So, we have to ignore the entire safety record for the entire technology just because one operator has failed to follow the instructions?
This is especially the case for something that was in its infancy back in 2019 when this crash happened.
And you know what we have in 2025 because of those restrictions being enforced since then?
In 2025, Tesla's nag drivers so much, for not paying attention to the road, that drivers no longer keep the much safer versions of autopilot engaged at all, when looking for their phones.
Instead, now, because the issue is "fixed", Tesla drivers simply do the same thing what drivers of any other car do in the situation.
They disable autopilot first, and only then stop paying attention to the road, looking for their phone.
How's that safer?
We're precisely less safe because of these regulatory requirements.
(And, add insult to injury, this court is now using the hindsight 20/20, of these warnings subsequently being implemented, as evidence of Tesla's wrongdoing in 2019, at a time before anything like that was thought to be possible? Even though, now that these warnings were implemented, we already have evidence that these nags themselves make everybody less safe, since autopilot is simply turned off when you need to stop paying attention to the road?)
What safety record are we ignoring? Can you please cite some scientifically rigorous and statistically sound data, evidence, and analysis?
Or are you talking about self-published numbers by the company that is proven to withhold, lie, and misdirect in even official police investigations, subpoenas, and trials where it is actively illegal to do so?
Are we talking numbers with a degree of scientific rigor unfit for publication in a middle school science fair, let alone the minimum standard of scientifically rigorous that members of their team had to achieve to get their degrees, yet somehow fail to do when detailing systems that are literally responsible for the life and death of humans?
So where's your unbiased data then?
Where's your data that these nags make everyone safer, when it's widely known that they simply result in people turning off the entire autopilot/FSD when the operator needs to stop paying attention to the road, to avoid the nags and the penalty strikes?
Where's all the news reports about the crashes without the autopilot engaged? If they were as rare as the autopilot ones, surely we'd have seen some of them covered by the media, right? Or are they so rare that not a single one has happened yet, hence, the lack of any reports being available?
You are the one claiming it has a “safety record”.
You are the one claiming “We're precisely less safe because of these regulatory requirements.”
Support your assertion with scientifically rigorous, statistically sound evidence.
And no, your ignorance of safety problems is not evidence of safety despite your attempts to argue as such. That was not a valid argument when the cigarette companies made it and it is not valid now.