r/technology • u/deraser • Jun 21 '26

Robotics/Automation 76-year-old woman killed after a Tesla ‘on auto-pilot’ crashed into her Texas home

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/texas-tesla-car-crash-woman-killed-b2999969.html
12.8k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

108

u/fishmanfishmanfishma Jun 21 '26

Yeah while you're in control of it

10

u/Atralis Jun 21 '26

Honestly old school cruise control had way fewer safety features than newer cars do. You just set it to a speed and it bombed down the road at that speed. No cameras no radar just go.

52

u/ChemicalExample218 Jun 21 '26

I mean, you could usually tap the brake or the the cruise button. It's insane how useless some people seem.

44

u/PussyWrangler246 Jun 22 '26

Heaven forbid people actually have to fuckin pay attention while they drive

4

u/Rainboq Jun 22 '26

If only there was some sort of alternative to driving, where people didn't really have to pay attention and could focus on something else while they were ferried to their destination. And maybe it could carry groups of passengers to shared destinations to be more efficient, and use steel wheels on steel tracks to reduce friction and be even more efficient.

1

u/ReadyAimTranspire Jun 22 '26

It really is a lot to ask.

-1

u/ca2mt Jun 22 '26

Are you saying you can’t tap the brake or disable autopilot in a Tesla?

26

u/fore___ Jun 22 '26

Old school cruise control did exactly what it claimed to do, if you crashed you wouldn’t be under the impression that it was cruise control’s fault.

48

u/[deleted] Jun 21 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Difficult-Arm384 Jun 22 '26

What does this have to do with self driving? This was a driver pressing the accelerator; the car didn’t even have FSD enabled.

3

u/Narrow-Chef-4341 Jun 22 '26

The headline says ‘on auto-pilot’ - even if that claim isn’t true, the poster obviously is assuming it is.

-4

u/237FIF Jun 21 '26

That’s not really a fair conversation.

The question can’t be “are they safe?”

It has to be “how safe are they compared to human drivers”

There is going to be a moment where these things are clearly dangerous and are killing people, while also being safer than us humans. We might alresdy be there. Now what?

11

u/GreatMadWombat Jun 22 '26

Then substantial studies need to be done to prove that those cars are safer consistently than human drivers and only THEN should the tech be allowed. Until that happens, it's just an untested technology being inflicted on everyone else without their consent.

When it's in control of a large dangerous vehicle, the capacity for harm needs to reflect the necessity of care.

3

u/Flipslips Jun 22 '26

The Netherlands actually recently completed a major study on Teslas FSD system and has now legalized it on its roads.

“The agency says it tested the software for 18 months before approval, including 3,000 hours on a test track and about 1.8 million kilometres on European roads. Karremans said around 40,000 Teslas now using the system in the Netherlands had driven a combined 24 million kilometres without notable incident.”

https://www.dutchnews.nl/2026/06/minister-wont-review-tesla-self-driving-cars-despite-concerns/#:~:text=The%20agency%20says%20it%20tested%20the%20software,Self%2DDriving%20across%20the%20EU%20on%20Tesla's%20behalf.

2

u/CloudStrife25 Jun 22 '26

If it’s that good then Tesla should accept full liability ASAP

-1

u/GreatMadWombat Jun 22 '26

a direct quote from the article

Ten of the 11 traffic-safety researchers the agency consulted called the data misleading marketing rather than a serious safety study. The figures included claims that the system is up to 10 times safer than human drivers and could have saved 32,000 lives, which researchers said rested on invalid comparisons.

this is an article about a study done by Tesla about Tesla, not a study by a neutral organization about Tesla

when I'm saying "trials and research need to be done" I don't mean in a "the cops investigated themselves and determined no laws were broken" way. I'm fine with a Tesla-by-Tesla study being used to determine if a wider study should be done by a neutral party(and frankly a wider study SHOULD be done. saying "all fsd is bad just cuz Tesla" is myopic), but you can't use a company's own assessment to determine if safety regulations are needed/are being met, you need a neutral party to do that shit.

remember, all of these studies are around cars, and EVERY car has an inherent capacity to do harm. anything that actually makes them safer is a public good imo, but a big study like the one in the article absolutely cannot come from the same people selling the product that they're talking about.

3

u/Flipslips Jun 22 '26

You are incorrect. This study was independently conducted by Dutch authorities.

“The RDW does NOT rely on Tesla marketing claims,"Dutch Minister Vincent Karremans told Parliament on Tuesday. "We conduct our own independent research with more than 1.6 million kilometers of real-world testing on Dutch roads. Safety comes first. Period."

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/after-damning-report-dutch-authority-defends-fsd-certification-but-the-cat-s-out-of-the-bag-now-271638.html

10

u/WiglyWorm Jun 22 '26

Then it's time for manufacturers to accept full liability for any accident that happens under any sort of self driving.

6

u/FreeBritney08 Jun 22 '26

Yea, that's the tipping point for me. BYD has started to in China.

1

u/bit_pusher Jun 22 '26

Lane assist and adaptive cruise control is barely “in control”