Obviously "self-driving" screwed up here, but crossing the freeway at 2:30AM is pretty suicidal when you're not 71 years old. A competent robot may be able to react to obstacles at that speed (70MPH/ 110kph), but humans can't.

Sounds like the real killer was lack of pedestrian infrastructure.

The car was in Full Self Driving mode,

which requires constant driver supervision and isn’t technically considered capable of driving on its own

The authorities just let them get away with these lies that kill people.

At a bare minimum there should be a requirement for redundant systems, Tesla in a cost cutting measure got rid of LiDar and only uses cameras. It's pretty well documented how cameras can be fooled but they of course did it anyway.

It's not like a certain oligarch or the share holder class values human life I guess

Reading those details, I'm honestly not entirely convinced that it wasn't suicide.

I might be a little biased, though, because I used to work 911 and stepping in front of a vehicle on the highway is a method of suicide that others might not think of.

if only the Tesla had had even brighter headlights to see him!

I disagree with your statement that humans can't. I can see just fine at highway speeds at night with my halogen headlights, a fucking Tesla with laser beams can definitely see fine. especially on what I presume is an otherwise empty road (given time of night).

unless the guy ran across like a deer, it's pretty goddamn easy to just drift left and avoid someone at walking speed. I've done the manoeuvre many times for animals, garbage, etc

That really depends on the distance between the vehicle and the pedestrian at the time the pedestrian enters the highway.

The CHP said it reviewed dashcam footage of the crash showing the Tesla traveling around 70 miles per hour when the pedestrian walked onto the freeway from the right shoulder.

It also showed the “Tesla’s brakes being applied as the vehicle steered to the left in an effort to avoid the pedestrian,” it said in a statement on social media, as quoted by ABC 7. “Despite these evasive actions, the right front portion of the Tesla struck the individual.”

Sounds like the car did react just not fast enough. This is a tough one and likely sensationalized because of the brand of car.

I've been in similar scenarios when driving through rougher parts of town with people casually wandering into the roads at night, presumably on some kind of drugs. Even at slower speeds it's been a few close calls. Physics only allows me to stop so fast if someone steps out in front of me. Of course reaction time plays a role too.

Point is I'm not sure this could have been avoided by a human driver either. Depends on very exact specifics that have not been provided.

"Man dies".. no "Car killed a man"

I wonder how often people walk onto a highway in front of an oncoming vehicle. I've heard it's relatively common, but this is the first time i've ever seen one actually reported. I wonder why that is.

Then people would complain about the headlights shining into their face.

so my assumption is that, being a highway, the shoulder is about six feet wide, there are multiple lanes, and there is great visibility of the ditch next to the highway (that headlights do light up). that's what a highway is around here

in that case, walking speed is more than enough time to react, assuming you're actually paying attention while driving and looking ahead.

but that's my point? Tesla headlights are blindingly bright already

The war against the machines (Terminator)

I don't think those are reasonable assumptions. In some places, yes.

It is not legally required but is general policy for news outlets not to highlight suicide as the cause of death because it has been found that stories about suicide being in the news leads to an short-term increase in suicides. Or at least, that's what I have been told and read.

Anyway, I don't think it's common, but I know it's not rare. I don't think statistics are kept on it.

Worse, in the US it's

Man kills himself by car

Best way to commit murder in the US is from a car.

Oh, I was ambiguous in my wording. What I meant was "I wonder why that is that they're reporting on this instance when they normally don't report on these stories. What is it about this story that makes it worth ignoring the normal taboo?"

And the obvious answer that I was implying is simply that it's because it makes Tesla look bad.

I'm no fan of Elon Musk, to say the least, but I think this article is one of the worst examples of irresponsible journalism that I've seen.

They're publicizing a likely suicide, the reporting of which, like you say, can cause bad outcomes, in order to attack Tesla in the clickbait headline, despite the body saying that the car tried to swerve and avoid the man, which probably makes it better than most human drivers in that situation.

Edit: Actually, going back and rereading my comment, I wasn't simply ambiguous. Your way of reading is really the natural way of reading, since I used the phrase "I wonder" specifically for the meaning you thought, and then used "I wonder" again supposedly questioning something completely different a couple of sentences later. Terrible writing from me.

Number one is car, followed by veing white and shooting somekne in the face.

Any liability here or are these all acts of God?

sorry, I should have included that the article calls out "freeway", which means restricted access

I think it's a pretty fair assumption for a major freeway in the US