Brake overrides the accelerator. If the driver depresses the brake and an object depresses the accelerator the brake would have stopped the car.

What if the Tesla was on a conveyor belt and accelerating in opposing direction as conveyor? Would it still move?

lol.

I think we've reached this stage of this thread:

Maybe it was


Teslas are more prone to Alien interference than all other brands of vehicles.

That only works if the occupant presses the brake.

Should the driver have pressed the brake if that did happen?

You're eager to scapegoat the software by any means necessary and ignoring the obvious case that the driver did not do what they were supposed to do. There is no claim that an object depressed the accelerator (and if it had it would not be the fault of FSD).

Reality is absent driver intervention no accident would have occurred. You're arguing a driver so bumfuddling stupid that he couldn't discern the pedal he was pushing was making him go faster should have had more, not less, input in the operation of the car.


And again, the over regulatory Europeans are saying FSD reduces crashes and your argument is it should be removed from the road. If there were any chance it was causing increased crashes the Europeans would be the last to approve it. They tested it, looked at the data and determined it is safer, they are now gathering more data from actual users and again have determined it is a net improvement in safety.

fixer said:

---

What if the Tesla was on a conveyor belt and accelerating in opposing direction as conveyor? Would it still move?

lol.

---

If the conveyor belt velocity is constant and the Tesla is accelerating, the Tesla would move.

The Tesla that Elon shot into space - how are you going to recharge that battery? Also, the wheels have no friction in a vacuum.

More Tesla design flaws.

It's ridiculous to give up control of a vehicle to a machine that throws control back to an out-of-the-loop occupant when it gets confused and blindly obeys any unconscious occupant input.

Data does not agree with you.

TexasRebel said:

---

It's ridiculous to give up control of a vehicle to a machine that throws control back to an out-of-the-loop occupant when it gets confused and blindly obeys any unconscious occupant input.

---

I don't think ICE vehicles or any machine handles an "out of the loop occupant" or an "unconscious occupant" very well.

Yep. They stay in one place and don't run through houses.

Driver crashes car into several Woodbury townhomes, causes large gas leak

3 hurt when car crashes into North Long Beach home

Car crashes into Omaha home, no one hurt

Former police vehicle crashes into Chester home; 7 inside escape injury

Car crashes into real estate building, Knoxville police say


Just the last 24 hours.

GeorgiAg said:

---

The Tesla that Elon shot into space - how are you going to recharge that battery? Also, the wheels have no friction in a vacuum.

More Tesla design flaws.

---

Wheel bearings should last forever though

Which one of those thought the car was in charge?

Was the driver of the Tesla under that impression? The giant red warning on the screen indicated otherwise. The constant reminders when not paying attention to the road would have suggested otherwise.

FSD demonstrated reduction in accidents over 10 billion miles.
Alcohol demonstrates increased rates of accidents over billions of miles.

You defend the consumption of alcohol beyond legal limits and criticize FSD as unsafe. Total backwards logic.

No, I defend people that arrive at their destination without incident.

Even though they have a demonstrably lower chance of doing that. While criticizing FSD as being unsafe while having a demonstrably better chance of doing that. Ban FSD, allow drunk driving if nothing bad happens. That's your standpoint.

When did I say ban FSD?

I just don't want to be part of the beta test.

Make it work, then release it.

TexasRebel said:

---

It's ridiculous to give up control of a vehicle to a machine that throws control back to an out-of-the-loop occupant when it gets confused and blindly obeys any unconscious occupant input.

---

The autopilot in this case wasn't confused. It performed exactly as designed and warned the driver with ample time to stop.

TexasRebel said:

---

When did I say ban FSD?

I just don't want to be part of the beta test.

Make it work, then release it.

---

You said a few pages back that adaptive cruise should also be banned.

TexasRebel said:

---

Which one of those thought the car was in charge?

---

In autopilot the car is never in charge and Tesla has made it clear that it isn't.

I don't want to be part of a drunk driving test to see if a drunk can make it home without crashing. Difference is my scenario of allowance, FSD, has a demonstrable improvement to safety while your scenario of allowance, drunk driving, has a demonstrable reduction in safety.

"Ban it until it works." Is a moving target. What is works? From my perspective if it is additive to safety it works. What's your standard? No errors ever?

This grandmother risked her life using FSD in a heavy rainstorm during a 200 mile drive in FL. The horror.

Quote:

---

My 87 year old grandma used FSD to get her home during a heavy rainstorm from Jacksonville FL to Tampa FL.

204 miles no disengagements.

She would not have been able to make this drive in these conditions without FSD.

---

My 87 year old grandma used FSD to get her home during a heavy rainstorm from Jacksonville FL to Tampa FL.

204 miles no disengagements.

She would not have been able to make this drive in these conditions without FSD. pic.twitter.com/w4CgHz7DaT

— Vad3r (@vad3rt3sla) June 23, 2026

OMG, Finland is about to greenlight this death trap too... WTF are they thinking.

This **** leads to complacency when driving which causes drivers to stomp on the gas peddle and not let up.

Notice it says it makes safer, faster decisions than a human but not better than a human. Thank goodness they did not say better!

Quote:

---

"The system is considered to have significant potential to reduce accidents caused by human factors and to make traffic flow more smoothly. The system has been observed to often make safer decisions than a human driver, and its response capability in many situations is faster than that of a human. The overall view of the system is positive.

---

Finland may approve @Tesla's FSD earlier than a European Union-wide decision expected in October, the country's transport ​authority said today.

"The system is considered to have significant potential to reduce accidents caused by human factors and to make traffic flow more… pic.twitter.com/hVMZrlchiY

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 23, 2026

This is starting to sound like a flat earther argument. Every logical fact is debated with, "when I run, it is flat" or "I ran a marathon, and I did not feel like I was running on a ball".

This debate cracks me up. You guys are arguing with a flat earther.

I tow some. Not all the time but enough that a pure EV isn't an option until towing range is as good as gas or diesel engines. I am considering exploring the range extending vehicles like the upcoming Ram REV or Scout (it's probably too small a cab), and I've heard Ford intends to make something similar soon as well.
My biggest concern is that I am a miles monger…I put 35k per year on a truck easily and I keep trucks at least until 150-200k miles, preferably longer. I'm just under the 4 yr mark on my current Ram and have 135k on it.

So the range extended concept gets you electric reliability and power/torque with the ability to fill up at any gas station and not have to wait in line for a charger or wait a long time.
I just do have concerns about early models, reliability of the batteries and battery life. If Ram sold the REV with a lifetime warranty on the battery and electric system/drivetrain it would be a no brainer for me.

Until that happens, I will just keep driving V8s

I tow a lot too and still keep a diesel truck for it. EV trucks just aren't there yet and quite frankly they aren't close.

Super Duty, Silverado 2500, and Ram 2500 (medium/heavy duty vehicles) do not get EPA ratings like the light duty half-ton trucks. They will have V8s for a long time since they are exempt from fleet CAFE average calculations.

Teslag said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

When did I say ban FSD?

I just don't want to be part of the beta test.

Make it work, then release it.

---

You said a few pages back that adaptive cruise should also be banned.

---

No, you did. I just don't have a reason to counter.

Teslag said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

Which one of those thought the car was in charge?

---

In autopilot the car is never in charge and Tesla has made it clear that it isn't.

---

Yes. Tesla has been clear that their Full Self Driving car is misleading in that it does not fully drive itself.

Teslag said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

It's ridiculous to give up control of a vehicle to a machine that throws control back to an out-of-the-loop occupant when it gets confused and blindly obeys any unconscious occupant input.

---

The autopilot in this case wasn't confused. It performed exactly as designed and warned the driver with ample time to stop.

---

Now do the other one.

They don't get logic.

Watch a car run itself through someone's grandmother and yet argue it's still safer than someone with any kind of survival instincts.

You are absolutely right. The driver should have opened up the window, jumped out and grabbed grandma at the right moment as to pull her out of the car's way.

Cars are way too dumb and humans needs to always be alert to perform like Ethan Hunt.

Or maybe don't think a car can drive itself?