter the nature of their agreements with consumers deep in the fine print and expect that to reverse what was otherwise communicated plainly.
I agree it's ultimately their fault, and they should especially be vigilant at a stop sign. Still, Tesla has been misleading.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Will there be a recall? There have been recalls for potentially unsafe issues. Killing a human is the most unsafe you can be.
Can we recall Elon Musk? He has killed lots of humans.
Hohoho elon's getting sued
Tesla was just doing its job as a nazi company, which is utterly disgust.
view more: next ›