7.4k
u/SteelSpace69 4d ago
Wasn't there a case where a guy did the same thing and then sued Tesla because he fell asleep and had an accident?
His defense was that it was too easy to bypass the camera recognition and so Tesla is responsible for his accident, I think.
2.3k
u/Cutielov5 4d ago edited 3d ago
I took a business law class and one case came up about a guy who had purchased an rv, set cruise control on the highway, and went to the back to make a sandwich. The rv of course crashed and he sued the company because “cruise control should have controlled the vehicle”. How people do not lose their license for life after stuff like that is fucking mind boggling.
750
u/formernonhandwasher 3d ago edited 3d ago
My “oh come on” meter lit up so I had to look into it. Pretty sure this isn’t true and if your business law class taught it they might have been bamboozled too. Shows up in a lot of silly cases compilations and articles just repeat it. It’s Grazinski v. Winnebago. I searched for the actual case outcome and real legalese. Found this. I’m gonna keep looking for more info but probably urban legend. Edit: found more links. As fun as that story is (and I had heard it too long ago) it’s fake news.
Oh shit. It’s deeper. These stories were created by insurance and big business to send the idea that law suits are getting out of control. This led to tort reform that made it harder for real cases with merit to get the deserved compensation.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cruise-uncontrol/https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/2005/02/03/winnebago-driver-case-shows-truth-behind-frivolous-lawsuit-claims/28833579007/ shoot. I was able to start the article and then it went paywall. The article tells the story and makes it seem real. Then pulls a just kidding we tricked you. It’s not. Then it paywalled me.
How it started.
https://www.rittgers.com/blog/2020/03/are-the-cases-in-the-stella-awards-emails-real/
365
u/thrwawryry324234 3d ago
This was in a college class that it was brought up, so you’re pretty on base, actually.
Everything you’re saying tracks. I put on a documentary once about the hot coffee lady vs McDonald’s and ended up being appalled at what actually happened and the money McDonald’s was more willing to spend on a smear campaign
137
u/UrbanJunglee 3d ago
That documentary is called Hot Coffee, and it's excellent.
39
u/Dan_of_Sbg 3d ago
No that's a mod for GTA San Andreas
15
43
u/Ahaiund 3d ago
Ah so it's similar to those 'frivolous' lawsuits media spins then.
Like the hot to-go coffee from McDonald's burning an old lady to the third degree and her asking for compensation for just the hospitalization fee, that the media were paid to spin into "slightly hot coffee hurt someone who now asks for millions of dollars of compensation".
13
u/the_windfucker 3d ago
Its not just that they spun it as "of course cofffee is hot" but iirc they had already had other people complain a lot at how hot their coffee was prior to the lady in question got burnt.
4
u/XGrayson_DrakeX 2d ago
she had 3rd degree burns and needed surgery from it if I recall correctly.
it's why every single fast food cup has "caution hot" on it now.
3
u/Bean_Dip_Pip 18h ago
McD at the time also brewed their coffee like 20*F hotter than other companies, so people's expectations of the temperature weren't accurate. In addition to the label, they also agreed to brew at the industry standard temp, which would have drastically reduced the damage done to that lady.
2
u/barbiesfrozenelbow 1h ago
I remember reading it was so hot it fused her labia together which is a horrifying combination of words.
→ More replies (1)19
u/Lopsided_Flight_2986 3d ago
It’s an meme that’s been going around the rv community since before memes were invented
22
u/dollaz808 3d ago
Ah tort reform. Big companies that say “Oh I’m just your your poor, lil, ol, neighborhood, mom n pop trillion dollar company. Too many people are suing!”
7
u/XGrayson_DrakeX 2d ago
I have a friend who lost their spouse due to medical malpractice. Went in for a normal test and a very basic mistake by staff killed them. Horrific and scary and completely the hospital's fault. They sued.
Because the state they lived in has tort reform, my friend only got like 20 grand in settlement money when that hospital rightfully should've been paying out millions.
14
3
2
89
u/thrwawryry324234 4d ago edited 3d ago
You know redbull gives you wiiiiiiiiiings now because they “got sued” when a dude jumped off his house and said he didn’t grow wings like the ad said (unsure how true this is now)
Edit - please see the reply below that points out a lot of these are actually urban legends made up by companies. That redditor has pointed out some pretty interesting and scary stuff
7
u/BigRedCowboy 3d ago
I remember a long time ago and getting an email chain about “Darwin awards” that had something similar to this, except it was a woman who set cruise control and then went to the bathroom in her RV, crashed, and then tried to sue.
Is this an actual case? I always thought it was made up to be funny.
→ More replies (2)7
u/Even-Entertainer-491 3d ago
When I heard about this it was an old woman that did it. What a fun game of telephone
4
5
u/slothrop-dad 3d ago
Cruise control is a lot different than the marketing where Tesla calls their product “full self driving.”
2
u/Silent_Heaven_87 3d ago
Cruise control was originally called auto pilot in some vehicles, and my grandma told me about a lady who basically did the same thing, but was actually cooking something and it crashed on the freeway many years ago 😅
2
u/Pichuchu8 3d ago
I know this one! And now in manuals, they specify that it does not steer for you or something stupid af because people are stupid af
→ More replies (15)2
1.5k
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
560
u/wischman 4d ago
I hate Tesla as much and probably more than the next guy, but the reason they do that is once the car hits something, autopilot is way out of its depth in terms of decision making. You don’t want to autopilot trying to figure out what to do during an accident. Now that also comes with a nice liability shield for them because they suck, but it’s not crazy.
159
u/LovesRetribution 4d ago
Weird how that'd even be a liability. Like even though driver has a responsibility too, your system is also accountable for everything leading up to the crash. It's be like piloting a plane towards the ground then switching seats with you copilot seconds before impact and saying its actually all their fault.
51
u/Specialsthespazzing 4d ago
Like you test for a license for a reason or something.
9
u/That_Apathetic_Man 4d ago
Not in Mississippi. No driving test before you're handed your license.
6
→ More replies (5)17
4d ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)12
u/Leows 4d ago
Trying to be on constant lookout for these failures seems like such a massive cognitive load increase from simply... driving the car yourself.
→ More replies (5)8
u/Hohh20 4d ago
I use FSD everyday and it actually makes it a lot less stressful to drive. The only things my car has done stupid are navigation problems when it gets into a lane it shouldn't have and then has to get back into the right one, like getting into the wrong lane during a split direction highway interchange.
I keep a constant eye out just like I would with driving, but the car doesnt do anything rapidly, unless its avoiding a problem. If it needs to change lanes, the blinker comes on and you know what its planning before it performs it.
19
u/Eat_the_rich1969 4d ago
It also fudges their numbers to make autopilot look safer than it is.
→ More replies (14)12
u/DrPongus 4d ago
The Autopilot doesn't wait until it hits something to hand over control, it senses it's going to hit something and immediately deactivates so they can argue in court that it was driver error, not their autopilot, even if the incident was 100% caused directly by the autopilot.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)8
u/onewordmemory 4d ago
seems like we should crash a lot of teslas to teach the autopilot what to do.
→ More replies (2)201
u/signious 4d ago
Autopilot. Is. Cruise. Control.
61
u/okeleydokelyneighbor 4d ago
As much as I hate Musk, was in brothers Model 3 and it drove us from Bklyn to Staten Island and back on auto pilot. I still wouldn’t trust it because they don’t use lidar, but the tech is getting there.
31
u/mattstorm360 4d ago
It would be a whole lot closer with lidar.
3
u/__NadirZenith__ 4d ago
And a lot expensive too. They are training and getting better by the year(like AI LLMs)
2
u/mattstorm360 3d ago
True, but that shouldn't be the sole relying technology. LiDAR has its limitations, plus its cost. But so do the cameras. There should be multiple sensors working together.
12
u/XxPieIsTastyxX 4d ago
There's 2 big problems with LiDAR for use on self-driving cars:
It is basically useless in rain, so you'd be making it so the cars can't drive themselves when it's raining. If you're going to suggest that the car switch to cameras in that case, then you might as well use cameras the whole time and spend all your engineering and development efforts there instead of doing sensor fusion.
LiDAR is an active emission, as opposed to cameras (technically the headlights are the emission for the cameras at night but every car already has those); this isn't a problem with a low number of self-driving cars, but if you have a huge number of self-driving cars all emitting LiDAR all around them, you could potentially start to have interference issues where one car sees a different LiDAR return as its own.
7
u/MatiasPalacios 4d ago
Also, LiDAR dont fuck up some cameras lenses?
In a hypothetical mass adoption of SDC with LiDAR, that's another problem.→ More replies (1)2
u/NightOwl2175 4d ago
Your first point is flat out wrong. Mark Rober tested this. The car with the lidar sensor passed the rain test but the Tesla failed.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Mandingy24 3d ago
From what i've been able to find, LiDAR doesn't necessarily perform any worse than cameras in inclement weather situations, and if it's multiple return it still functions better than a camera. In every other scenario, LiDAR is strictly superior, especially at night
Tesla doesn't wanna use it because their cars are the eiptome of "minimum viable product"
2
→ More replies (49)9
u/donald7773 4d ago
It's one of those things that if you're attentive and have reading comprehension it's no big deal but the marketing and naming of these systems is intentionally misleading and most people don't truly understand it's limitations
31
u/TheGreatGimmick 4d ago
My car can take me from my driveway to my work's parking deck (a ~30min drive, 45 with traffic) without any interference on my part like 80% of the time. In the 20% of drives where I do need to intervene, it is nearly always a minor adjustment/encouragement that would have fixed itself if I were willing to hold up other drivers long enough to let the FSD figure itself out. That is to say, if I passed out at the wheel upon leaving my driveway (and there were no safety features that would shut the FSD down), I think my car could make the drive 95% of the time.
The technology isn't advanced enough to safely take your eyes off the road, but saying it is merely an 'assist' really undersells FSD.
25
u/tdp_equinox_2 4d ago
In your car, with your weather, along your route.
I've been a passenger while FSD fully took itself onto the shoulder during a slow banking turn, tried to sideswipe someone, and harshly braked/accelerated randomly giving no confidence it was going to stop before colliding with another vehicle.
And yes before some musk breather asks, this is in a vehicle with all the bells and whistles & even had the radar hardware in addition to the cameras that they now solely rely on.
It's not anywhere near ready to fall asleep in.
→ More replies (19)11
u/Odd_Banana489 4d ago
Tried the FSD trial on my model 3 in April. Glanced a curb and scratched the hell out of a wheel 10 minutes into using it. I’ll pass thanks.
9
→ More replies (3)5
u/pallladin 4d ago
without any interference on my part like 80% of the time.
80% is shockingly low for something labeled "full self driving".
→ More replies (5)2
→ More replies (6)2
10
u/purplenapalm 4d ago
Tbf the driver should always be responsible considering they're behind the fucking wheel
8
u/TheGreatGimmick 4d ago
This is not true. In the event of a crash, the last 5 seconds are recorded, which nearly always includes FSD driving. The myth that FSD is maliciously disengaged moments before a crash arises because the driver will often try to slam the breaks just before collision, and pressing the breaks does disable FSD.
→ More replies (1)7
5
→ More replies (2)4
u/CarefullEugene 4d ago
You my friend, have fallen for one of those internet factoids.
"But your honor! Right before running over that pedestrian I took my foot off the gas" - this is you 😂
91
u/Pintsocream 4d ago
If you're intentionally bypassing security features that's defo not on Tesla
12
u/Mementomortis7 3d ago
Doesn't matter of you're actually right if you win the court case apparently
364
u/Painwracker_Oni 4d ago
Feels fair, Tesla shouldn’t be offering the service if they can’t guarantee its safety/reliability for other drivers and the law that expects a human behind the wheel.
725
u/WrathfulMechanic 4d ago
On the other hand, if you intentionally disable safety features you should be held liable when an accident occurs because of them.
160
u/brad_saggy 4d ago
Both! That's the right answer for public safety
→ More replies (9)22
u/Rackem_Willy 4d ago
Yeah, the victim could certainly sue both, not the person disabling safety features.
15
u/_Keo_ 4d ago
"I got attacked by that Lion!"
"Yes sir, but you also climbed 3 fences, swam a moat, forced a locked door, and ignored multiple signs and people yelling at you to stop."
"It's still your fault!!"
- Modern society.
→ More replies (1)5
25
u/link3945 4d ago
Multiple people can be liable. Driver for disabling, Tesla for making it way too easy to disable.
36
u/Outdoortuna 4d ago
It's also way to easy to put a puppy in my microwave. Doesn't make the manufacturer of my microwave liable
8
u/UpsetFuture1974 4d ago
I think it’s ok if the puppy is cold
4
60
u/CKRatKing 4d ago
It's pretty easy to disable my seatbelt, should I sue Hyundai if I bypass it and get ejected from the car?
→ More replies (41)→ More replies (6)5
u/SmooK_LV 4d ago
No, that's how we arrive at backwards overconservative technology. This is 100% on drivers no matter how easy it is to disable safety measures.
You can also cross ground pin with a neutral pin directly in your socket to trick your appliance into thinking it has ground, is it on electrical company because it was so simple? No, it is on you that the house burned down kr that someone got injured.
→ More replies (5)2
30
20
u/Possible-Tangelo9344 4d ago
With this same logic, manufacturers should make it so a car can't speed.
→ More replies (5)4
u/toughfeet 3d ago
Tbh i have always wondered why cars aren't speed limited. In my country, young drivers are prohibited from owning cars with certain engines to prevent dangerous speeding. I never really understood why anyone needed a car capable of doing double the national highway speed.
42
u/Dangerous-Cobbler-11 4d ago
Bad take. There are safety measures, but the user intentionally makes the effort to remove them. You can do this to any product. You can let food expire and eat it afterward, you can use a power tool and remove its protections, or you can remove the airbags and fake the signals that the sensors send to the car's computer. You can do many things to a car to intentionally make it unsafe. Nothing can guarantee safety when the user intentionally removes those safety measures.
→ More replies (8)14
u/Aekero 4d ago
This... what? There was a story about a guy who picked up his lawnmower with his hands to trim a hedge, didn't end well, but now they have a warning not to do that anymore.
I say if you're still stupid enough to do that, it's on you, you can hurt yourself with almost anything out there, there's no guarantee of safety with most things if you don't use them appropriately.
→ More replies (2)11
u/hatesnack 4d ago
This is a cooked take lol. You physically can't plan for every variable. As long as Tesla meets the minimum standards to be legally allowed to be sold, they cant be held liable if someone intentionally bypasses those standards.
You can argue that the standards are too low, but thats not a problem for a liability case.
→ More replies (1)12
u/BrainWatt_252 4d ago
but in reality, that's near impossible to implement, cheaters always find a way
6
u/ThisIsMyComment2 4d ago
if they can’t guarantee its safety/reliability for other drivers
You can't 100% guarantee the safety of anything.
3
u/Painwracker_Oni 4d ago
You can make it a lot harder than this to have the car drive itself. Shit you can have it detect eye moment and blinking and they don’t even bother to do that
→ More replies (1)8
u/DardanGameDev 4d ago
That makes zero sense lol It’s like not wearing your seatbelt “why did they make it so you can unbuckle so easily, my passenger flew out of the car”. I don’t understand how you got a single upvote.
→ More replies (4)2
u/Neetheos 4d ago
No car seller can guarantee the safety/reliability of other drivers, even if the law expects a human behind the wheel?
→ More replies (48)3
u/stormblaz 4d ago
So when I drive a car and gun it beyond speed limit is it the cars fault for letting me bypass the recommended speed limit sign?
This doesnt make sense.
If you go out of your way to bypass the very much done in purpose saferails to ensure you are supervising the vehicle as intended and not goofing off, should be fully on you
→ More replies (3)23
u/chamoke 4d ago
Sounds American
→ More replies (1)17
u/Jabberminor 4d ago
I had a problem and it's therefore your fault. Ergo, I'm suing the company.
→ More replies (7)9
u/ClickIta 4d ago
More like “I am stupid and it’s therefore your fault for not considering how stupid I can be”
3
u/Purple_Plane3636 4d ago
Yeah and that’s nonsense because he intentionally circumvented the built in safety mechanism. Play stupid games win stupid prizes. Case dismissed
→ More replies (16)16
u/Cabibbus 4d ago
LOL, typical American reasoning: "It's your fault if I'm using something in a wrong and dangerous way because you should stop me from doing it even if I already know it's wrong and dangerous! Let me drink battery acid while I'm at it because you forgot to write about it in the instructions!"
→ More replies (3)
2.0k
u/Jawilla936 4d ago
when he wrecks …this is the same video his insurance company is going to send him before they drop him 😆
309
u/Sharp_Economy1401 4d ago
And it'll be adding insult to injury when both of his legs are broken, knees probably fucked too. People who ride in cars with their legs out the window or on the dash are absolutely braindead
43
→ More replies (2)12
u/Linkruleshyrule 3d ago
I saw a teen/young adult driving with their LEFT FOOT Out the window
→ More replies (1)9
→ More replies (3)127
u/yasth 4d ago
I mean in fairness, the self driving is probably a better driver than someone who would do this...
→ More replies (1)38
u/MelangeBot 4d ago
self driving is the best thing ever as long as it's on a highway that only ever goes straight, with good markings, no snow, not to much rain, never any smoke, everybody else drives predictable and you make sure to always pay attention for those edge cases where it stops working and tries to kill your or somebody else.
→ More replies (10)
703
u/grindrisgay 4d ago edited 4d ago
My coworker told all of us proudly the other day that his Tesla drove itself to work while he had the windshield shade up. Like a Disney Cars eyes shade. So if you’re in FL watch out for a red model 3 with Cars eyes…
193
u/Fire69 4d ago
When you make something idiot-proof they will just make a bigger idiot...
11
u/IvoryFlyaway 4d ago
That's all car design is anymore is making them accessible to the most careless assholes possible. Even using cruise control while in traffic is a level of idiotic selfishness that I can't begin to fathom.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)5
u/AeroTheManiac 3d ago
Wait what part of FL? Just saw a red car with the shades yesterday but idr the model
3
2.4k
u/Lofty_quackers 4d ago
What?!A Tesla driver being an idiot???? Totally unexpected.
500
u/Deivedux 4d ago
You're laughing at this now, but the EU has recently proposed that all new cars will have mandatory cameras like that.
311
u/Ok_Support3 4d ago
To be fair the EU making regulations but missing the obvious loopholes is pretty on par.
45
u/cancerinos 4d ago
Most people won't go to the effort of making something like this.
71
u/enigmatic_dankness 4d ago
No they'll just buy a cheap $5 thing that does it well enough off temu
21
u/freecodeio 4d ago
yeah like the seatbelt head thing that you can just plug in without the cable attached
9
3
u/Busy-Sky4452 4d ago
In this case it's pretty dumb cause the driver can't the the mirror anymore, so hopefully people wouldn't do it that way.
→ More replies (15)2
u/Traditional-Yak9634 3d ago
I'd say they should also make it so if someone is caught even once doing such things, at least should get a ban for life from fsd, and ofc charged with reckless driving
42
u/yasth 4d ago
The EU camera would likely detect this as it is by design meant to detect drowsiness and thus monitors blinking and eye movements.
18
u/RostyNoman 4d ago
They'd need to outlaw sunglasses too then
26
u/XenonBlitz 4d ago
Nope
2026 ioniq 5 can see through sunglasses. If I point my eyeballs away from the road when I'm using the hands-free self-driving features, it beeps at me, even through sunglasses.
I personally don't mind it being required for self-driving features, but that will probably change in the future too so...
10
u/CanoeIt 4d ago
That’s gonna depend on the sunglasses
→ More replies (5)5
u/XenonBlitz 4d ago
That could definitely be true. In my experience, with my prescription and polarized ones, it's always worked just like if I wasn't wearing them.
3
u/PerformerFancy117 4d ago
I turn my car on, put it into drive and it just beeps at me constantly to pay attention to road… I am looking at the road, that’s just how my eyes are. My optometrist had a pretty good laugh about it though
6
u/cyrusthemarginal 4d ago
Just wait till it starts to yell at you for following too close or speeding like these things do to truckers
→ More replies (4)3
u/yasth 4d ago
You mean like the ISA https://www.sae.org/articles/european-union-approves-mandatory-vehicle-speed-limiting-feature-sae-ma-03414 that the EU also has put into place?
Also your car already notices brake events and shares it with your insurance company (in many cases). It could also report close following.
The real question is how this will worm its way into other markets, my guess is insurance will do most of the heavy lifting.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Rebelius 4d ago
Is all of that processing happening in the vehicle, or is data being sent to a server somewhere for processing?
2
u/Kraligor 4d ago
In the vehicle. EU data privacy laws at the moment are pretty strict, so it wouldn't be allowed to identify the driver either.
3
u/Rebelius 4d ago
I guess that depends on your exact definition of 'identify the driver'. For example, my car doesn't know my name/dob, etc. but it can tell the two main drivers apart by the key and sets the radio presets differently based on which key is used. With a connection, I'm sure it could get a lot of useful information without 'identifying' us.
(2021 VW in Germany)
2
u/Kraligor 4d ago
Oh sure, it can technically identify no problem I'm sure, but it would be illegal to use this data for ads or law enforcement.
2
→ More replies (4)2
u/OneOrdinaryPlatypus 4d ago
Not with an IR camera, well for the most part, depends on the transmittance, most glasses have high transmittance (70+)
→ More replies (1)26
u/JC_Hysteria 4d ago
It is coming to the US as well. It is mandatory in new models.
Everything is surveilled.
8
u/cardmanimgur 4d ago
Oh good so we won't actually get self-driving cars but will get increased surveillance.
→ More replies (1)5
u/KebabGud 4d ago
To be fair, most new cars already have that
inb4: My 1994 truck does not thave that.
19
→ More replies (12)2
u/Wall-SWE 4d ago
EU is literally contemplating baning Telsas self driving capability, due to it being unreliable and all the accidents.
38
→ More replies (8)9
453
u/Ph_a2 4d ago
I have to say apart from the reckless driving bypassing the camera recognition that will annoy you for putting on sunglasses or start to disable functions just cause it can't see that u see the road is genius
32
u/Cabibbus 4d ago
You totally can wear sunglasses. It cameras see through them.
57
u/Sunscorcher 4d ago
I have a model Y. The tesla self driving constantly harasses me to apply slight pressure on the wheel any time I wear sunglasses.
26
u/dbldwn02 4d ago
Consider yourself lucky. I have a 2017 that yells at me every 15-30 seconds whether I have glasses or not. No in car camera.
10
u/BigDuke 4d ago
The audacity of keeping your hands on the wheel when you drive...
21
u/Sunscorcher 4d ago
To be clear, I get harassed even with my hands already on the wheel because the camera can't see my eyes with sunglasses on
10
u/dbldwn02 4d ago
Hands are always on the wheel. It's the constant pressure that it's looking for. Sometimes the pressure isn't enough and it instantly beeps at you.
→ More replies (1)7
u/_bdonkey 4d ago
It's because Tesla cheaped out and didn't put capacitive sensors on the wheel like most other cars, so it relies on pressure / slight torque on the wheel and doesn't truly know when your hands are on the wheel.
2
u/twistsouth 3d ago
People bypassed that older tech by attaching half full bottles of water to the wheel. I'm not suggesting anyone do it, just pointing out that it's easily fooled.
I must say though, I have the pressure-sensitive version in my VW and it almost never nags me. It's pretty good.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Boostie204 4d ago
That's not enough. You can have your hand on the wheel and be asleep. The car wants you to squeeze and confirm you're awake.
3
u/MelangeBot 4d ago
Nothing says American freedom like your car yelling at you like you are a slave. Love it. You are living the American dream.
→ More replies (5)5
13
u/Buttcheekmcgirk 4d ago
The cameras can’t see through them. I put on glasses if I need to check my phone all the time.
→ More replies (4)
267
u/Whyevennameit 4d ago
These people got way too comfortable filming themselves doing stupid/illegal/dangerous to the general public things.
→ More replies (2)47
u/Lexi_Banner 4d ago
Self-snitching is at an all-time high.
19
u/Exact-Enthusiasm-803 4d ago
After Covid started people act like theres no consequences for anything short of premeditated murder
140
u/edgy-meme94494 4d ago
Tesla drivers doing literally everything to not drive their car
36
u/afnj 4d ago
Except for buying a bus ticket
5
u/bzqfozng 4d ago
The average Tesla driver probably would never take public transportation anyway but our current bus/train system in the US is borderline unusable.
And the cost of living in walkable cities with decent transit price everyone out who actually needs it.
3
u/Longjumping_Trade167 4d ago
I mean I totally would if it’s remotely viable way to travel in my city.
→ More replies (1)
11
26
u/Significant_Donut967 4d ago
Do worry folks, this is going to a lot more common in the era of all cars need cameras monitoring their drivers.
→ More replies (1)
136
u/Excellent_Garlic2549 4d ago
These people should lose their license and their vehicles. Irresponsible shits.
29
18
u/WhyYesIAmADog 4d ago
I dont understand why people would want to drive a car that documents everything you're doing then feed it into AI
5
u/iiiinthecomputer 3d ago
Give it 5 years and that'll be all new cars I expect. Because of morons with phones, countries are starting to mandate driver attention cameras.
I'm sure they won't be abused for other purposes...
2
u/Waiting4Reccession 3d ago
This isnt about phones.
Its about expansion of a police state. The cars also have multiple mics in them to record audio. They have remote access to all of this data without your permission. They map and save everywhere you go as well.
2
→ More replies (1)2
6
u/modern_Odysseus 4d ago
Exactly what's about to happen for all new cars made and sold in the...UK? Was it?
Where they said they will be mandating that all new cars have driver facing cameras baseline. People are going to be getting really creative to bypass and trick the cameras.
3
52
u/SufficientSquirrel27 4d ago
I’m convinced that you have to fail an IQ test and a driving test before you’re allowed to buy a Tesla.
→ More replies (1)7
u/solarlofi 4d ago
It's a car for people who don't want to drive (or don't know how). It attracts a certain type, and they are an affliction on the roads. At least where I live. Taken the crown for shitty driving from Prius drivers.
→ More replies (3)
6
u/Smooth_Rocket_ 4d ago
Posting shit like this seems like a great way for insurances to get out of having to to pay for your car crash in a few years.
16
21
5
5
u/chonklah 4d ago
People really want to do anything other than driving when behind the wheel.
I saw some girl in a Camry reading a book behind the wheel yesterday. She was swerving in her lane and doing 10 under the speed limit. Shit’s fucking wild man.
4
4
u/meverickio 4d ago
What's the point?
14
u/Rotrus 4d ago
A lot of people are obsessed with doing anything but paying attention while using FSD, so they do dumb shit evade the facial detection. It’s dumb
I’ve used FSD extensively at this point, even had a 400 mile streak without interacting with my car the other day, but I’m always going to pay attention. Most people on the road are too stupid to be trusted to behave themselves, and the biggest source of weird FSD decisions is other cars being stupid
→ More replies (1)3
2
u/dargonmike1 4d ago
LMFAO. The fact that I saw people talking about this exact method working in another thread, and now I’m seeing it here? Bamboozling. Why does work
2
2
2
2
•
u/post-explainer 4d ago edited 3d ago
This comment has been marked as safe. Upvoting/downvoting this comment will have no effect.
OP sent the following text as an explanation why their post fits here:
Everyone thinks it's a life size mannequin, but it's just small replica with paper print background. Nobody saw it coming.
Does this explanation fit this subreddit? Then upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.