The U.S. government’s road safety agency is again investigating Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” system, this time after getting reports of crashes in low-visibility conditions, including one that killed a pedestrian.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says in documents that it opened the probe on Thursday with the company reporting four crashes after Teslas entered areas of low visibility, including sun glare, fog and airborne dust.

In addition to the pedestrian’s death, another crash involved an injury, the agency said.

Investigators will look into the ability of “Full Self-Driving” to “detect and respond appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions, and if so, the contributing circumstances for these crashes.”

  • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    1 day ago

    Tesla, which has repeatedly said the system cannot drive itself and human drivers must be ready to intervene at all times.

    how is it legal to label this “full self driving” ?

    • kiku@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      19 hours ago

      If customers can’t assume that boneless wings don’t have bones in them, then they shouldn’t assume that Full Self Driving can self-drive the car.

      The courts made it clear that words don’t matter, and that the company can’t be liable for you assuming that words have meaning.

    • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      “I freely admit that the refreshing sparkling water I sell is poisonous and should not be consumed.”

      • don@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        “But to be clear, although I most certainly know for a fact that the refreshing sparkling water I sell is exceedingly poisonous and should in absolutely no way be consumed by any living (and most dead*) beings, I will nevertheless very heartily encourage you to buy it. What you do with it after is entirely up to you.

        *Exceptions may apply. You might be one.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 day ago

      That’s pretty clearly just a disclaimer meant to shield them from legal repercussions. They know people aren’t going to do that.

      • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Last time I checked that disclaimer was there because officially Teslas are SAE level 2, which let’s them evade regulations that higher SAE levels have, and in practice Tesla FSD beta is SAE level 4.

          • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            That’s what I read from an article but I don’t think whether they’re level 4 or not doesn’t really matter. The point is they officially claim to be level 2 but their cars clearly function beyond level 2.

            • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              cars clearly function beyond level 2.

              You want to read again what level 4 means.

              Between the levels it is not just about function, but about completeness of circumstances.

      • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        23 hours ago

        legal or not it’s absolutely bonkers. Safety should be the legal assumption for marketing terms like this, not an optional extra.