Until the car is ready to take over as legal driver, it's foolish to set the human driver up for failure in the way that Tesla (and the humans driving Tesla cars) do.
Until the car is ready to take over as legal driver, it's foolish to set the human driver up for failure in the way that Tesla (and the humans driving Tesla cars) do.
Indeed, and that goes for the person or persons who say that the products they sell are safe when used in a certain way.
The whole point is that is somewhat of an unreasonable expectation but it’s what Tesla expects you to do today
Didn't Tesla have an issue a couple of years ago where pressing the brake did not disengage any throttle? i.e. if the car has a bug and puts throttle to 100% and you stand on the brake, the car should say "cut throttle to 0", but instead, you just had 100% throttle, 100% brake?
You can't imagine that the stopping distances will be the same.
The liability lies with the driver, and all Tesla needs to prove is that input from the driver will override any decision made by the ADAS.
In this case, the behaviour of the system and the responsibility of the driver is well-established. I'd actually quite like it if Tesla were held responsible for their software, but they somehow continue to skirt the line wherein they require the driver to retain vigilance and any system failures are therefore the (legal) fault of the human not the car despite advertising it as "Full Self Driving".
In most American jurisdictions' liability law, the more usual thing is to expand liability, rather than transferring liability. The idea that exactly one -- or at most one -- person or entity should be liable for any given portion of any given harm is a common popular one in places like HN, but the law is much more accepting of the situation where lots of people may have overlapping liability for the same harm, with none relieving the others.
The liability of a driver for maintenance and operation within the law is not categorically mutually exclusive with the liability of the manufacturer (and, indeed, every party in the chain of commerce) for manufacturing defects.
If a car is driven in a way that violates the rules of the road and causes an accident and a manufacturing defect in a driver assistance system contributed to that, it is quite possible for the driver, manufacturer of the driver assistance system, manufacturer of the vehicle (if different from that of the assistance system) and seller of the vehicle to the driver (if different from the last two), among others, to all be fully liable to those injured for the harms.