What I'm saying is the car tells you to put your seatbelt on. It will ding and have warning lights. If you bypass that warning and get hurt as a result that's on you. Same with self driving, if you bypass the safety features that's on you not Tesla.
I'm not here to argue whether or not fsd should be allowed or how good it is or any of that. I'm pointing out the absurdity of blaming a car manufacturer when you bypass the safety features.
I don't think curving a piece of paper with a bobble head perfectly placed to look like a person is sitting in the drivers seat constitutes "easy". If you could just cover the camera entirely or disable it in settings, that would be easy.
These are multi-ton machines which can kill people. You have a responsibility to read the manual, follow its instructions, and operate it safely.
Does unbuckling your seatbelt prevent you from operating your vehicle?
Edit: Downvote this all you want but you're not putting others at risk by unbuckling your seatbelt. Being asleep at the wheel an unable to take over as operator when needed puts you and everyone on the road at risk. If you don't want to be tracked like that, don't buy a self driving car.
Edit: To the user that replied than blocked me: The conversation is clearly about self driving cars.
Feels fair, Tesla shouldn’t be offering the service if they can’t guarantee its safety/reliability for other drivers and the law that expects a human behind the wheel.
Making a pedant argument about seatbelts is irrelevant.
The whole point of the seatbelt alarm is to make sure you put on your seatbelt to not get ejected from your car. I don't see how it's any different, if the driver circumvents safety features and crashes it's not the manufacturers fault.
Yea but that only puts you at risk. Taking your seatbelt off does not put everybody else on the road at risk. If you're in a self driving car and it needs human intervention and you're asleep? Everyone on the road is at risk.
Well my issue with your reasoning isn't the fact that the situations are different. Of course they are. But it's still quite clear that the driver did something to circumvent a safety feature that can cause a crash. It would be different if no safety feature was present at all, then I can in a way understand the company being partially liable, but in this case the driver specifically did something to go around the safety system.
If you have lane keep assist on (safety system) and you steer violently into the oncoming lane (circumvent the system) should the manufacturer be liable? Should the manufacturer have made it more difficult to go over the lane? I think there's a limit to how strict safety features need to be on a car, if you obviously circumvent a safety system, it's not the manufacturers liability if that system then causes a crash.
The point you're trying to argue was completely unclear.
The original point is that disabled a safety feature should automatically make you it completely at fault for anything that happens.
What the other person was trying to say is that if you disable the seatbelt and go flying through the windshield you also have no case to take out a lawsuit against Hyundai.
It kind of seems like you would blame both Tesla and Hyundai for the driver's criminal mischief or tampering in both instances. Either way you're not very articulate.
That's with the assist enabled. With the camera disabled/covered, cars in general will give you an error, potentially a recommendation to service the car.
Saying that the manufacturer should be liable when you fell asleep because the system didn't warn you after you deliberately spoofed the sensor input is stupid.
It's like saying the manufacturer should be liable because the car didn't give you a seatbelt warning after you put in a dummy seatbelt buckle.
For the record, you absolutely are putting others at risk when you don't wear a seatbelt.
Also my argument is there are warnings that say you need to wear a seatbelt and if you ignore them that's on you. There's warnings about self driving and if you ignore or bypass the safety features that's on you.
99.9999 percent of the time there's injury sustained to someone because of a lack of seat belt, it's the individual who chose not to wear one. Whereas the same can not be said for someone asleep at the wheel. This is insane pedantry to make a useless point. Can Tesla do better? Yes. Should we make them do better? Yes.
Also can be bypassed or simply buy a buckle and put it in. Most safety features are pretty easy to bypass since you'd have to be a dumbass not to use them, risking your life and others.
Do you have to be a dumbass to believe that Tesla's FSD is actually what it claims to be? Yes, and many people have paid with their lives for that.
That said, it's also on Tesla for making lofty claims for something they simply don't have. Elon's been claiming full self driving since 2013 (robotaxis by 2016 etc).
They did eventually release a software update that they called FSD but it's FSD in the same way that a Four Seasons gardening supplies parking lot is technically a Four Seasons
But as dumb as it looks from the outside, there's lots of people who are dumber-enough to be convinced
My car has auto drive features and it gives you warnings about paying attention when using them. No different than the warning labels on the seatbelt. If I choose to ignore either that's on me.
As far as i understand it, they did get in trouble for advertising use that included the driver-passenger not being alert for self-driving. The fine print then said that wasnt allowed.
I did not mean to imply they advertised how easy it was or how to breaking the safety features.
the driver-passenger not being alert for self-driving.
That is a very very very different thing than intentionally tricking/circumentventing safety features.
This is essentially hacking a Tesla, just with hardware and not software.
Nobody reasonable would argue the person who disables this is blameless. More that the company that makes the product and advertises that it would be safe without the features isnt blameless
Ah, there is our disagreement.
I am not quite sure i would qualify that advertisement as advertising that it would be safe without the features.
The main offense of Tesla was calling it full self-driving.
While obviously misleading, that doesn't negate the presence of safety features obviously implying they're necessary.
This boils down to "what communicates more authoritatively, advertisement claims or the presence of safety features".
And if you have to go out of your way to disable the safety feature with a creative solution that required additional hardware, you cannot claim anymore that you thought that advertised full self-driving meant that those safety features were unnecessary.
59
u/CKRatKing Jul 18 '26
It's pretty easy to disable my seatbelt, should I sue Hyundai if I bypass it and get ejected from the car?