Tesla Recalls 2M Cars to Fix Autopilot Safety Flaws
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
These requirements are already a major thorn in my side. My car has sensors to detect when a passenger isn't wearing a seat belt and to blast an ear-hurting alarm directly at the driver. It's so loud that it's actually a safety issue in itself because it's hard to focus on driving when there is a blaring alarm in your face.
The worst of the problem though, is that the system is made to be ultra cautious and thus has a lot of false positives. For example, if I put my backpack on the passenger seat, I have to plug the seat belt in otherwise it will scream at me once my speed hits 10 MPH. Or if one of my kids decides to change seats so unbuckles and moves to a new chair and buckles in that one, then the car will scream at me unless both buckles are buckled, even if there's no weight in the previous seat. It takes several minutes to timeout and stop, meanwhile it is ear-splittingly loud and so bad that it's unsafe to drive while it's blaring.
There are more things, like if I leave the engine running while walking away with the key fob in my pocket, it will loudly honk twice. This happens constantly. Just this morning it honked ear splittingly loud in my face while I was scraping the ice from my windshield.
Then of course there is the complete disabling of the in-car navigation controls while moving, so my passenger can't configure the map while I'm driving, even though there is absolutely no reason to do that. The net result is also that I end up using my phone which is way less safe because I have to look down and the controls are not even remotely optimized for quick and low-attention use.
Our modern way of maximizing the responsiblity of the manufacturer to prevent misuse and minimizing the liability of the person doing the misusing is leading us to some real bad places IMHO.
Unless you are truly an expert spitter and the car is not moving, then spitting out the window is going to end up streaking the tobacco juice all across the exterior of the car. If the rear window is open, it might even go onto the back seat of the car. If you aren't moving then it will usually land somewhat vertically on the body of the car, or straight back (horizontally) if you're moving fast. It's always super tempting to try, but nearly impossible to pull off
It's absolutely ridiculous to use such a signal to direct vehicle handling dynamics and control aspects.
source : I was a mechanic at a dealership as a young person for many years, and I replaced an untold amount of door switches as warranty work -- but back then the most that they did was annoy the driver with an intermittently lit cabin rather than brake-stomping.
Stop defending nannyfying conditioning.
Where is this pointed out? Opening and closing the doors at highway speed is not common, winter or otherwise.
I'm fine with "nannifying" cars when it gets these results. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_U...
And adding safety features to cars is one thing. Indiscriminately slamming on the brakes without context is another.
A feature has to actually lead to safer outcomes. Braking hard when opening the door is highly questionable.
The people who decry the "nanny state" tend to oppose requirements for these, as well. You'll find plenty of people moaning about how they don't make cars like they used to, that bumpers require expensive replacement in low-speed impacts, that all this extra metal is expensive, etc.
> Indiscriminately slamming on the brakes without context is another.
I wouldn't call "when the driver door opens at speed" to be "indiscriminate". I don't doubt the sudden decceleration is a bit surprising (and it probably quickly trains you out of opening the door mid-drive), but if someone rear-ends you because of this that's clearly their fault for following too closely.
I’m sure you can find some people who find safer crumple zones unreasonable, but I don’t think most people fit into this category.
Automatic braking is far less clear cut, and as someone who prefers cars with safe frames, I don’t yet trust the car to know when it’s the right time to brake (some collision avoidance features are getting way better).
> I wouldn't call "when the driver door opens at speed" to be "indiscriminate".
I would. The car doesn’t know why the door was opened at speed, or what the consequences of braking in that moment might be.
The driver has a better chance of knowing these thing.
Furthermore, if the driver isn’t prepared for this behavior, the car has now created a dangerous situation for the driver, regardless of who is at fault if it causes a rear-end collision. A collision that would not have happened if not for the automatic behavior.
I have a friend who is allergic to bees. While driving one day (they were in the passenger seat), a bee made an appearance. It must have flown in through the sunroof at some point, and started flying around in a rather agitated fashion. When it landed on the edge of the driver door, I opened it slightly (at speed) and let the wind carry it away.
I think this is the only time I’ve ever opened the door while driving, but the one thing I did not need at that moment was my car thinking it knew better than me.
Until self driving tech has truly arrived, I’d argue this kind of automatic behavior is pretty indiscriminate. This is not the same as a collision avoidance sensor that knows the car is about to hit something.
Maybe I’m wrong and most people who open the door while driving are trying to escape the car and would benefit from slower speed. I doubt it. And if this is the case, one wonders if braking would work anyway (why else is someone trying to exit the car while moving?).
It is absolutely not, that's a silly claim. Go and push open your door on the highway, nothing much will happen. Wind will push it back, it'll mostly close and you can keep driving that way all day if you like.
Sure it's not the normal way to drive, but there's nothing dramatic about it, let alone "emergency".
It is hard to believe the OPs story is entirely true, or wasn’t exaggerated.
More like the guy spilled some dip on himself while pulling out of the garage (because of the sudden halt) and it eventually turned into a “honey, i’m serious, I almost died” story because they were so embarrassed.
News at 11.
Also, this is an adult. With grownish children. They are old enough to know the risk of OPENING THE DRIVERS DOOR AT 70 MPH, and it is no one’s responsibility to account for that, and the guy should know by now that even if it worked 10,000,000,000 times before, it is inherently risky and dangerous, and it will always be inherently risky and dangerous.
Like, the risk to reward ratio here is categorically insane. Use a cup, or maybe die? And they chose maybe die? And that’s a problem with the car? Huh?
And the documented part is BS. People don't read their owners manuals and even if they did it'd usually say not to open the door in motion, not that it will slam the brakes if you do. Even if it does it's unrealistic to expect people to read the manual of every car they drive. Rentals would go out of business real quick.
A more appropriate measure would be a loud and annoying alarm. Or a steering wheel shaker (like many lane-keeping systems already have).
Why? Because someone at some point has attempted to exit a vehicle moving at speed.
Ok so you didn't actually read my comment. Granted it was long, but if you're going to reply you should probably actually read it
The seat belt dinging is a minor inconvenience. The key fob honking can probably be controlled via your car settings. I turned the honking off on my car, now it softly dings at me once.
You're being very, very dramatic, is my point. If the seat belt alarm is that ear splitting, you might want to talk to a doctor?
And thanks for the free medical advice, but I actually have talked to a doctor and I actually have minor hearing loss, not hearing gain or whatever medical "problem" you think might cause people to hear something louder than it is.
No offense, but if you haven’t, you might consider anti-anxiety or similar drugs. Not saying it isn’t real, or that it’s your fault, but there is a big difference between it being real and it being entirely caused by the car.
Is there some reason you can’t simply sell your car and get a different one? For the amount of pain you say you are in, this seems like an easy and direct solution?
The decision to have an annoying beep instead of a soft ding or pop up is stupid but many cars do this. Mine handles seatbelts well and never has a false positive there so it's not a general modern car problem (2021 sonata).
But yeah, I've been spoiled by modern fobs you don't even take out of your pocket. I really like those, that's the kind of convenience that makes you sign up for robot overlords ...
These can be super annoying. My partner has a car which just spontaneously unlocks whenever the key approaches. Which is ridiculous since often I'm just walking to the mailbox or out to a different car and have zero desire to unlock that particular car.
It just assumes, without understanding what I'm actually doing. Which is the fundamental UX problem with all these misfeatures.
They even have carjacking prevention features, to keep unwanted riders out - only the driver door opens unless you start by opening another door or double-tap the driver's.
A great example of this is an alarming amount of new drivers are absolutely incapable of backing a vehicle up unguided on mirrors alone, they rely solely on the backup camera and it was never a skill they had to learn.
At the end of the day, you are never going to be able to do tests or training to the level where it invalidates the need for good UX and safety features. Even for tasks with extensive training like air pilots, there is still a tremendous amount of effort put towards safety and usability. Human beings are fallible.
There are only two ways we’re going to improve that: letting fewer people drive or making cars harder to use unsafely. Since there’s intense political opposition to building bike/transit infrastructure, removing driving privileges or even ticketing unsafe drivers, we’re going to keep seeing attempts to solve the problem with technical measures.
I suspect pretty soon the mirrors may go the way of morse code with respect to tesging.
Tesla is trying to eliminate rearview mirrors, replacing them with cameras.
that said, I LIKE mirrors - they don't go out or white out in the wrong lighting. I also like turn signals and gearshift levers, which tesla has already eliminated. It seems like the only button you can depend on in a tesla is the hazard lights (by law)
Tesla also have an indicator stalk ("turn signal"), and their gear shift is also on a stalk, as it was in most 50s and 60s cars.
Is there a specific Tesla type or concept vehicle you're referencing here? Because none of the ones I've been in reflect what you're saying.
turn signals - they are a touch sensor in the middle of the steering wheel.
gear shift - the new cars "guess" which direction you want to go and shift for you. You can select a direction on the touchscreen. There is also a touch area underneath the center console for selecting gears (you have to touch it to wake, then touch again to shift).
lights are a touch area on the steering wheel.
the horn is a touch area on the steering wheel.
By law cars require rearview mirrors, so tesla ships them, but they are fighting against them both technically and in a regulatory way.
I think tesla is throwing the baby, your spouse and your kids out with the bathwater.
I would prefer if these controls were an $2k option, maybe even a dashboard as an option.
you are a worse driver in a tesla.
https://mikerowe.com/2020/03/walk-me-through-this-safety-thi...
I also disagree with the article for other reasons. The idea that something being the first priority means it’s the only priority is nonsense. Safety can be weighted the highest out of all the priorities while still being balanced with the other priorities.
What make and model is this?
> Start by sitting in the driver's seat and closing the door. Buckle your seat belt. Turn the ignition to the "On" position without starting the engine. Within a few seconds of turning the ignition on, unbuckle and then re-buckle your seat belt three times, making sure each action is completed quickly. After the third buckle action, keep the seat belt buckled and wait for approximately 20 seconds. You should hear a confirmation sound or see a visual indication that the seat belt warning chime volume can now be adjusted. Use the volume control buttons on the steering wheel or the audio system controls to adjust the volume. Please note that the specific buttons or menu options for adjusting the volume may vary depending on your Corolla's trim level and audio system.
Worth a shot? Sounds like it’s adjustable (presuming Corolla and Sienna share some software) and yours is set a bit high.
Details vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, but they're quite common. https://lifehacker.com/hack-your-ride-cheat-codes-and-workar...
I'd do it too but... My car (not a Toyota), although 11 years old, is still on an extended manufacturer warranty (which I pay to renew each year) but if I modify the system, I void the warranty.
I'm just pointing out that out because Toyota have great warranties AFAIK and can be extended up to at least 7 years old? (if you do the maintenance at Toyota dealerships).
I want to "hack" my car too but I'm not doing it as long as it's still under warranty.
Tesla's QC issues make them look like bespoke works of art compared to what I saw of some of the newest Ladas. It's one thing when you're missing parts or badly glued windshields. It's a whole other thing when the welds holding the frame of your car together have the structural integrity of butter on Venus.
You aren’t supposed to be driving until all occupants in your vehicle have buckled their seatbelts. That’s why the alarm is loud and annoying, because obviously you can’t be trusted to follow basic motor vehicle laws. You’re not supposed to be focused on driving before everyone is buckled in.
They also got the seat belt warning right. At startup it displays a map of the seats, green if occupied and buckled, red if not, grey if unoccupied. Good for checking that the kids did up their seat belts in the back, without being annoying. I'm guessing it does have a nag chime, but the kids have behaved so far...
I do have to say, the only complaint about the gimcrackery in mine (low-ish trim level 2023 Honda Civic) is that the menu UI is a bit clunky. But nothing gets in your way once adjusted properly and the automations (e.g. you can't manually time the windshield washer squirt any more - it squirts at the optimum angle of the wipers) work pretty well.
Good for everyone around though, because you're not polluting the soundscape with a completely unncessary honk. Where I live, honking within cities is allowed only in emergency or dangerous situations. Not that anyone follows that law though.
Arguably, if your backpack is heavy enough to set off the sensor, it's probably a projectile hazard in itself and probably shouldn't be on the seat and instead in a foot well or in the cargo area.
Not trying to say that you're wrong, but an unsecured, heavy backpack is a real safety risk in even minor accidents. From the impact pattern, it's like having a pet or a baby in the front seat and not securing it.
Tesla allows this and a lot of other things. TBH, I'm shocked that NHTSA hasn't made them stop, given how quickly they've intervened when passengers were allowed to play solitaire on the screen in drive. :)
I understand the reasoning, but it is all a bit weird given that people have a phone that they can use instead. And unfortunately, they do resort to the phone pretty regularly.
Given that FMVSS 208 mandates passenger occupation detection at 35lbs for seat belts, and 65lbs for airbags, I'm not sure what you're expecting from the system. How is it meant to differentiate between a 35lb backpack and a 35lb child?
I’m curious to see what this amounts to because Autopilot is already pretty sensitive to this. Pick up your phone or look away from the road for more than a few seconds and the in-cabin car notices and warns you. I don’t know of a comparable system in any car with self driving or without.
Marketing, marketing, especially to Americans.
Tesla's highlighting stuff that various other car brands have and I think there's also an influx of newish drivers that just didn't check what their cars were capable of (nobody reads the manual).
Very nice car though: excellent build quality and driving feel. Some aspects of the Google software not quite as good as Tesla’s however (but the maps/navigation are excellent, maybe even better than Tesla).
Autopilot is a suite of driver assistance features.
The driver assistance features can't assist the driver if there is no driver because they've moved to the backseat.
From a technical standpoint I understand what you're saying (autopilot didn't get any better at driving), but if autopilot is causing a stochastic safety issue with driver focus then addressing that is a good thing and makes the complete system safer.
Edit: meant "self-driving" as opposed to theoretical FSD.
My point was even if you don't have "door-to-door good as a human driver really fully self-driving", the main feature of self-driving is that you should be able to not pay attention for a while. Personally I'm not sure that "proper" FSD will even be possible in the near future.
You’re not only endangering your own life, but you’re endangering others as well.
It’s one thing to do this on rare occasions to change a route on the navigation, or change a song.
But for many people, being on their phone is the norm and not the exception — that’s what’s crazy.
My Model Y turned off FSD when I was fully engaged, but with my head tilted sideways. It wants me to sit in a particular way and have my head straight for some reason. It's really annoying.
From my experience if FSD/AP turns off without me turning it off, it makes sounds that seem like the whole airplane is going to crash. Same with lane departure warnings.
He wants to be free to lie claiming that it is fully autonomous.
And here is a 2 million recall for safety issues on the same system.
I used to have a lot of respect for him. Now, it's just repulsion.
[0] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/tesla-fights-aut...
That is so on the nose American :-))))
You know, the world is full of suckers, I should be free to separate them from their money, it's MY RIGHT! :-))))
https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2023/RCLRPT-23V838-8276.PDF
Relevant part: >Description of the Safety Risk : In certain circumstances when Autosteer is engaged, if a driver misuses the SAE Level 2 advanced driver-assistance feature such that they fail to maintain continuous and sustained responsibility for vehicle operation and are unprepared to intervene, fail to recognize when the feature is canceled or not engaged, and/or fail to recognize when the feature is operating in situations where its functionality may be limited, there may be an increased risk of a collision.
I've driven with GM's Super Cruise (Escalade) and it's about 80 percent the same as basic autopilot. The interior quality is much better but you're in a GM vehicle which are kind of known to be ticking-time bombs.
Do you mean they're mechanically bad and they start failing after N years? (N is traditionally somewhere around 7 years)
My Nissan Propilot behaves very similarly to AP, just with less capability and even less alertness monitoring. Surely it would be affected by the same recall? Along with a lot of other cars using similar systems?
Or maybe there is some subtle difference, but the article doesn't really make that clear. And given the broadness on the Tesla side, it is hard to see what could be different.
A very simple automated system that makes a lot of mistakes will make a driver more alert than baseline, but as the automation improves drivers will quickly start to trust the system too much and lose alertness. There is a huge gulf where the system is good enough to cause loss of alertness, but where the failure rate is still far higher than the average human driver.
But you're right, in that context it doesn't make much sense to apply to AP1 cars but not everybody else. It is a voluntary recall so Tesla might just be recalling everything named "Autopilot" even if a mandated recall wouldn't have.
[1] http://safeautonomy.blogspot.com/2019/01/how-road-testing-se...
I'm not sure how I feel about that, especially if the boundaries aren't well defined.
I think the big issue is that the NHTSA is fundamentally a reactive organization. Automakers self-certify compliance with the regulations, then at some point later the NHTSA may investigate and take action against a specific product or manufacturer if there are enough complaints. Legally I'm not sure that they are allowed to make broad recalls even if its the logical thing to do.
Maybe autopilot just helps you realize that you are not really fully in control about everything that may happen.
You really have to trust the system but it's making it hard to do so if you are skeptic.
They won't get a firmware update, but they'll get an IM while they're late, won't pull over to reply, and ran you over at full speed instead of trying to slow down.
To be fair, you really can’t compare the performance of drivers to Autopilot, without commenting on Autopilot performance.
Many people’s anxiety with it is exactly due to lack of confidence in Autopilot, and (relatively) more confidence in humans.
I’m not arguing which one is worse, I’m just saying you can’t make the comparison without commenting on the performance of both (by definition, required for making a comparison).
Local roads, same but we are still doing 60 in a 45 with our head glued to our shoulder or holding the phone with one hand in front of our face to facetime. I see this every day.
Get a Tesla, put on AP, take your conf call, at least it will keep you in lane, just nudge the steering wheel every 30 seconds.
I frequently walk now and the number of basic white Tesla close calls is way too high.
There's just no going back from this.
Anecdotally, the worst drivers I have ever encountered on the road are the basic white Tesla drivers. Almost on par with beat down Nissan Altima drivers.
I don't pay for the extras, but paying for extra features on a car is as old as cars.
It's a very comfortable car which is nice to drive, cheap to run and has many features. I'm not sure how you get to "garbage" here.
> Apple is recalling 45 Brazilion iPhones and iPads to fix software flaw[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2023/t...
Tesla software is.
Also how many lives has it saved?
1. There's a structural issue that affects camera systems which can't be fixed in a shop; for instance, something which may cause the camera to come loose which results in blind spots, that's due to the structural issue of the car itself. Tesla has to replace 2 million customer's actual cars, destroying the old ones (or perhaps selling them as "refurb but no autopilot").
2. There's an issue that affects camera systems which can be fixed in a shop; Tesla has to pay for repairs for 2 million cars.
3. There's an issue which affects Autopilot which can be fixed in software. They push an over-the-air update automatically and everyone is fine.
These each have very different properties in terms of costs to Tesla and hassle for owners; so it makes sense that there be a different word for them. "Recall" literally means "call back"; I'd argue for only using it in the case of #1.
Writing means to carve but you wrote this post without a metal stick and a hammer.
>hassle for owners
"Recall" is used to signify the severity of the flaw not the inconvenience fixing it caused owners. I feel "software update" doesn't do it justice at all and "recall" is appropriate.
A recall is a mandatory fix that the manufacturer is obligated to provide at no charge and to proactively notify customers of. It comes with reporting obligations and long term warranty implications.
It might be that industries should not reuse common words, but IMO it’s a little silly to insist that they only use the most literal and etymologically correct terms for each individual action rather than defining categories that have clear meanings even if a specific action doesn’t perfectly match the most literal reading of the name of the category.
This does make sense; but I would nonetheless suggest to the auto industry that they change the wording somehow. Fifty years ago any such mandatory fix certainly did mean making manual modifications to each individual car, whether in a service shop or by replacing the whole thing. That's no longer the case, and risks significant public misunderstanding.
Here in the UK they have loads of "archaisms":
- pavement: A place for pedestrians to walk on the side of a road; what Americans call a "sidewalk". Named because 200 years ago, the roads were dirt but sidewalks were paved. Now the roads are paved too, but they kept calling it "pavement"
- public school: A very posh private school; e.g., Eton. Named (as I understand it) because your children were taught in public, rather than in the home by a private tutor / governess / whatever.
I am not so sure. Take Linux kernel log levels:
0 = emergency
1 = alert
2 = critical
3 = error
4 = warning
As soon as I saw this I showed it to multiple people, and none of them understand how a log level of "alert" can be more severe than "critical". Now, there is probably some greybeards that decided these words way way back and we decided to stuck with them. But if you tell someone "damn, the kernel is giving off alerts", their thought will be "well, at least the system isn't in a critical state or erroring out, right?".
Intuition matters.
That it is straightforward is nice for them I guess, but it's less relevant to describing it than it being ordered by the government.
model y (20-23) model x (16-23) model s (12-23) model 3 (17-23)
NVM the fact that customers will get them months after the work has automatically been done. :facepalm
Here’s what they’re required to do:
> In the case of a notification required to be sent by a motor vehicle manufacturer, by certified mail, verifiable electronic means such as receipts or logs from electronic mail or satellite distribution system, or other more expeditious and verifiable means to all dealers and distributors of the vehicles that contain the defect or noncompliance.
No. "recall" is a term with a meaning, it means:
- the manufacturer has been obligated to fix this
- they must fix it for all listed cars
- they must fix it for free
The term "recall" doesn't imply anything about the implementation details how the above is going to be accomplished.
Whether you have to take it to a dealer, or it's done over the air, or even if they have to ship the car back to the factory, makes no difference to that fact that it is a recall.
iPhones 12 were banned for a short period in France because they emitted too much electromagnetic radiation.
Now how did the media called this 'recall' ?
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66795175
An update.
The French system for radio emissions uses different terminology for the same ideas. The English term they used was a “temporary withdrawal” with a full recall if Apple couldn’t update the devices:
https://www.anfr.fr/liste-actualites/actualite/temporary-wit...
This does mean that news coverage used the same language as the subject of the story, but that’s no more unfair than complaining that the BBC referred to a game as football even though you think they should have said soccer.
I know a lot of people who don't update their phones because they believe it's getting slower and their battery degrades faster. In some cases, they might be right because when new futures are added the device can indeed become slower.
It would be nice if we can get fixes and security updates, without adding any new functionality so we can preserve the original workload of the device. I would love to have my iPhone 4s running iOS 6, just secured enough, so I can use it the way it was when I purchased it(I wouldn't care much if Apple services don't work anymore).
Sure, Apple does security only updates for old phones but I actually would like to have the option to do this on the current phones too.
Autopilot is probably actually quite a good term for it if you actually compare it to a plane Autopilot - you don't expect pilots to be inattentive or away from the controls, and you expect them to intervene in certain scenarios and disengage autopilot if there is danger.
I disagree with calling the top level of Autopilot "FSD" by the way - I think that is misleading. But Autopilot - I think that's a fair term personally considering the context and historical use.
Pilots need to get training and certification for autopilot before they can use it.
At the level of airline pilots???
This discussion has happened many, many times here on HN. Tesla's marketing is extremely misleading (and it's not the only case).
Because if so, it sounds like Autopilot would be a good word.
I think the term "Full Self Driving" is misleading, but comparing it to an Autopilot (i.e. a system which requires pilot input and care) seems correct.
In the US? No, we don't. Even ignoring that a driver's license is treated more as a right than a perk... Consumers are absolutely NOT trained on the nuances of any particular car's UI, systems, etc.
An airline pilot absolutely IS trained on those nuances and can ONLY operate planes in which they've trained. And they get periodic check-rides from FAA examiners. And, as we saw with the 737Max, failure to train on those nuances can have deadly consequences.
Is the argument "You can't call it Autopilot because Autopilot refers to a complex system that requires a skilled operator and needs people to pay constant attention"?
I'm not aware of similar reports of crashes/deaths with systems like Subaru's EyeSight or Honda's SensingSuite. Or, on the other end of the spectrum, Mercedes's Drive Pilot.
I’m just talking about the name because that’s what this thread was about.
The airline system requires thousands of hours of training total (and many hours on a specific type/model of plane) to operate.
Driving a car requires no such training.
The aircraft requires hundreds of hours to operate without autopilot. Autopilot isn’t what imposes the training requirement.
Let's check the first paragraph of the Autopilot section in the manual:
Autopilot is a suite of advanced driver assistance features that are intended to make driving safer and less stressful. None of these features make Model 3 fully autonomous or replace you as the driver
And on the same page:
Warning Basic Autopilot is a hands-on feature. Keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times and be mindful of road conditions, surrounding traffic, and other road users (such as pedestrians and cyclists). Always be prepared to take immediate action. Failure to follow these instructions could cause damage, serious injury, or death.
The earliest autopilot for boats was built in the 1800s.
You can get the certificate after taking training but I imagine there is some way to test out of it.
--
The training doesn't need to be months long though. Try renting a jet-ski; they'll give you a very quick training but it's still present. Although jet-skis are probably not long enough to qualify as motorized boats in a lot of states.
https://www.americasboatingcourse.com/lawsbystate.cfm?lid=50
They are comparing it to piloting, which as you point out, requires a trained and skilled, responsible and attentive person.
Calling something an autopilot implies you can do essentially whatever you want while the machine operates itself.
Airplane autopilots are usually disengaged for landing because the failure mechanism is to return control to the human pilots, but in the event of a failure during landing there is usually insufficient time for that.
Tesla "Autopilot" is basically the landing portion of a flight, all the time. It has the same failure window: seconds, or less, for the human to take over and prevent an accident. And Tesla's AP is uniquely bad compared to comparable advanced cruise control systems: Tesla has more than 17x as many crashes than the next crashiest automaker, and more than 60x as many crashes as the safest major automaker. Given that Tesla has far fewer cars on the road, scaled up for fleet size, Tesla's AP system is the most dangerous advanced cruise control system in the world. (And the fatalities bear that out; FSD alone has more fatalities than the combined fatality count of every other automaker in the world combined.)
If you were a prospective buyer in the past, the autopilot link would take you to a page which very prominently says this:
> Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars. All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver.
Way down the page, you get this:
> Enhanced Autopilot adds these new capabilities to the Tesla Autopilot driving experience. Your Tesla will match speed to traffic conditions, keep within a lane, automatically change lanes without requiring driver input, transition from one freeway to another, exit the freeway when your destination is near, self-park when near a parking spot and be summoned to and from your garage.
Finally, you get a bit more realistic warning after a bit of misdirection intended to make you think the product was ready but government red tape was delaying availability:
> Tesla’s Enhanced Autopilot software has begun rolling out and features will continue to be introduced as validation is completed, subject to regulatory approval. Every driver is responsible for remaining alert and active when using Autopilot, and must be prepared to take action at any time.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190101050434/https://www.tesla...
Contrast with Nissan’s page which is very clear that it assists you in hands-on driving. There’s nothing on there which sounds like the vehicle can drive itself (e.g. who reads the smart summons description and thinks it can’t reliably stop or identify pedestrians?)
It is not used in the context of your average update that might give you new eye candy or features, it is just for safety related issues and usually at the behest of a regulator (though a manufacturer can decide to do a voluntary recall to avoid the regulators stepping in).
Hint: Not everything is SV-like "we'll fix it in production"...
"Recall" has a regulatory definition, so this is that.
Years ago, Tesla issued an update that added some features to show warnings in certain cases. It previously showed no warnings because the feature didn't exist. It was net new.
NHTSA warned them that this net new feature improved safety and was therefore a recall by definition. Ever since then, "recall" has been heavily overused, IMO. Virtually every update is a "recall" by the technical definition. :facepalm
Using "recall" for what they are defining as a safety defect is, of course, reasonable, even if it is just a software update.