Not The Onion

22271 readers

375 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

331

Tesla Robotaxi Mows Down Bollards & Keeps Driving, After “Impeccable” Record Touted on Stock Call (fuelarc.com)

submitted 1 day ago by KayLeadfoot@fedia.io to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

61 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I mean, I guess "impeccable safety record" is in the eye of the beholder?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I have no facts but I must scream.

Peak corporate bootlicking.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world -1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Or maybe I can recognize nuance? Not once did I try to say Tesla was not at fault, only that there is no sign of anyone even arguing whether FSD disengaging immediately before a crash shifts blame. It does not, nor can I find any legal, regulatory, or actual news indicating that it ever did.

There are plenty of real issues we should focus on rather than claiming something there is no evidence of

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (2 children)

They clearly state they do that for safety and count it as engaged

Or maybe provide citations and proof of your claim instead of going off strawmanning on a different topic.

As for real issues, yeah we should focus on how we should never trust a for-profit corporation lead by a known liar to supply statistics on their own safety.

https://electrek.co/2026/05/28/tesla-fsd-safety-stats-misleading-reuters-investigation/

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 0 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

By “strawmanning on a different topic.” perhaps you mean sticking to the original topic while you go off strawmanning on a different topic?

Teslas are programmed to turn off autopilot half a second before a crash so statistics can say “autopilot was off at the time of the crash”.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

So OP provided a citation from the NSHTA report on how FSD disengages before a crash which has been in the news a lot when it first was revealed and I provided a journalistist investigation that found Tesla is potentially fudging their statistics with FSD.

Plenty of citations there to make a case.

Your turn to once again provide a citation to back up your case.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world -1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

This whole chain is a response to

Teslas are programmed to turn off autopilot half a second before a crash so statistics can say “autopilot was off at the time of the crash”.

And no one has anything to support that.

Please add a citation to support that before you insist on citations to support disagreeing with an unsupported claim

Note my previous response (accidentally responded to the nhtsa thing in the past with an edit)

Im not disagreeing that FSD can disengage just before a crash, just arguing that I’ve not seen them try to shift blame based on it and I remember reading somewhere that it’s intentional to try to mitigate the aftermath

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Done playing chess with a pigeon and you trying desperately to strawman.

Simply provide your citations for your original argument.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world -1 points 11 hours ago

I do not see anything about your contention there. Perhaps you could support that since my entire point was that is wrong.

And I used stronger language because if you wanted to claim FSD was unsafe you have all these well documented historical issues and do not need to spread the unsubstantiated claim that FSD disengages to shift blame