> How the fuck are these cars legal anywhere?

Because product defects don't (in general) make the car illegal, they just incur strict liability for the manufacturer (and the chain of commerce, but in Tesla’s case that's moot except as to defects that originate upstream of them, since they sell direct to consumer) when they cause damages.

The driver behind a vehicle is primarily responsible for any rear end collision (US-specific, YMMV elsewhere). Should probably not tailgate a Tesla (or tailgate in general).

> How the fuck are these cars legal anywhere???

They're legal because Autopilot is driver assistance. The driver is still 100% responsible, just as they would be for cruise control.

> The driver behind a vehicle is primarily responsible for any rear end collision (US-specific, YMMV elsewhere).

Not if you slam on the brakes without cause on the highway.

Here is the general state statute you're up against (as the person rear ending someone on the interstate):

“Any person driving a vehicle on a highway shall drive the same at a careful and prudent speed not greater than nor less than is reasonable and proper, having due regard to the traffic, surface and width of the highway and any other conditions then existing, and no person shall drive any vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than will permit the driver to bring it to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead.”

Maybe if you have a dash cam. Maybe if you can prove there was nothing in front of the person in front of you. Lot of maybes.

You've described the statute in some state for spacing between cars or something, but in some states "brake checking" is mentioned explicitly in the criminal code, and in others it can be prosecuted as vehicular assault. It's harder to prove without a dashcam, but if there are witnesses it is certainly possible.

That's a bit of a sideshow. Tesla needs to worry about the civil liability involved in making a car that stops suddenly in the middle of the road. For example, "The driver is still 100% responsible, just as they would be for cruise control" is absolutely not going to impress anyone as a defense if there is enough property damage or personal injury involving such a feature to justify a class action.

> For example, "The driver is still 100% responsible, just as they would be for cruise control" is absolutely not going to impress anyone as a defense if there is enough property damage or personal injury involving such a feature to justify a class action.

Class action vs. direct action is immaterial; Tesla can't disclaim it's liability for manufacturing g defects even if it tried, and stating that the driver remains responsible for following traffic laws isn't even superficially a disclaimer of product defect liability anyway.

Product defect liability is strict liability for damages produced, and there's a fairly high bar for excluding liability due to intervening causes which would not generally apply to the simple negligence of a driver (either of a Tesla or the other involved vehicle) which contributed to a collision where the defective operation of an assist system was also a contributing cause.

If you’re not at a safe following distance behind the car in front of you, regardless of why they’re stopping, your driving skills are deficient. Following distances don’t change because it’s a Tesla; you shouldn’t follow closely as a tire blowout or a piece of debris falling into the path of travel of the vehicle in front of you is just as possible. Im sure there are states with more strict statues; they aren’t the majority of states.

Anyone can sue anyone in the US. Take it up with their general counsel.

Being in a car is life-threatening.

Which is why there are so many laws and regulations surrounding them, the most basic of which is a technical inspection every few years.

If your brakes don't work your car is illegal on the road (at least here in Europe). But apparently if its a software bug in the brakes then its okay to drive it around...

The number of question marks and exclamation points in your original post does not fit the relative severity of the issue you are describing. If you used that many question marks to describe a car with an imperfect auto-braking system, I can't imagine how many you'd use to describe a car with a human braking system. In the U.S., those humans fail to brake, with consequences, 2.5 million times a year. https://www.scmitchell.com/blog/2017/may/rear-end-collisions...

Even when self-driving cars become popular, people will still be injured and die in them. And it won't be just a subset of the people who would have died without such cars. It will almost certainly be a different, randomly selected group of people. If it's your time to go, does it matter to you whether you died because a texting teenager slammed into your stopped car? Or because an edge case triggered in a car's software? The former case is just stupid. The latter case is something society can learn from and prevent from ever happening again.

If you are in favor of more people dying in "normal" accidents, then by all means, please continue expressing your outrage.

The cost of progress in this area is computers making mistakes instead of people making them.

The US NHTSA and state regulators have allowed Tesla to continue to offer Autopilot, therefore I believe your argument to be invalid (versus that of domain experts), although you are entitled to your opinion.

There is no way that Autopilot is worse than human drivers: https://i.imgur.com/au8A1o3.gifv

Oh well then I guess high speed braking maneuvers on a highway without user input are just fine then.