> my entire point is I trust the incentives of the insurer to accurately price risk and determine at fault more than a publication that needs clicks

Fair enough. I agree with you in the long run. I just don't think we've seen the litigation that will define liability play out yet.

> Does the data from Tesla even come into play for an insurer?

Directly? No. At least, not unless AI actuaries make the work worth the while.

For juries calculating damages? Plaintiffs weighing whether to bring a case? Sure. That, in turn, plays into liability. And that is something insurers care about.

> In the meantime, a collision with a Tesla is the same as any other auto brand’s

In the meantime, yes. If collisions with Teslas predictably result in larger damages than with other brands, you'd expect to see more litigation when a Tesla is involved/suspected at fault, and with that, higher costs.

> No auto brand picks up the liability for the driver

Tesla has been assigned liability already [1].

[1] https://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2025/08/jury-awards-24...