Hacker News Reader

Comment by bin_bash | Hacker News Reader

I disengaged twice because I was terrified of what it might do but turned it back on. I'm generally a very early adopter with these kinds of things (I'm the type of person to always turn on "Beta" mode regardless of what I'm working with). So I have a high tolerance for things not working the way they should.

This is unbelievably terrible though. I really regret purchasing it.

View on HN

> I'm generally a very early adopter with these kinds of things

Which in turn makes everyone else around your car an early adopter?

By that logic, all drivers are early adopters every time a new driver gets their license and enters the "driving pool".

Isn't that why lots of of jurisdictions have constraints on the learning driver (e.g. graduated licensing of some sort) and/or visibility requirements (e.g. car has to have a "learner" sticker of some sort) so that other drivers know?

I literally never heard of such stickers.

We had them in the Midwest US. And the learner vehicles have an extra break pedal for the instructor.

Which is good because a student in my group nearly killed us trying to merge into a semi.

They probably are to some extent, and you know where the liability would lie if they are responsible should something bad happen. What about this case ? There is no sense of responsibility or realization of the danger they are introducing at scale .

Even when they actually admit that they have failed at it [0]. I am not sure if they are aware of the doublespeak in this admission.

[0] Failure to realize a long-term aspirational goal is not fraud.

We should require a test of one's ability to drive based on some basic standards before issuing a license. We should come up with a series of rules for what happens if someone does not adhere to these standards, as well as a mechanism of enforcement if they violate those rules.

I think this logic is still square-

Normally, each person puts one new driver on the road per-lifetime.

When you beta test a baby driving robot, you’re now at two new drivers per life! And the Tesla doesn’t seem to be learning faster than a human!

Hence why in the UK they're strongly advised to have a P plate so other drivers are aware they are a new driver.

I suppose everyone should just assume a Tesla is about to do something silly and drive defensively ...

It would seem like a return and a refund for selling a defective product is in order.

I expect that's exactly why you're paying to be a beta tester: they can keep your money and not deliver anything.

The one time I really beta tested a for-profit product, not only did I get it for free, I actually got a rebate on the final product (it was pycharm, and jetbrains gave me a free license for a year, which they got back many times over as I renewed yearly ever since).

Though I guess the early accesses I got for kickstarters were kinda like paying for a beta in a way.

I don't think 'beta tester' is a recognized class in terms of consumer law. You're a customer, a merchant, a manufacturer or a bystander. Besides that for something that costs that kind of money you can simply expect it to work.

This makes me feel like running an Android beta on my daily use phone just isn't that daring.

This thread and the other comments on this post are amazing. One cannot sell a car without a seatbelt, but Tesla can use their customers for beta testing a dangerous system that drives a whole car around.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com