A representative for Tesla sent Ars the following statement: “Today’s verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla’s and the entire industry’s efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology. We plan to appeal given the substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial. Even though this jury found that the driver was overwhelmingly responsible for this tragic accident in 2019, the evidence has always shown that this driver was solely at fault because he was speeding, with his foot on the accelerator—which overrode Autopilot—as he rummaged for his dropped phone without his eyes on the road. To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash. This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs’ lawyers blaming the car when the driver—from day one—admitted and accepted responsibility.”

So, you admit that the company’s marketing has continued to lie for the past six years?

  • Auli@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 day ago

    Fuck that I’m not a beta tester for a company. What happened to having a good product and then releasing it. Not oh let’s see what happens.

    • CannedYeet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      It’s not that simple. Imagine you’re dying of a rare terminal disease. A pharma company is developing a new drug for it. Obviously you want it. But they tell you you can’t have it because “we’re not releasing it until we know it’s good”.

      • Mirshe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        This is, or was (thanks RFK for handing the industry a blank check), how pharma development works. You don’t even get to do human trials until you’re pretty damn sure it’s not going to kill anyone. “Experimental medicine” stuff you read about is still medicine that’s been in development for YEARS, and gone through animal, cellular, and various other trials.

        • CannedYeet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Actually we have “right to try” laws for the scenario I described.

          But the FDA could use some serious reform. Under the system we have, an FDA approval lumps together the determinations of whether a drugs is safe, effective and worth paying for. A more libertarian system would let people spend their own money on drugs that are safe even if the FDA’s particular research didn’t find them effective. And it wouldn’t waste tax payer money on drugs that are effective but exorbitantly expensive relative to their minimal effectiveness. But if a wealthy person wants to spend their own money, thereby subsidizing pharmaceuticals for the rest of us, that’s great in my opinion.