Regarding words, names and trademarks -
First - and I do say this not with humility but with pride - I think that most here recognize, and some acknowledge, that I wear the mantle of TMC’s word maven. The most “Disagrees” I’ve ever garnered was, in fact, for a post in which I declared “Words matter.”
Now, I understand, appreciate but disagree with the crux of
@jbcarioca’s post.
@Unpilot,
@StealthP3D,
@Krugerrand and others disagree for different reasons; mine are encompassed in my reasonably longstanding Sig-line. In that the new TMC format truncates signatures, I’m repeating it in-post:
”To NHTSA, NTSB and German Courts: Ban the deceptive word ‘Automobile’!”
Now, before someone jumps in with historical claims of intent: no - you cannot claim that “auto” means “horseless”, because it does not, regardless of whether that was indeed the intent of the word’s originators. However, even if you wish to take that line, it thereupon opens the use of the prefix to mean exactly what Tesla chooses it to mean.
And yes, I am being tongue-in-cheek with my call for proscription. Rather, I am using my line’s obvious facetiousness to shame them for their two-facedness. It is utterly incumbent to the point that ===>
NO<=== deviation must occur upon those in authority and those charged with upholding and interpreting the law that they remain consistent in their dictates and terminology. One cannot, I aver, turn a blind eye to the idiocy of “automobile” and then proscribe “autopilot”.
With that, I would address
@jbcarioca’s concerns by suggesting that rather than capitulating and altering its name, there should be a movement, one in which Mr Musk should aggressively participate, to excoriate those criticizing “autopilot” by revealing this double standard - this duplicity.
