Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This argument is boring (because even if you were right, that's not what the public understands) but let's pretend it is not: so are you actually right?

It's debatable.

To fly a plane safely, you have to prioritize in the following order: aviate, navigate, communicate.

An autopilot takes care of the aviate part (under some conditions) - and even bits of navigate in some case, but this is probably an easier problem actually. It can warn you when it is disengaging, so you have to be available, but you don't have to monitor actively at all time and with your full focus (as-if you fly manually) that it is working correctly and be able to disengage it yourself.

Tesla "autopilot" does not take care of the aviate equivalent. It is believed so imperfect that you are supposed to stay extremely vigilant at all time, keep your hands on the wheel, look at the road as-if you were actually fully manually driving, and disengage it yourself if it attempts to kill you (or somebody else).

My own judgment is that it is not an autopilot, by the most common parallel possible (with the autopilot of a plane). And again, that's probably not even very important. If most of the public believe a car autopilot is supposed not only to "aviate"-equivalent perfectly, but maybe even navigate on top of that, then Tesla, not even having reached the first part fully, should be just careful a little and chose some other wording.

They don't, because they are completely playing on that. I found it even more than dishonest; I found it unethical.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: