News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Tesla must pay $329M in damages in fatal Autopilot case, jury says. Parent comment

Re:Tesla must pay $329M in damages in fatal Autopilot case, ... by ratelimitsteve on Friday August 01, 2025 @03:51PM (#44761610)
Couldn't agree more. This thing where words have a common definition and then a secret custom definition that only applies in courts is garbage. Everyone knows what "full self driving" means, either deliver that, come up with a new phrase or get your pants sued off for deceptive marketing.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tesla must pay $329M in damages in fatal Autopilot case, ... by ajross on Sunday August 03, 2025 @07:33PM (#44780749)
> Everyone knows what "full self driving" means

Sadly most people don't know that this case involved a comparatively ancient Tesla that did not have FSD. Seems like better attention to the "meaning of words" (like, the ones in the article you seem not to have read) might have helped things and not hurt them?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tesla must pay $329M in damages in fatal Autopilot case, ... by ratelimitsteve on Monday August 04, 2025 @12:43PM (#44788289)
The crash took place in 2019, which is the year that FSD went into beta in the model s. Older vehicles were capable of being retrofitted with FSD.

https://www.autopilotreview.com/tesla-now-offering-fsd-hardw...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tesla must pay $329M in damages in fatal Autopilot case, ... by ajross on Monday August 04, 2025 @01:15PM (#44788744)
The car didn't have it. They weren't advertising it at the time of the crash. You couldn't buy it yet. And the upgrades wouldn't ship for months. I think I stand by what I said. Your attempt to make this about FSD seems to be basically a lie, no?
[ Parent | on HN ]