Connect with us
Tesla's Autopilot was not engaged in a crash with a train; driver unharmed Tesla's Autopilot was not engaged in a crash with a train; driver unharmed

News

Tesla argues human error caused fatal 2019 crash, not Autopilot: report

Credit: Jeremy from Sydney, Australia, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Published

on

Tesla now faces the jury’s verdict in a trial alleging that Autopilot caused a fatality, and the trial is expected to set a precedent for future cases surrounding advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). During closing arguments on Tuesday, an attorney for the plaintiffs pointed to an analysis Tesla conducted two years before the accident, claiming that the automaker knowingly sold the Model 3 with a safety issue related to its steering.

The trial began in California late last month after a 2019 incident in which 37-year-old Micah Lee veered off a highway outside Los Angeles at 65 miles per hour, suddenly striking a palm tree before the vehicle burst into flames. According to court documents, the crash killed Lee and injured both of his passengers, one of whom was an 8-year-old boy.

Lee’s passengers and estate initiated a civil lawsuit against Tesla, alleging that the company knew that Autopilot and its other safety systems were defective when it sold the Model 3.

Tesla has denied any liability in the accident, claiming that Lee had consumed alcohol before getting behind the wheel and saying it could not detect if Autopilot was engaged at the time of the crash.

This and other trials come as regulatory requirements for ADAS suites are just emerging, and the cases are expected to help navigate future court cases related to accidents with the systems.

According to Reuters, the attorney for the plaintiffs, Jonathan Michaels, showed the jury an internal safety analysis from Tesla in 2017 during closing arguments, in which employees identified “incorrect steering command” as a potential safety issue. Michaels said the issue involved an “excessive” steering wheel angle, arguing that Tesla was aware of related safety problems before selling the Model 3.

“They predicted this was going to happen. They knew about it. They named it,” Michaels said.

Michaels also said that Tesla created a specific protocol to deal with affected customers and that the company instructed workers to avoid accepting liability for the issue. Michaels also echoed prior arguments, saying that Tesla knew it was releasing Autopilot in an experimental state, though it needed to do so to boost market share.

“They had no regard for the loss of life,” Michaels added.

Michael Carey, Tesla’s attorney, said that the 2017 analysis wasn’t meant to identify the defect but instead was meant to help avoid any potential safety issues that could theoretically occur. Carey also said that Tesla developed a system to prevent Autopilot from making the same turn that had caused the crash.

Advertisement

Carey said that the subsequent development of the safety system “is a brick wall standing in the way of plaintiffs’ claim,” adding that there haven’t been any other cases where a Tesla has maneuvered the way that Lee’s did.

Instead, Carey argued to the jury that the crash’s simplest explanation was human error, asking jurors to avoid awarding damages on behalf of the severe injuries encountered by the victims.

“Empathy is a real thing, we’re not saying its not,” Carey argued. “But it does not make cars defective.”

Earlier this month, a federal judge in California ruled in Tesla’s favor in a similar case looking at whether the automaker misled consumers about its Autopilot system’s capabilities. In that case, which had the chance to become a class-action lawsuit, the judge ruled that most of the involved plaintiffs had signed an arbitration clause when purchasing the vehicle, requiring the claims to be settled outside of court.

The cases are expected to set precedents in court for future trials involving Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (FSD) beta systems and the degree of the automaker’s responsibility in accidents related to their engagement. Tesla is also facing additional information requests from the U.S. Department of Justice related to its Autopilot and FSD beta.

Tesla has received more requests regarding Autopilot and FSD from DOJ

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.

Zach is a renewable energy reporter who has been covering electric vehicles since 2020. He grew up in Fremont, California, and he currently lives in Colorado. His work has appeared in the Chicago Tribune, KRON4 San Francisco, FOX31 Denver, InsideEVs, CleanTechnica, and many other publications. When he isn't covering Tesla or other EV companies, you can find him writing and performing music, drinking a good cup of coffee, or hanging out with his cats, Banks and Freddie. Reach out at zach@teslarati.com, find him on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk shares insights on SpaceX and Tesla’s potential scale

In a pair of recent posts on X, Musk argued that both companies operate in domains where growth is not linear, but exponential.

Published

on

Credit: xAI

Elon Musk outlined why he believes Tesla and SpaceX ultimately dwarf their competitors, pointing to autonomy, robotics, and space-based energy as forces that fundamentally reshape economic scale. 

In a pair of recent posts on X, Musk argued that both companies operate in domains where growth is not linear, but exponential.

Space-based energy

In a response to a user on X who observed that SpaceX has a larger valuation than all six US defense companies combined, Musk explained that space-based industries will eventually surpass the total economic value of Earth. He noted that space allows humanity to harness roughly 100,000 times more energy than Earth currently uses, while still consuming less than a millionth of the Sun’s total energy output.

That level of available energy should enable the emergence and development of industries that are simply not possible within Earth’s physical and environmental constraints. Continuous solar exposure in space, as per Musk’s comment, removes limitations imposed by atmosphere, weather, and land availability.

Autonomy and robots

In a follow-up post, Elon Musk explaned that “due to autonomy, Tesla is worth more than the rest of the auto industry.” Musk added that this assessment does not yet account for Optimus, Tesla’s humanoid robot. As per the CEO, once Optimus reaches scaled production, it could increase Earth’s gross domestic product by an order of magnitude, ultimately paving the way for sustainable abundance.

Even before the advent of Optimus, however, Tesla’s autonomous driving system already gives vehicles the option to become revenue-generating assets through services like the Tesla Robotaxi network. Tesla’s autonomous efforts seem to be on the verge of paying off, as services like the Robotaxi network have already been launched in its initial stages in Austin and the Bay Area. 

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab undergoes winter testing as Elon Musk reiterates production start date

CEO Elon Musk confirmed the timeline in a recent post on X, while Tesla’s official social media accounts separately revealed that Cybercab prototypes are now undergoing winter testing in Alaska.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Robotaxi/X

Tesla has reiterated that production of its fully autonomous Cybercab is set to begin in April, even as the company continues expanding real-world testing of the vehicle. 

CEO Elon Musk confirmed the timeline in a recent post on X, while Tesla’s official social media accounts separately revealed that Cybercab prototypes are now undergoing winter testing in Alaska.

Musk confirms April Cybercab initial production

In a post on X, Musk reiterated that Cybercab production is scheduled to begin in April, reiterating his guidance about the vehicle’s manufacturing timeline. Around the same time, Tesla shared images showing the Cybercab undergoing cold-weather testing in Alaska. Interestingly enough, the Cybercab prototypes being tested in Alaska seemed to be equipped with snow tires. 

Winter testing in Alaska suggests Tesla is preparing the Cybercab for deployment across a wide range of climates in the United States. Cold temperatures, snow, ice, and reduced traction present some of the most demanding scenarios for autonomous systems, making Alaska a logical proving ground for a vehicle designed to operate without a human driver.

Taken together, Musk’s production update and Tesla’s testing post indicate that while the Cybercab is nearing the start of manufacturing, validation efforts are still actively ramping to ensure reliability in real-world environments.

What early Cybercab production might look like

Musk has previously cautioned that the start of Cybercab manufacturing will be slow, reflecting the challenges of launching an all-new vehicle platform. In a recent comment, Musk said initial production typically follows an S-curve, with early output constrained by how many new parts and processes are involved.

According to Musk, both Cybercab and Optimus fall into this category, as “almost everything is new.” As a result, early production rates are expected to be very deliberate before eventually accelerating rapidly as manufacturing processes mature.

“Initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast,” Musk wrote in a post on X.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla to increase Full Self-Driving subscription price: here’s when

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla will increase its Full Self-Driving subscription price, meaning it will eventually be more than the current $99 per month price tag it has right now.

Already stating that the ability to purchase the suite outright will be removed, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said earlier this week that the Full Self-Driving subscription price would increase when its capabilities improve:

“I should also mention that the $99/month for supervised FSD will rise as FSD’s capabilities improve. The massive value jump is when you can be on your phone or sleeping for the entire ride (unsupervised FSD).”

This was an expected change, especially as Tesla has been hinting for some time that it is approaching a feature-complete version of Full Self-Driving that will no longer require driver supervision. However, with the increase, some are concerned that they may be priced out.

$99 per month is already a tough ask for some. While Full Self-Driving is definitely worth it just due to the capabilities, not every driver is ready to add potentially 50 percent to their car payment each month to have it.

While Tesla has not revealed any target price for FSD, it does seem that it will go up to at least $150.

Additionally, the ability to purchase the suite outright is also being eliminated on February 14, which gives owners another reason to be slightly concerned about whether they will be able to afford to continue paying for Full Self-Driving in any capacity.

Some owners have requested a tiered program, which would allow people to pay for the capabilities they want at a discounted price.

Unsupervised FSD would be the most expensive, and although the company started removing Autopilot from some vehicles, it seems a Supervised FSD suite would still attract people to pay between $49 and $99 per month, as it is very useful.

Tesla will likely release pricing for the Unsupervised suite when it is available, but price increases could still come to the Supervised version as things improve.

This is not the first time Musk has hinted that the price would change with capability improvements, either. He’s been saying it for some time. In 2020, he even said the value of FSD would “probably be somewhere in excess of $100,000.”

Continue Reading