How much would you pay if Tesla were to offer a software upgrade to remove the autopilot “nag,” provided you had to accept a disclaimer that you are aware you must remain attentive at all times and would be 100% liable in the event of an accident?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Autopilot “Nag” Question/Poll
- Thread starter what_the_frunk
- Start date
It’s funny. Have had autopilot for 2 weeks almost and it has never nagged me. It may be because I keep my hand in the wheel most of the time and dont fully trust it? Have driven on 2 4 hour trips with it and love it but I know it’s just a driver assist tool not something I would trust me or my families life to.
Brettski
Member
My only comment is that nearly every time I get a nag, I already have my hand(s) on the wheel. If it would require a little less torque so as to more consistently detect my hands, I’d be happier.
You are already 100% liable for accidents with or without AP enabled. Tesla would never do this as it would be terrible PR.
That being said, if Tesla somehow went out of business and offered this is a way to raise funds to pay off creditors, I would probably buy it.
Doesn't help Tesla deny liability to the press and regulators after you kill yourself, no matter what you sign. That's the key part here.
Everyone knows the nag is useless for actual safety, or they're in deep denial, or just confused.
It's not going to happen, period.
Too many folks, falling asleep, standing on the seat out the moon roof, drunk driving, show boating, and so many other things that have proven to Tesla that no matter how much you want to trust your users, some idiots are going to spoil it.
They even had to enlist the help of the NTSB to ban a device that could defeat it.
Blame it on all the freaking idiots who just had to screw it up.
It's not a personal liability issue (since as I mentioned, there are idiots) it's a corporate liability, both from a PR and financial viewpoint.
Too many folks, falling asleep, standing on the seat out the moon roof, drunk driving, show boating, and so many other things that have proven to Tesla that no matter how much you want to trust your users, some idiots are going to spoil it.
They even had to enlist the help of the NTSB to ban a device that could defeat it.
Blame it on all the freaking idiots who just had to screw it up.
It's not a personal liability issue (since as I mentioned, there are idiots) it's a corporate liability, both from a PR and financial viewpoint.
I haven’t tried it but I think I read that one can wedge an orange into the steering wheel and satisfy the torque requirement of the hands on sensor system.
I do keep my hands on the wheel, but I have a light touch so the nag comes up. I consciously apply more torque so the nag is just occasionally now.
I enjoy using the autopilot system but I don’t trust it. That’s what keeps my hands on the wheel, not the nags.
The car constantly collects and records an enormous amount of data about the driver’s behavior while driving. What bothers me most is that when that nag comes up, the car has already recorded that my hands were not on the wheel for the past 30 seconds, and it’s commonly interpreted that the nag was necessary for me to reassume control of the car, when in actual fact there was never a time when I wasn’t in control. At 70 MPH, the car has covered over 3000 feet (over half a mile, over 10 football fields) in that 30 seconds, and should there be a need to investigate my data, the actual total time the car was not actively controlled and the number of nags required for me to actually pay attention to the direction of the car will be misreported.
I don’t really want to defeat the safety controls but I would like to have the car accurately represent hands on status and I cringe at the thought of what would be assumed by the currently recorded data.
The NTSB report for the original Florida fatality is available on line. The collected driver data is a part of that report. It’s a real eye opener to see what the car records.
Once the orginal articles are published, it doesn’t really matter what’s reported afterwards. It’s still widely believed that the Florida driver was watching a Harry Potter video. That was an idle speculation by the inept truck driver that actually caused the accident, and it was completely debunked. Still it’s years after that accident, two weeks ago I went to a showing of a new movie purporting to represent the current state of auto-driving technology, and there it was, that Harry Potter story presented as fact. That truck driver caused the accident. If the Tesla sensor system or the driver had seen the truck, the accident may or may not have been preventable. The Tesla was exceeding the 55 MPH speed limit so that did contribute to the accident. Still, any time you see a reference to that accident, about the only thing people know it that the driver was watching a Harry Potter video instead of driving the car.
The bottom line is that any time you see that nag, there’s a 30 second window beforehand during which the car has recorded you were not in control, and not only that, but the nag was necessary to cause you to reassume control.
I may have to buy an orange just to keep the car data accurate.
I do keep my hands on the wheel, but I have a light touch so the nag comes up. I consciously apply more torque so the nag is just occasionally now.
I enjoy using the autopilot system but I don’t trust it. That’s what keeps my hands on the wheel, not the nags.
The car constantly collects and records an enormous amount of data about the driver’s behavior while driving. What bothers me most is that when that nag comes up, the car has already recorded that my hands were not on the wheel for the past 30 seconds, and it’s commonly interpreted that the nag was necessary for me to reassume control of the car, when in actual fact there was never a time when I wasn’t in control. At 70 MPH, the car has covered over 3000 feet (over half a mile, over 10 football fields) in that 30 seconds, and should there be a need to investigate my data, the actual total time the car was not actively controlled and the number of nags required for me to actually pay attention to the direction of the car will be misreported.
I don’t really want to defeat the safety controls but I would like to have the car accurately represent hands on status and I cringe at the thought of what would be assumed by the currently recorded data.
The NTSB report for the original Florida fatality is available on line. The collected driver data is a part of that report. It’s a real eye opener to see what the car records.
Once the orginal articles are published, it doesn’t really matter what’s reported afterwards. It’s still widely believed that the Florida driver was watching a Harry Potter video. That was an idle speculation by the inept truck driver that actually caused the accident, and it was completely debunked. Still it’s years after that accident, two weeks ago I went to a showing of a new movie purporting to represent the current state of auto-driving technology, and there it was, that Harry Potter story presented as fact. That truck driver caused the accident. If the Tesla sensor system or the driver had seen the truck, the accident may or may not have been preventable. The Tesla was exceeding the 55 MPH speed limit so that did contribute to the accident. Still, any time you see a reference to that accident, about the only thing people know it that the driver was watching a Harry Potter video instead of driving the car.
The bottom line is that any time you see that nag, there’s a 30 second window beforehand during which the car has recorded you were not in control, and not only that, but the nag was necessary to cause you to reassume control.
I may have to buy an orange just to keep the car data accurate.
boonedocks
MS LR Blk/Blk 19”
The problem is, disclaimer or not - the USA is a litigious society; nothing stops the driver or especially a third party (passengers, other victims) from suing Tesla for contributing. And in a society where someone can spill hot coffee all over themselves and the sue McDonalds for selling a dangerous good, and win a million dollars - the risk that someone would sue if you made it too easy to ignore nags is too great a risk. Juries are not guaranteed to decide on the facts, or even logic. (In the McDonalds case, the plaintiff presented as proof that the coffee was dangerously hot a list of other people across the USA who also burned themselves with their coffee.)
Like medical lawsuits, where the plaintiff sues the doctor, the nurses, and the hospital - if the hospital is judged even 5% liable, it must pay whatever of the award the others can't pay - joint liability. And the big business has the deepest pockets. So with Tesla - doesn't matter if the driver was criminally stupid - the lawsuit will target also whoever has nice deep pockets.
Like medical lawsuits, where the plaintiff sues the doctor, the nurses, and the hospital - if the hospital is judged even 5% liable, it must pay whatever of the award the others can't pay - joint liability. And the big business has the deepest pockets. So with Tesla - doesn't matter if the driver was criminally stupid - the lawsuit will target also whoever has nice deep pockets.
What 'nag' ?
I've never seen it, but then again I'm not in denial about the level of autonomy available on the cars at the current stage of development...
This is the wrong question to be asking, a better question would be 'when will Tesla release a version of AP that is safe to use without hands on the wheel'. The current question amounts to 'what would you pay to be able to drive unsafely...'
I've never seen it, but then again I'm not in denial about the level of autonomy available on the cars at the current stage of development...
This is the wrong question to be asking, a better question would be 'when will Tesla release a version of AP that is safe to use without hands on the wheel'. The current question amounts to 'what would you pay to be able to drive unsafely...'
bishoppeak
Member
I saw a post once somewhere where a person had 3d-printed a handle to hold a potato-sized rock about 3 inches out from the side of the steering wheel - which presumably provided enough torque to fool the AP. I find that holding the wheel with one hand in the 8-o'clock position is enough to satisfy the AP.
This is the reason why I have not updated since last April. I get nags, but with a much lower frequency than the current version
RossBrindleyAU
Member
I am going to admit something that I am dreadfully embarrassed about.
I do a couple of long haul trips a year and love autopilot. I just lay one hand at around the 8 o'clock mark on the inside of the wheel and let friction hold it there. No nags - and it works perfectly.
On my last trip i nodded off, I'm not sure how long for, and was woken by the "nag" as my hand had dropped off the wheel.
I would NEVER want it disabled.
This has only ever happened once and I do not intend to let it happen again - but just in case....
I do a couple of long haul trips a year and love autopilot. I just lay one hand at around the 8 o'clock mark on the inside of the wheel and let friction hold it there. No nags - and it works perfectly.
On my last trip i nodded off, I'm not sure how long for, and was woken by the "nag" as my hand had dropped off the wheel.
I would NEVER want it disabled.
This has only ever happened once and I do not intend to let it happen again - but just in case....
Similar threads
- Poll
