EVNow
Well-Known Member
Mr retired IT exec - what does the name "beta" mean to you ?As a retired I.T. exec involved in more software development initiatives than I can ever recall, I have always said that this is just not ready for prime time.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Mr retired IT exec - what does the name "beta" mean to you ?As a retired I.T. exec involved in more software development initiatives than I can ever recall, I have always said that this is just not ready for prime time.
Hey there. Was really not intending to be confrontational . Yup BETA is beta for sure. This is key to why I would not use such a feature in a real-world scenario. Again, not looking to upset anyone. Peace out.Mr retired IT exec - what does the name "beta" mean to you ?
Yeah, a quick google found C7 fracture doesn't necessarily mean lower body paralysis. It depends on it how severe it is and if it damaged the spinal cord.Or there was a third person (driver) who escaped. Else, how to we explain the deformed steering wheel/column? Also, I'm no medical expert but I don't think a fractured C7 necessarily means paralysis: you can fracture the C7 and not sever the spinal cord. I suspect a drunk person trying to escape from a fire might still be able to move around with a skull and vertebrae fracture.
Mike
Yes, found this on the Shepard Center website on Understanding Spinal Cord Injury. According to the autopsy the bladder was ok.Yeah, a quick google found C7 fracture doesn't necessarily mean lower body paralysis. It depends on it how severe it is and if it damaged the spinal cord.
I'm not sure why this particular exchange is even relevant. It's been pretty well established that the car was not on Autopilot.Hey there. Was really not intending to be confrontational . Yup BETA is beta for sure. This is key to why I would not use such a feature in a real-world scenario. Again, not looking to upset anyone. Peace out.
I'm not sure why this particular exchange is even relevant. It's been pretty well established that the car was not on Autopilot.
I'm not speaking as a fanboy defender who doesn't want any Tesla criticism, it's just that this accident is not an Autopilot issue. Continuing to discuss the merits or demerits of Autopilot within the Texas accident context only adds to ongoing misunderstandings. There are many other opportunities to discuss one's reservations about autopilot and FSD in this forum, including other accidents in which Autopilot was actually operating.
Do the reports say anything about them being belted or not ?
It was established by several parties (e.g. youtubers making experiments to demonstrate, + Elon ) including the NHTSA, that TACC could NOT possibly reach anywhere near (read less than half) the speed (in 550 feet distance available) necessary for the amount of damage to occur upon impact.Yeah, it's been said that autosteer wasn't enabled. But was TACC? I think if it was, it becomes an autopilot issue, especially since it's easy to confuse the two. On my very first times driving my MY and learning autopilot, autosteer disengaged, but TACC remained active. As somebody who never even used dumb cruise control in the past, it startled me. The learning curve of telling the difference wasn't that steep - but considering this guy was drunk, it's a mistake I see as being possible.
I believe this thread is about reporting accuracy and journalistic integrity rather than about any features of Tesla.Why not just lock this thread. It was clearly not auto pilot issue, driver was drinking, odd case but seems counter productive to anyone interested in Tesla to have this thread keep getting comments. better threads to post on re technology challenges, etc
More about the investigative abilities of the police department, they're the ones who claimed no one was in the drivers seat. I do agree that journalists tend to be a little too credulous when reporting statements made by the police.I believe this thread is about reporting accuracy and journalistic integrity rather than about any features of Tesla.
Critical point: There was no one in the driver's seat when the responders got there (multiple eye witnesses). The problem is the constable's claim that there was no one in the driver's seat when it crashed (unfounded speculation).More about the investigative abilities of the police department, they're the ones who claimed no one was in the drivers seat. I do agree that journalists tend to be a little too credulous when reporting statements made by the police.
Learning about incidents is a good thing. And thusly what the investigation has uncovered has proved to be good for Tesla.People will be people, autonomous technology would have actually prevented this accident.
The fact a Federal investigation is ongoing also shows something about how Tesla is seen by those with power.
Would a government investigation be launched for any other brand of car where a fatal accident occurred with a drunk driver in a car they recently acquired??
We don't need another Tesla, but stories like these is almost enough for me to go and buy another one. The resistance to change from the establishment really is staggering!
Doing some search around the web about this accident, I came across a Reddit post that mentions the owner William Varner had a broken neck
The autopsy report lists a C7 fracture, and this person said the first responders immediately documented that Varner was in the back seat with a broken/twisted neck. A C7 fracture would result in paralysis of the lower body, and finding a vehicle with nobody in the driver's seat + an occupant in the back seat with a visibly broken neck would be why they're 100% certain there was no driver at the time of the crash.
It'll be good to see the final report, but I'm leaning towards there being no chance Varner moved from the driver's seat to the back seat after the crash. If anything, maybe he was climbing from the front seat to the back when the crash occurred.
Critical point: There was no one in the driver's seat when the responders got there (multiple eye witnesses). The problem is the constable's claim that there was no one in the driver's seat when it crashed (unfounded speculation).
I believe this thread is about reporting accuracy and journalistic integrity rather than about any features of Tesla.
Elon issued a statement early on about the Model X accident in Mt View, CA. Tesla got kicked out of the investigative panel, maybe fined (I don’t remember exactly what the repercussions were) but the investigators don’t want anyone involved making any statements before they conclude their work. Tesla’s recorded info what they have of it has no doubt been given over to them and parties are encouraged to cooperate with the investigators. Someone from Tesla as I recall reading was there early on with a similiarly configured vehicle so the investigators could test different scenarios on it.Elon/Tesla supposedly have the data showing very few people use the passenger seat lumbar adjustment, but they haven't said or published the logs from this crash? You'd think Tesla could pull this info if they wanted with how much other data about vehicles they supposedly gather.
I think the various reports and autopsies were obtained by the press requesting it under some information act which I’m guessing was a legal procedure.This incident wouldn't have gotten nearly the amount of attention other than a Tesla was involved and the dubious claim that AP was involved. We had all of the usual nicks piling in to spread and amplify the FUD.
The autopsy was performed shortly after the accident, yet details are released now and probably on a Friday night to minimize the audience.
Most Teslas are not involved in crashes of this magnitude, nor were they on fire (such that back box is damaged). Nor are there various regulations/conventions limiting release of info during an accident investigation. Whatever Tesla pulled would have been provided to the investigators and Tesla have said publicly from the results that they don't believe AP was active. However people just refuse to believe that (there are still people here pushing the "no driver" theory).Elon/Tesla supposedly have the data showing very few people use the passenger seat lumbar adjustment, but they haven't said or published the logs from this crash? You'd think Tesla could pull this info if they wanted with how much other data about vehicles they supposedly gather.