The industrial led to a surge of news articles and criticism of Tesla’s software program, which is being examined in an early-release model by greater than 100,000 customers on public streets in international locations together with the United States and Canada. It additionally triggered blowback from Tesla supporters who mentioned the check might have been manipulated. Some of them sought to re-create the demonstrations — typically involving actual kids — in an effort to point out that Tesla’s software program does truly work.
The forwards and backwards is the most recent escalation in an ongoing spat between Tesla’s vocal fan neighborhood and critics of its driver-assistance software program.
The man behind the Dawn Project, tech founder and billionaire Dan O’Dowd, has develop into an unlikely and controversial chief of the latter group. He runs Green Hills Software, which makes working methods for airplanes and cars, doubtlessly making him a competitor available in the market for automobile software program. He additionally ran for the U.S. Senate this yr, and broadcast his movies on TV and on-line as marketing campaign adverts. (One such ad options reporting from The Washington Post, which was not concerned.)
O’Dowd says his motivation for going after Tesla is a conviction that the tech, like many different items of software program that individuals depend on within the fashionable world, isn’t secure sufficient and must be redesigned — and on this case must be banned.
“We have been busy hooking up and putting computers in charge of the things that millions of people’s lives depend on: self-driving cars is one of those,” O’Dowd mentioned.
“Full Self-Driving” Beta remains to be in improvement and is usually utilized by accredited drivers who’ve certified after a security screening or have in any other case been granted entry. A $12,000 software program improve makes automobiles succesful of receiving it — although the value is soon to go up. Tesla doesn’t declare the software program is autonomous, and the system requires the motive force to be alert always — issuing escalating warnings if a driver isn’t paying consideration earlier than turning off the options.
Tesla has pointed to the power of applied sciences like its Autopilot driver-assistance system to “reduce the frequency and severity of traffic crashes and save thousands of lives each year.” Musk has said Autopilot is “unequivocally safer” than regular driving.
Musk and Tesla didn’t instantly reply to a request for remark.
Regulatory and police companies have urged users not to involve children in tests or attempt to simulate safety demonstrations, which are conducted under strict, tightly controlled sets of conditions.
That did not stop one Tesla superfan from conducting a test involving a child in an attempt to prove that “Full Self-Driving” Beta is safe, after the parent agreed to sit behind the wheel for the demo. The vehicle in the video slowly approached both a child-sized mannequin and a real child, and both times slowed down and stopped. YouTube took down the video after it was flagged to the site by CNBC, the outlet reported.
The cease-and-desist letter from Tesla leaned on an investigation by the news website Electrek, which alleged Tesla’s “Full Self-Driving” Beta “never engaged” during the Dawn Project’s test using mannequins. Aspects of the report have since come into question, after the Dawn Project pointed to raw data and other information indicating Full Self-Driving was activated during the demonstrations.
“The purported tests misuse and misrepresent the capabilities of Tesla’s technology, and disregard widely recognized testing performed by independent agencies as well as the experiences shared by our customers,” Tesla deputy general counsel Dinna Eskin wrote in the letter dated Aug. 11, the day after the Electrek article.
The letter demands the campaign immediately remove the videos and accused the group of “unsafe and improper use” of FSD Beta. “Your actions actually put consumers at risk,” Tesla alleged.
Cease-and-desist orders sometimes precede a lawsuit, but can also be used to convince an opponent to back down under the threat of legal action.
O’Dowd dismissed the order.
“This letter is so pathetic in terms of whining: Mr. Free Speech Absolutist, just a crybaby hiding behind his lawyers,” O’Dowd said in an interview. (Musk has said he supports free speech and welcomes criticism.)
O’Dowd said he did not intend to take down the video commercial, and instead pledged more money into the effort.