Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Germany Tells Tesla To Not Advertise Autopilot Feature, Fears Drivers Will Become Less Attentive (fortune.com)

Posted by msmash on from the public-best-interest dept.

German Transport Minister Alexander Dobrindt has asked Tesla to stop advertising its electric vehicles as having an Autopilot function, as this might suggest drivers' attention is not needed, his ministry said on Sunday. Reuters reports: A spokeswoman for the ministry, confirming a report in the daily Bild am Sonntag (BamS), said the Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA) had written to Tesla to make the request. "It can be confirmed that a letter to Tesla exists with the request to no longer use the misleading term Autopilot for the driver assistance system of the car," she said in a written response to a Reuters' query.

108 comments

  1. Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously Tesla, CHANGE THE GOD DAMN NAME. This is NOT an "auto-pilot" in the way that nearly everyone would think it is from watching movies and what not, this is just an advanced form of Cruise Control.
    Every bullcrap that comes out related to auto-pilot would've been a no issue if they didn't make people misunderstand what auto-pilot is just by the name. They expect people to actually READ the instructions on what it is when first activating it, when they should be aware that NOBODY reads the god damn manual, much less on-screen instructions! Otherwise customer support wouldn't be a job.

    1. Re:Change the name! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Germany is the second country where they had to change the way the feature was advertised, after the crash in China forced them to there as well.

      I still kinda want this feature, but only for slow stop/start traffic.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I know. Clear, concise, and accurate can be frustrating.

    3. Re:Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hear-hear! For all of Musk's intelligence, calling it Autopilot is incredibly myopic.

    4. Re: Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what autonomous driving really is- "Super" cruise control, or cruise control 2.0.

    5. Re:Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed - if it was "LaneAssist" or something similar then, yes, people wouldn't be having anywhere near the level of misplaced trust.

      In aviation, the 'autopilot' doesn't have to keep track of terrain, or even other planes. It merely heads to waypoints, follows a heading, or an ILS localiser. The only system that has to keep track of other aircraft is TCAS, and even then, that just merely TELLS pilots what to do. It has huge advantages (ATC is supposed to keep planes clear of each other, TCAS can communicate with the other plane to give unambiguous "CLIMB CLIMB" or "DESCEND DESCEND" instructions to the humans, there's just in general a lot less traffic a pilot has to keep track of, big jets don't just "indicate and change lanes", and it only keeps track of transponders (doesn't use any computer vision, for example.)

    6. Re:Change the name! by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is NOT an "auto-pilot" in the way

      Yeah tell me about it. It's far more advanced than that.

      Oh wait you also don't know how simple autopilot is in real life and apply your own pre-conception to the term?

    7. Re: Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      China and Germany, two countries with one thing in common besides their love for David Hasselhoff. They are buth ruthless totalitarian dictatorships that crush the free spirits of their citizens into servitude towards industrial might.

      Why should we tolerate their capricious censorship and oppression? Let Tesla be free to be Tesla.

    8. Re: Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read the manual for every car I own and I own a few. I always have.

    9. Re: Change the name! by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Wait, they crush the free spirits of their citizens into servitude towards industry ... by demanding industry change a misleading name of a feature?

      What?

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    10. Re: Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tesla is an American company, and stands liberty and freedom. Haven't you seen their factories? It's practically paradise, I'm surprised the workers don't pay to innovate there.

    11. Re:Change the name! by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Germany is the second country where they had to change the way the feature was advertised, after the crash in China forced them to there as well.

      I still kinda want this feature, but only for slow stop/start traffic.

      Stop and start traffic might be the place where we could benefit the most from this tech in the near term, as well as smoothing the flow of heavy congestion on highways (sort of a cruise that follows the car in front of you).

      But as far as what you call it, it really doesn't matter. As some drivers get accustomed to its ability to control a car, and don't experience any adverse situations due to it, they will begin to take more and more risks with distracting tasks. Not different than what drivers do without assisted control, like driving with the knees or wrists while handling something, it is human nature. This tech just enables people to take it further.

    12. Re:Change the name! by ArtemaOne · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Why aren't you raging about the airline industry calling their system "auto-pilot" when it is far less capable in terms of maneuvering in comparison to Tesla's?

    13. Re:Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the term "auto-pilot" is an aviation term, and aviators know what it means.

    14. Re: Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will the average person ever interact with an airline auto-pilot system? No.

    15. Re:Change the name! by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh wait you also don't know how simple autopilot is in real life and apply your own pre-conception to the term?

      But that's exactly the problem. Most people don't understand what an autopilot is, so when they hear the term they apply that exact pre-conception. I imagine that some portion of training new pilots involves a very specific explanation of what the auto-pilot is capable of, and, more importantly, what it isn't capable of. Until auto-pilot systems become ubiquitous in cars (which may be superseded by fully autonomous vehicles before that can happen), it doesn't make sense to include this kind of training for every new driver. Not to mention all the existing drivers who would have to go back to driving school to learn it.

      The much simpler solution is for Tesla to change the name. In this case, perception trumps reality for the sake of safety. Yes, we are pandering to the ignorant, but if we could stop them from being ignorant, there wouldn't be a problem in the first place.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    16. Re:Change the name! by jaa101 · · Score: 2

      Oh wait you also don't know how simple autopilot is in real life and apply your own pre-conception to the term?

      Aircraft autopilots are designed to allow pilots to take their hands off the controls. The Tesla "Autopilot" isn't. Game over. The Wikipedia article on Autopilots opens with the sentence "An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of a vehicle without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required."

    17. Re:Change the name! by minogully · · Score: 1

      This is NOT an "auto-pilot" in the way that nearly everyone would think it is

      This definition that everyone uses for auto-pilot gave rise to the phase "on autopilot", as in "I'm running on autopilot". Which means to do a task without paying full attention. That's a far cry from fully autonomous. I'd be scared if someone was driving "on autopilot", so why should I expect an autopilot car to be any better?

      I don't think "nearly everyone" feels the same way about the definition of "autopilot" as you do.

    18. Re:Change the name! by stackOVFL · · Score: 1
      Umm What? I'd say, for example, the 777 flight director autopilot is a tad more capable than Tesla's System.

      From

      https://www.rockwellcollins.co... AFDS-770 Autopilot Flight Director System Put the proven standard autopilot flight director system of the Boeing 777 to work for you. The Rockwell Collins AFDS-770 incorporates technology advancements consistent with Boeingâ(TM)s state-of-the-art design objectives. So you can trust it fully digital, fail operational autopilot, flight director and fly-by-wire backdrive system. The triplex system provides multichannel cruise autopilot and flight director control functions for speed selection, altitude modes, heading/track modes, vertical speed/flight path angle modes, vertical/lateral flight management control selection, and fully automatic landing and go-around modes. The AFDS-770 also provides for backdrive of the captain's and first officer's control columns and control wheels during all phases of the flight envelope, and will also backdrive the rudder pedals during autoland and go-around. The backdrive system provides traditional wheel, column and pedal feedback for the 777 fly-by-wire system under autopilot control.

    19. Re:Change the name! by ArtemaOne · · Score: 1

      So one of them is complex. What is the least complex auto-pilot that still holds the name that is apparently some big problem?

    20. Re: Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a two axis auto pilot in my Piper Archer. Thing is the biggest piece of crap, can barely track a straight line and the altitude hold mode disengages randomly for no reason at all.

    21. Re:Change the name! by stackOVFL · · Score: 1

      Why aren't you raging about the airline industry calling their system "auto-pilot"

      Because it's not about the smallest system it's about that capabilities of the equipment the airline industry uses. Not a Piper Cub. But FYI, the Garmn FDS that fits in a Mooney can auto navigate the aircraft. The Tesla system can steer a car.

    22. Re:Change the name! by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Did you even read what you wrote? The phrase "I'm on autopilot" means you HAVE a metaphorical autopilot which is doing the work, so you don't have to be paying attention. And it is exactly this common usage which is the problem, because when you have a Tesla autopilot you do need to pay full attention. You seem to think the phrase means you ARE an autopilot, and thus are not paying attention. You are probably the only one with that bad a misunderstanding of the phrase.

    23. Re:Change the name! by ArtemaOne · · Score: 1

      It's about the name, apparently. And if a system that does little more than keep your plane steered in one direction while keeping altitude can hold the name, then a system that can navigate lanes and avoid obstacles with great reliability should exceed that minimum standard for that name as well.

    24. Re:Change the name! by stackOVFL · · Score: 1

      And if a system that does little more than keep your plane steered in one direction while keeping altitude can hold the name

      I think you missed it. Many of the autopilots systems even in small aircraft are fully capable of navigating the aircraft. Not just flying in a straight line and alt hold but maneuvering the aircraft from waypoint to waypoint. Modern flight director controlled autopilots fly the airplane not just keep the wings level. The 777 Rockwell autopilot is an example of a extremely capable autopilot system can take off the aircraft, fly it to its destination and LAND IT!

    25. Re:Change the name! by ArtemaOne · · Score: 1

      And you keep quoting only part and avoiding the question.

    26. Re:Change the name! by stackOVFL · · Score: 1
      No, apparently you are incapable of admitting when you are wrong.

      Why aren't you raging about the airline industry calling their system "auto-pilot" when it is far less capable in terms of maneuvering in comparison to Tesla's?

      You said the airline industry not a simple attitude hold system in a Cessna but the airline industry. My answers are directly on topic of what YOU said. Now move on you've lost this argument.

    27. Re:Change the name! by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Aircraft autopilots are designed to allow pilots to take their hands off the controls.

      They are not allowed to be any less attentive. The only reason they can take their hands off the controls is that if the vehicle drifts off course for a fraction of a second, that won't cause it to intersect another vehicle or an obstacle.

      The Tesla "Autopilot" isn't. Game over.

      The reason it is not game over or even squirrely shit is that you are not required to keep your hands on the controls of an airplane. You're required to operate both planes and cars in a safe manner, and what a safe manner is varies between the two because of physics.

      The Wikipedia article on Autopilots opens with the sentence "An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of a vehicle without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required."

      They don't mean legally required. Also, Wikipedia is not an authoritative source on the meanings of words.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    28. Re:Change the name! by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      I don't know why I'm even bothering anymore, but here I go again:

      1. As an airline pilot, I can confirm that Tesla's autopilot is way more advanced than airplane autopilots. Of course, when the airplane is sufficiently high, we can let go of the controls and have a chat with the cabin attendants because there's really nothing we can fly into. However, when doing an automatic approach and landing on autopilot, our hands are on the controls and we're watching the instruments like a hawk, ready to take over at any time because the system does occasionally malfunction. And then I'm not even talking about early autopilots that could just maintain an altitude and a heading. So the Tesla autopilot's function fits very comfortably within generally accepted boundaries of what constitutes an autopilot.

      2. Yes, I know people are morons and don't know what an airplane autopilot actually does or how limited it really is. But do you really think they would behave differently if it was called "advanced driving assistance" or something like that? People don't buy a car, discover a button labeled "autopilot", and go "o, nobody told me what that does but since it's called autopilot I'll just go ahead and trust it with my life". No, they try it out, see how well it drives, and then gradually start to trust it more and more until they start watching movies while driving. THAT is what's causing the accidents. Hell, there are even youtube videos of Mercedes cars with nobody in the driver's seat with cans strapped to the steering wheel to fool the sensors. How is that possible if their system is not called "autopilot"? And the Mercedes system works nowhere nearly as well. The only reason Mercedes doesn't have hundreds of automated crashes is because they are not good enough for people to trust them. People try it out as a gimmick and then stop using it because it's too scary. Maybe in slow stop and go traffic, but that's it. Tesla is the only car right now that drives well enough for people to trust it, and that's what is causing them not to pay attention anymore until the system eventually messes up and crashes the car. The name has nothing to do with it, they could call it anything they wanted and people would still behave the same way.

      "Autopilot" is a concise and perfectly applicable term for what the system does. If Tesla did anything wrong, it's the many demonstrations with their hands in the air showing off the system and exaggerating its capabilities. Leave the name alone, that's not where the problem is.

    29. Re:Change the name! by DirkDaring · · Score: 1

      Why did you even bring up the airline industry in the first place? Flying a plane requires a tad more instruction than getting a drivers license.

    30. Re:Change the name! by houghi · · Score: 1

      The Marketing companies select the names of cars, because of what they mean. They select the wording ads, so they give us certain feelings. They decide the colors to be used in ads, so specific emotions are being targeted, yet they had NO idea that the general public would think of when they said "auto-pilot"? I think THAT is the problem.

      They hide behind semantics like a 12 year old who holds the hand of his brother and yells "Stop hitting yourself."
      And no, naming it "I can't believe it is not an autopilot." is not a good name either, not is taking a trademark on 'AutoPilot' and claim it is just a name.
      By naming it Autopilot, they where very well aware of what that idea would mean.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    31. Re:Change the name! by minogully · · Score: 1

      You seem to think the phrase means you ARE an autopilot, and thus are not paying attention

      Whether it's meant metaphorically or not, if you're "on autopilot" you, or your unconscious mind, IS the autopilot. Therefore, YOU in fact ARE an autopilot and are also not paying attention.

      But that's besides the point because, typically, this phrase is used to state that you should have been paying attention, because obviously, an autopilot system isn't as good as a fully aware human. Not to state that you don't have to be paying attention because you're on autopilot. For example, Instead of driving to school my brain was on autopilot, and I started driving to work!

      Doesn't sound like a synonym for an 'autonomous system' to me.

    32. Re:Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dumbass Tesla is setting self-driving cars back 5 years due to their marketing. They should have called it something like "Driver Assist" and sold it as an aid for when drivers fall asleep or when humans can't react to things like a stopped car fast enough. We still have idiots who will drive off a cliff if their GPS tells them too.

    33. Re:Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why did you even bring up the airline industry in the first place?

      Gee, genius, guess which industry has the man-in-control-of-the-machine called a "pilot"? And which industry has been using the term "auto-pilot" for decades?

    34. Re:Change the name! by xystren · · Score: 1

      It comes down to inattentive driving. All these quote/unquote safety features are making the driver feel like then need to pay less attention. The automatic braking for collision avoidance, rear backup cameras, the sonar/beeping when backing up, or the out of lane warning - these while intended to make things safer (intended), but they also make people feel like they can pay less attention because there is an alarm that will let me know when something is amiss (unintended).

      I've even noticed with myself, that after driving my wife's vehicle with these feature, I need to really be more actively aware to remember those features are not there when I'm driving my older vehicle - they do lull you into a false sense of security. People are putting far too much faith in technology and not focusing on what they should be doing, which is driving.

    35. Re: Change the name! by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      /Thin foil hat mode ON
      Responsible found: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      /Thin foil hat mode OFF

    36. Re:Change the name! by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      The autopilot on my Cessna 302 had one function - it would hold altitude and heading. Just like a car's cruise control. Some are even dumber than that.

      Nonetheless, Tesla's marketing leaves a lot to be desired, as do people who try to "prove" how good it is on public roads by operating outside the supported manner.

    37. Re:Change the name! by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      All tech evolution that automatize something does this, no? They can still sell remote control for car alarm activation... and electronic gate opening for parking the car in the house? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    38. Re:Change the name! by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      Leave the name alone, that's not where the problem is.

      I second this!

    39. Re:Change the name! by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      tech is magic, you know, ADs say that...

    40. Re:Change the name! by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      Yet I'm contrary to the name change, but you made a very good point here :)

    41. Re:Change the name! by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      calm down and get a room, you two...

    42. Re:Change the name! by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      The 777 Rockwell autopilot is an example of a extremely capable autopilot system can take off the aircraft, fly it to its destination and LAND IT!

      I was not aware of this...

    43. Re:Change the name! by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      What is the point of the car driving for you if you must remain just as inattentive anyway? If people don't see a practical use for something, it is human nature to try to fill in that blank. In this case human nature gets you into a serious accident.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    44. Re:Change the name! by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      attentive*

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    45. Re:Change the name! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about autopilot for boats? Or a quadcopter autopilot? Sometimes it is the exact same autopilot hardware and software used on some hobby RC cars.

    46. Re:Change the name! by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      The shipping industry?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  2. Elon Musk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    on Twitter : 'Umm...Autobahn ?' says enough.

    1. Re:Elon Musk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I read it, and as a German I still don't understand what he meant by it.
      At best I conclude it is proof that if you are totally clueless about a language it's easy to be confused by it.
      German Autopilot has the same meaning as the English, with "auto" being the "self" prefix, thus in context meaning self-driving.
      Autobahn in meaning has absolutely nothing to do with it, and no German would be confused by it having the same prefix. It came to be purely as a language evolution artefact.
      It stems from the word "Automobil" for car (foreign expressions were/are(?) always popular for newly invented things), which ended up to be too unwieldly for everyday use and became "Auto".
      Autobahn just means "car track" really.
      And no, I don't think any native German would misunderstand Autopilot to mean "car pilot", though even if I don't see how that would change anything.

    2. Re:Elon Musk reaction by Golden_Rider · · Score: 1

      Yup, it shows that Elon Musk apparently is not aware that that "Auto" in "Autobahn" does not mean the same as the "auto" in "autopilot" (German "Auto"="automobile" vs. "auto" as in "automatic"). Just because a word uses the same letters does not mean that, in two different contexts, it means the same thing.

    3. Re:Elon Musk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even in English! The phrase "auto racing" in English speaking countries does NOT mean "automatic racing", but rather "racing with automobiles".

      (Sure, it's not how people would speak, but nobody would be confused about it - normally, it'd be "motor racing", "car racing", or "motorsport" or similar - but it would be understood!)

      (BTW, Wikipedia states that Autobahn is officially "Bundesautobahn" and "The literal meaning of the word Bundesautobahn is "Federal Auto(mobile) Track".").

    4. Re:Elon Musk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually auto in automobile also means "self" from self-moving (automobile) v.s. being moved externally - e.g. towed by a pack of horses. But autobahn is track for automobiles. Autopilot means in every language conceivable a self-driving system.

    5. Re:Elon Musk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse, "auto" is Greek while "mobile" is Latin.

      It should be "ipsomobile" in Latin or "autokinete" in Greek.

    6. Re: Elon Musk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ISTR Fowler complaining about the word television for the same reason in his Modern English Usage.

    7. Re: Elon Musk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in any case it doesn't describe what it is. a self pilot, meant for being able to take hands off controls, it isn't. it's also not a "pilot" for an auto(consequently auto in finnish means also just car).

      anyways, musk took and trademarked the term and then tweeted plenty of stuff from which you can see that he fully intends to have that tm later used for autonomous driving.

      also what Tesla engineers did was BUY AN OFF THE SHELF PRODUCT and simply just proceeded to disable safeties so that lane assist became something more, something that the guys who built the system knew would be dangerous.

      the name autopilot as up for grabs for cars simply because nobody sane wanted to call their system that - and if it worked like a real movie autopilot, think kitt, it wouldn't be trademarkable anyways so it's a stupid name to choose in the first place.

    8. Re:Elon Musk reaction by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

      To all the people here trying to make this connection about the "auto" part of autobahn he's referring is about "automatic", you should think again: he's obviously stating there is such a thing as a reckless road where there are no speed limits in Germany, because that's the only place the rich could justify their 250km/h top speed purchases legally. The autobahn is an obvious incentive to German auto high-end purchasing, sponsored by the government. Now there is government-sponsored public chatter trying to take away from Tesla one of their key features, in obvious favor to German automakers' features that are still not ready for production, or aren't as fully-featured as Tesla's. For the sake of the argument, I'm pretty much an unbiased party: I am from Portugal, and I don't own any interests in whatever form in Tesla or any auto company. I do drive a SEAT car with a VW engine, but it's a 2000 model and I have no particular feelings towards the engine-makers.

      TL:DR - The comment is obviously about the irony of the comment coming from a government official, from a state who already showed disregard for safety in favor of boosting German car purchases.

    9. Re:Elon Musk reaction by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      I read it, and as a German I still don't understand what he meant by it. [...] Autobahn just means "car track" really. And no, I don't think any native German would misunderstand Autopilot to mean "car pilot", though even if I don't see how that would change anything.

      back to the start: why change words?

    10. Re:Elon Musk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that the Autobahn is one of the safest road systems anywhere in the world, so even that interpretation makes no sense at all.

    11. Re:Elon Musk reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      try checking out accident figures on the Autobahn

    12. Re:Elon Musk reaction by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

      I don't have to: the statistical argument is invalid. There's a reason insurance doesn't pay for high-speed accidents in the autobahn.

      Reckless driving is reckless driving no matter how statistics want to play them. That's why there are speed limits. Uncontrollable things that happen at 230kmh, things you can't put a fault on anything else other than the speed the car is driving: the statistically odd bird comes around the windshield, you die; a tire bursts, you die; drivetrain cracks under pressure, you die; somebody takes over without signaling to your lane (a mild driving offense in most countries, not a serious one) and you're at 15m from them, everyone dies. The lack of control, and the lack of liability, is the real issue here. Insurers would have never allowed such a thing unless immunity in the autobahn wasn't a thing. And it became a thing . And that is the proof it is reckless.

      The same statistical argument can be said about autopilot systems: if everyone is using the same programmed driving (and that programming is half-decent), less accidents happen. I guaran-fuking-tee you this with my life, it's the easiest calculation anyone in IT will be able to make. Yet, it does not make it any less reckless to not have a driver paying attention. That is a fair argument. Much like it is super NOT reckless to have speed limits no matter what.

      Commercial airliner flight is 99% autopilot, yet they still need the pilots there for a reason: they are carrying the responsibility the computer programs won't legally carry. And in case you didn't read the fine print, that's the real problem - German automakers don't have enough technology/money/liability combo to back a product like Tesla's in production cars at such a scale, at least not in financially favorable way to them. The politicians are defending this interest in hampering autopilot initiatives until german makers can abide, much like the autobahn was put in place when engines reached a certain maturity, which despite being useless, made for a good reason for profit scaling (SELL FAST CARS AT PREMIUM). They can't be driven like this anywhere else other than circuits... Simple state-self-defense tactics imho.

    13. Re:Elon Musk reaction by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

      And the obvious reason there are less accidents in the autobahn is highly likely for the number of lanes, the low rate of curves, the quality of the road, and the high tolls for trucks (less trucks, less takeovers from slower cars, more slow cars on the outer lanes). You really tried to turn an argument around using nothing but flawed logic. I took logic as the main issue and so did Elon.

  3. Re:Proof that autonomous cars don't work by WarJolt · · Score: 1

    Level 3 autonomous cars are inherently dangerous. Jim McBride was right when he said, "We're not going to ask the driver to instantaneously intervene—that's not a fair proposition."

    We should focus on the standard which level 4 autonomous cars will be judged. Pick the right one and they will be safe and pick the wrong one and we will see them crash.

  4. Auto automatische Rücksitz Schwiegermutter by Steve1952 · · Score: 3, Funny

    May I suggest "Auto automatische Rücksitz Schwiegermutter", which as near as I can tell, translates into "Automobile backseat mother" (or mother in law). This should not result in driver over-confidence.

  5. My million dollar idea: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you engage the autopilot, the steering wheel becomes a blowjob machine. It'll make way more than that lousy intermittent wiper idea ever did.

    1. Re:My million dollar idea: by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      wow!

  6. Re: Auto automatische Rücksitz Schwiegermutte by bkmoore · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Schwiegermutter" is mother in law. "automatischer Rücksitzfahrer"- would be a literal translation for automatic backseat driver. But I don't think it has the same colequal meaning as it does in english. "Besserwisser" (know-it-all) or something similar comes to mind as a better translation for "back seat driver".

  7. Tesla needs to change dash interface by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surprised they havent been sued yet. Isn't it illegal to play on an ipad while driving?

    1. Re: Tesla needs to change dash interface by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's there for 2 reasons.
      1) to play with while driving when autopilot hits 5.0 and it's superperfect and dlc to original hw(musk actually believed so, hence the autopilot name in the first place).

      2) it's way cheaper thana traditional dash. much cheaper to wire. much cheaper to assemble. everything is cheaper with a tablet instead of knobs. design too. ..and still he fails to make profit with it. amazing how news outlets barely ever mention that the super geniuses only venture that made profit to enable it all was a bank that wasn't a bank that unlike all other similar products from early internet era managed to not get shut down by government.

    2. Re: Tesla needs to change dash interface by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      For a company, profit = taxes = you did something wrong.

      Any money over expenses should be reinvested or given to investors, not be left there to be taxed.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  8. Re: Proof that autonomous cars don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're far better off waiting for 5th levels cars when they gain the ability to cast a 3rd level spell.

  9. Scheweinhund pigdoggen! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It ist ein order das must be oveyed vizout kvestion!

  10. Re: Auto automatische Rücksitz Schwiegermutte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, my mother in law is definitely a schwiegermutter...

  11. Re: Proof that autonomous cars don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're far better off waiting for 5th levels cars when they gain the ability to cast a 3rd level spell.

    I won't know whether to choose Fly or Lightning Bolt.

  12. Re: Auto automatische Rücksitz Schwiegermutte by Kjella · · Score: 1

    But I don't think it has the same colequal meaning as it does in english. "Besserwisser" (know-it-all) or something similar comes to mind as a better translation for "back seat driver".

    Knowing Germans I think the correct translation for "back seat driver" is Fußgänger (pedestrian). If you want to insult a German, talk shit about their car, driving or mother - in that order.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  13. Automatische besonderen Bedürfnissen helfen by Steve1952 · · Score: 1

    But I don't think it has the same colequal meaning as it does in english. "Besserwisser" (know-it-all) or something similar comes to mind as a better translation for "back seat driver".

    Knowing Germans I think the correct translation for "back seat driver" is Fußgänger (pedestrian). If you want to insult a German, talk shit about their car, driving or mother - in that order.

    Perhaps "automatische besonderen Bedürfnissen helfen" (automatic special needs assist) then!

  14. Germans are Right by labnet · · Score: 2

    Having driven a Tesla S for a week, I found the autopilot dangerous and stopped using it.
    If your lighting is good, and you lane markings are good, it works OK; but other wise all you hear is a little bong and your on your own.

    The trouble with autopilot is you still need to 100% concentrate as it could give up at any moment or come across a condition it doesn't understand, but the feature lends you to taking 100% of your concentration off the task of driving.
    They should limit it to adaptive cruise control, e-braking, but not steering.

    --
    46137
    1. Re:Germans are Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but other wise all you hear is a little bong and your on your own.

      I had wondered how the "smooth trade-off" worked. Now I have no doubt that any time Musk and his marketers insist that a vehicle was not on auto-pilot "at the time of the crash", it really means the auto-pilot turned off when a crash was unavoidable.

    2. Re:Germans are Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think we need to bring back Model T controls. Manual engine timing adjustments as you are driving, brakes that might work, etc... This will help make more attentive drivers.

    3. Re:Germans are Right by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      People have said these get used in snow storms in Norway! How the heck do they use them in snow if it needs lane markings?

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  15. Better name by stackOVFL · · Score: 1

    Auto crash.

  16. Re: Proof that autonomous cars don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only option, I'm afraid, is Fireball.

  17. Re: Automatische besonderen Bedürfnissen helf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I don't think it has the same colequal meaning as it does in english. "Besserwisser" (know-it-all) or something similar comes to mind as a better translation for "back seat driver".

    Knowing Germans I think the correct translation for "back seat driver" is Fußgänger (pedestrian). If you want to insult a German, talk shit about their car, driving or mother - in that order.

    Perhaps "automatische besonderen Bedürfnissen helfen" (automatic special needs assist) then!

    What's German for "You mama's driving is so bad the German Transport Minister asked to stop advertising her as the 'driver'".?

  18. Re:Proof that autonomous cars don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The same German government that tried to claim their auto driving system was safe back in the late 90's and tried and failed to sell it to the US. Yeah...

  19. Re: Automatische besonderen Bedürfnissen helf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps "automatische besonderen Bedürfnissen helfen" (automatic special needs assist) then!

    Thats broken German. A better translation is "automatischer Assistent für besondere Bedürfnisse".

    What's German for "You mama's driving is so bad the German Transport Minister asked to stop advertising her as the 'driver'".?

    Deine Mama fährt so schlecht, dass der deutsche Verkehrsminister darum gebeten hat aufzuhören sie als der "Fahrer" zu bewerben.
    But Yo Mama jokes in German usually use Mutter instead Mama and there it is pronounced more like Mudder to give it a ghetto touch.

  20. Re: Auto automatische Rücksitz Schwiegermutte by houghi · · Score: 1

    "Rechts is frei" sind die letzeten Woerter des Beifahrers. (Sorry for the errors)
    This means 'No traffic from the right' are the last words from the person sitting next to the driver. (Traffic from the right has right of way).
    So I would go for "Automatishe beifahrende Swiegermutter"

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  21. Ban "automobile" too by Framboise · · Score: 1

    To be fair the misleading word "automobile" should be banned as well.

    1. Re:Ban "automobile" too by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      Ipsomobile! Autokinete!

    2. Re:Ban "automobile" too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Automobile" means "self moving". That is, it provides its own propulsion. So, not it's not misleading at all.

  22. let's get even simpler! by khallow · · Score: 1

    The much simpler solution is for Tesla to change the name.

    An even simpler solution is to not care in the first place either by you or the German government. That seems to fix the problem quite nicely when you do that.

    1. Re: let's get even simpler! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The really simple solution is that Tesla not allow their cars out in public. If they don't sell the cars, or allow anyone to use them, then they don't have to worry about a single thing!

      Alternatively, they can just stay out of Germany.

    2. Re: let's get even simpler! by khallow · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I still think it's even simply for you and Germany to just not care. The complaint doesn't even seem to be that it is false advertising, but rather that it gives dumb people the wrong impression. So how much should we compromise your life because there are dumb people in the world?

    3. Re: let's get even simpler! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, how much does use of a different word in their advertising in Germany rate in terms of impact to me? I think it's pretty low. Like about 1/1000 the level of how plastic bags are suffocation hazards, but even cheaper since they won't need to print something special.

      I'll pay that price on the off-chance one single driver won't hit somebody I care about because of it. Or my mailbox.

    4. Re: let's get even simpler! by khallow · · Score: 1

      Hmm, how much does use of a different word in their advertising in Germany rate in terms of impact to me?

      Stupid people might take that the wrong way and think it's ok to mug you simply because it's not much impact to them what happens to you. So I think I should have the power to stop you from saying that. For your own good.

      And funny how you have yet to give a reason for why Tesla should change that name.

    5. Re: let's get even simpler! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The KBA's reason was already stated, if you can't even bother to read the article, at least read the summary. Or the title of the article.

      It's right there: "Germany Tells Tesla To Not Advertise Autopilot Feature, Fears Drivers Will Become Less Attentive"

    6. Re: let's get even simpler! by khallow · · Score: 1

      So? What does advertising have to do with less attentive drivers? You're still missing a huge cause and effect thing here.

    7. Re: let's get even simpler! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's right there in the article. I'm not missing it, you are.

    8. Re: let's get even simpler! by khallow · · Score: 1

      It's right there in the article. I'm not missing it, you are.

      No, it's not. It's a lazy ass assertion by a bureaucrat. Let's reason this out. Does removing the advertising or changing the branding label remove the feature from the vehicle? No, it doesn't. So the driver can still use the feature to be as inattentive as they can get away with.

      There is no credible reason to removing the advertising or changing the name from "autopilot". It's not misleading or false advertising. It doesn't change driver behavior. Thus, it turns out to be completely irrelevant to the actual problem such as it is.

    9. Re: let's get even simpler! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is. There's a difference between "I am not persuaded by the reason given" and "there is no reason given" so I suggest you learn to express yourself better.

      Because you see, if you had expressed yourself in a more accurate manner, I would have been able to address you better myself. Thus demonstrating, by your own inadvertent act, the appropriateness of the KBA's position.

      Thank you for providing an example. I appreciate it. Now you can learn from your own mistake.

  23. automatic lane changing and Autobahn by k2r · · Score: 1

    We don't have a general speed limit on German highways, the speed driven in the leftmost lane frequently exceeds 120mph by a lot, so the differential speed between cars in different lanes can be quite high. While you are driving 80mph (130kmph) in the middle lane a car will pass you at 130mph (210kmph).
    This only works because one of the rules on the Autobahn is that - except from a few circumstances - you are supposed NOT to overtake on the right. The lane on the right of you is always slower than your lane.

    So I'm wondering
    - does the autosteer-feature of tesla obey this rule or will it pass by a slower car on the right
    - when auto-changing lanes to the left, what is the maximum speed difference the Tesla checks for (i.e. how far back does its radar / camera-system check whether a car is approaching).

    1. Re:automatic lane changing and Autobahn by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      what a crazy transit rule! This may cause more acidents than anything like "autopilot"!)

    2. Re:automatic lane changing and Autobahn by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      what a crazy transit rule! This may cause more acidents than anything like "autopilot"!)

      He forgot to mention that in Germany you can lose your license for failing to yield the passing lane on the autobahn.

      In theory, you can be ticketed for it here in the USA, but in practice that never happens because the cops don't give a shit about road safety. It's all revenue generation to them.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re: automatic lane changing and Autobahn by k2r · · Score: 1

      It seems my explanation made it appear a little more complicated than it is.
      While we're at it, let me quickly explain to you the offside rule in football: ...

  24. Thin foil hat mode ON by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    Can be VW or Mercedes related to it, to preserve marketshare (avoiding a competitor to make some kind of ADs)? "Corporate America" on Germany, you know... /Thin foil hat mode OFF

  25. Re: Proof that autonomous cars don't work by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    I'm grandmaster in car crash hidden (a Tesla certification(TM))

  26. Re:Proof that autonomous cars don't work by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    interesting. Tell us more about it please

  27. "Auto Pilot" + Autobahn speed = Bad Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is one thing to rely on an enhanced driver assistance system at relatively slow speeds, e.g. up to 65 mph. It is a completely different story to rely on autonomous features at speeds beyond that. Speeds upwards of 150 mph are not uncommon on the Autobahn. They could, of course, rename the feature to "Selbstmordassistent" or "Totengraeberhilfsfunktion" in German models.