Share this page!

E.W. Niedermeyer Profile picture
Twitter logo
13 Oct, 8 tweets, 3 min read
The ticking from Tesla's regulatory risk time bomb just got a little louder, as NHTSA sends a letter asking why an update to Autopilot related to emergency vehicle detection (the subject of an investigation) wasn't made as a recall. Read the whole thing 👇 static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2021/I…
This isn't just a reckoning for Autopilot, which NHTSA seems increasingly likely to recall due to the risk of foreseeable misuse, it's a reckoning for Tesla's entire approach to safety regulation compliance. Some context 👇

dailykanban.com/2016/06/08/tes…

newcartographer.com/combustion/tes…
Fans may praise Tesla's over-the-air update capability, but the reality is that Tesla routinely uses it to avoid recall reporting requirements and conduct "stealth recalls." That is effectively what the regulator has just accused Tesla of doing: performing a stealth recall.
Meanwhile, NHTSA continues to send signs that it will fight fire with fire, not just holding Tesla accountable for trying to stealth recall Autopilot in the teeth of an investigation but also using its leverage to expand its probe into Tesla's "Full Self-Driving Beta" testing.
Typically when NHTSA has its claws this deep in an automaker with Tesla's scofflaw record, there's an effort to settle. Instead, Tesla has been fighting. Given NHTSA's ability (and now, its willingness) to make an OEM's life hell, what Tesla does next will be extremely impactful.
Tesla has zero leverage here, it's fighting simply because it has so much to lose if Autopilot and FSD become subject to major, involuntary recalls. But resisting the agency doesn't have a great track record, in fact it typically makes things worse. Don't underestimate the risks!
One last point that I missed on my first read-through: NHTSA is also going after the other mainstay of Tesla's regulatory evasion (along with OTA updates), namely non disclosure agreements. One of my big early stories, linked above, relates to this tactic.
NHTSA's letter communicating its special order to Tesla re: "FSD Beta" nondisclosure agreements can be found here static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2021/I…

This letter is separate from the information request letter linked at the top of this thread, but both are dated October 12.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with E.W. Niedermeyer

E.W. Niedermeyer Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Tweetermeyer

E.W. Niedermeyer Profile picture
13 Oct
If a firm's profits are underwritten by systematic evasion of environmental and safety regulations, a runaway "Full Self-Driving" scam, deposits on vaporware vehicles and a massive list of unfunded obligations, you need to be analyzing it as a criminal enterprise, not a business.
If you like Tesla's products, think it has a sustainable business, whatever, that's fine. I won't quarrel with any of those views. But the current leadership has made it clear that it operates the company as an unapologetic criminal enterprise, more or less top to bottom.
Tesla's fundamentally criminal attitudes and actions have revealed deep weaknesses in America's regulatory regimes, which aren't easy to fix. But if the systems has been working, and one player's amorality is all that has broken it, maybe the system isn't the problem... nahmean?
Read 7 tweets
E.W. Niedermeyer Profile picture
12 Oct
Being anti-autonomous vehicle is like being anti-robot.

When you imagine a car, we're all imagining more or less the same thing. When you imagine a robot, you could literally be imagining anything. A robot takes its form from the problem it's solving. Same with AVs.
If you like cars and want to perpetuate their monoculture, sure, think of AVs as self-driving cars.

But if you don't, don't let a lack of imagination lead you to default into thinking of AVs as self-driving cars. That's as lazy as thinking of robots as all being humanoid.
The idea of "cars" has been so hammered into our brains by a century of marketing and ubiquity, that our imaginations have been shackled. We can imagine cars that are electric or self-driving, but we struggle to imagine a future that isn't a monoculture. Where mobility is diverse
Read 4 tweets
E.W. Niedermeyer Profile picture
28 Sep
First of all, this gross utilitarianism (people will die but it will be worth it) has no place in the development of complex, safety-critical systems. If you aren't principled about safety, you won't get it. Just ask Uber ATG... oh wait, they don't exist anymore!
Uber ATG bought into this utilitarian logic, it cut corners on safety in the development process, and it killed an innocent human being. What it never saw was the implicit payoff: a technical advantage arising from its embrace of these deaths as inevitable and worth it.
Today, Uber ATG no longer exists. There are lots of lessons to be learned from their experience, but the most important part is that rushing and cutting corners on safety only causes innocent deaths and delivers no advantages: thedrive.com/tech/27023/10-…
Read 9 tweets
E.W. Niedermeyer Profile picture
28 Sep
Rivian embargo just hit, brace yourselves people
(turns out it's good)
I'd like to take this moment to say: these reviews affirm my impression, first formed long ago, that Rivian has cultivated an effective blend of traditional automotive values and high-tech startup culture. Much remains to be proven, but a very promising, balanced blend so far.
Read 4 tweets
E.W. Niedermeyer Profile picture
28 Sep
Fanboys be like "Tesla is such a leader in AV tech that the industry is banding together to take them down."

No fool, the AV industry is coming together to differentiate their shared technology and safety practices from this janky mess. Open your eyes.
Every time one of these half-baked camera-only nightmares crashes, taking out emergency responders or innocent bystanders, someone somewhere decides they will never get in an autonomous vehicle (which Teslas are not). Tesla is a menace to public adoption of this life-saving tech.
Blurring the line between driver assistance and autonomy (#autonowashing) not only leads to misuse of Autopilot and more crashes, but it also leads to misreporting of said crash as being by an "autonomous vehicle"... which leads to lower trust in a technology Tesla doesn't have.
Read 4 tweets
E.W. Niedermeyer Profile picture
27 Sep
Academics: unscrupulous ADS developers will use unsuspecting humans as a "moral crumple zone" to protect their imperfect systems from the moral consequences of inevitable failure

Unsuspecting humans: Image
The only thing @m_c_elish didn't predict in this mess was that toxic social media-fueled consumerism would make serving as a "moral crumple zone" a status symbol papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
"How is this different than what AV developers are doing?"

There is a fundamental difference between using highly-trained professionals as safety operators and pushing dangerously immature ADS software to any clout-chasing rando gullible enough to pay for the pleasure.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @Tweetermeyer has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @Tweetermeyer!

Read all threads by @Tweetermeyer

:(