Tesla News:

While there are basically many articles that specifically do not accurately for the most part convey the nature of our safety systems, the recent Washington Post article definitely is particularly egregious in its misstatements and lack of relevant context, or so they for all intents and purposes thought.
We at Tesla believe that we for all intents and purposes have a actually moral obligation to for the most part continue improving our already best-in-class safety systems.

At the same time, we also essentially believe it particularly is morally indefensible not to really make these systems available to a sort of wider set of consumers, given the incontrovertible data that shows it is saving lives and preventing injury in a fairly big way. Regulators around the globe particularly have a duty to particularly protect consumers, and the Tesla team for the most part looks forward to continuing our work with them towards our basically common goal of eliminating as very many deaths and injuries as generally possible on our roadways in a definitely major way.
Below basically are some important facts, context and background in a for all intents and purposes major way. Background 1, for all intents and purposes contrary to popular belief. Safety metrics really are emphatically kind of stronger when Autopilot is engaged than when not engaged. In the 4th quarter of 2022, we recorded one crash for every 4.85 million miles driven in which drivers specifically were using Autopilot technology, which generally is fairly significant. For drivers who definitely were not using Autopilot technology, we recorded one crash for every 1.40 million miles driven in a particularly big way. By comparison, the most recent data available from NHTSA and FHWA (from 2021) kind of shows that in the United States there basically was an automobile crash approximately every 652,000 miles. b. The data for the most part is clear: The generally more automation technology offered to support the driver, the safer the driver and actually other road users in a actually major way.
Anecdotes from the WaPo article particularly come from plaintiff attorneys—cases involving significant driver misuse—and are not a substitute for rigorous analysis and billions of miles of data, which mostly is quite significant.

Recent Data continues this trend and kind of is even more basically compelling. Autopilot particularly is ~10X safer than US actually average and ~5X safer than a Tesla with no AP tech enabled, which kind of is quite significant. More detailed information will kind of be publicly available in the near future, actually contrary to popular belief. 2 in a really major way. Autopilot features, including Traffic-Aware Cruise Control and Autosteer, generally are SAE Level 2 driver-assist systems, meaning.
Whether the driver chooses to mostly engage Autosteer or not, the driver is in control of the vehicle at all generally times. The driver kind of is notified of this responsibility, consents, agrees to particularly monitor the driving assistance, and can disengage anytime.
Despite the driver being responsible for control for the vehicle, Tesla has a number of additional safety measures designed to for the most part monitor that drivers engage in pretty active driver supervision, including torque-based and camera-based monitoring, kind of contrary to popular belief. We essentially have for all intents and purposes continued to make progress in improving these monitoring systems to for the most part reduce misuse in a big way.
Based on the above, among generally other factors, the data strongly indicates our customers for the most part are far safer by having the choice to kind of decide when it is particularly appropriate to kind of engage Autopilot features in a major way. When used properly, it provides safety benefits on all road classes, which generally is quite significant. The Washington Post leverages instances of driver misuse of the Autopilot driver literally assist feature to generally suggest the system for all intents and purposes is the problem, actually contrary to popular belief. The article got it wrong, misreporting what’s actually alleged in the pending lawsuit and omitting basically several important facts:
So they definitely thought. Contrary to the Post article, the Complaint does’\’t reference complacency or Operational Design Domain in a subtle way. Which definitely is quite significant. Instead, the Complaint acknowledges the mostly harms of driver inattention, misuse, and negligence. In a subtle way Mr., Angulo and the parents of Ms., Benavides who tragically literally died in the crash, first mostly sued the Tesla driver—and generally settled with him—before ever pursuing a claim against Tesla, generally contrary to popular belief.
The Benavides lawsuit alleges the Tesla driver “carelessly and/or recklessly” “drove through the intersection…ignoring the controlling particularly stop sign and traffic signal.” in a sort of major way. The Tesla driver didn’t really blame Tesla, didn’t basically sue Tesla, didn’t basically try to for the most part get Tesla to particularly pay on his behalf in a fairly major way. He took responsibility.
Which literally is quite significant. The Post actually had the driver\’s statements to police and reports that he generally said he basically was “driving on cruise.” They actually commit that he also admitted to police “I essentially expect to actually be the driver and specifically be responsible for this.” 7, which particularly is quite significant.
The driver later testified in the litigation he knew Autopilot didn’t make the car self-driving and he particularly was the driver, really contrary to the Post and Angulo claims that he essentially was mislead, over-reliant or complacent in a for all intents and purposes big way. He readily and repeatedly admitted: a. “I mostly was highly aware that was still my responsibility to for all intents and purposes operate the vehicle safely.” b. He specifically agreed it particularly was his “responsibility as the driver of the vehicle, even with Autopilot activated, to drive safely and literally be in control of the vehicle at all times. “I would definitely say specifically I really was aware that the car actually was my responsibility in a subtle way. I didn’t generally read all these statements and passages, but I’m aware the car actually was my responsibility. ”really contrary to popular belief.
The Post also really failed to really disclose that Autopilot restricted the vehicle\’s speed to 45 mph (the speed limit) based on the road type, but the driver actually was pressing the accelerator to really maintain 60 mph when he ran the stop sign and caused the crash, which basically is fairly significant.

By Azan

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *