WSJ: Tesla Faces Expanded U.S. Probe Over Self-Driving Performance in Poor Weather

[Rivianready]

Looks like Tesla's big bet on cameras only and no lidar/radar is coming under scrutiny. Enormous strategic blunder?

https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/...6?st=iyFMxU&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Sponsored

 

[Great Gatsby]

I feel like this comes up every now and then and then nothing comes off it. Feel how you want about Tesla, they are paving the way for autonomous driving. Smart of Rivian to watch how things unfold for Tesla from a regulation standpoint while still planning their own path. A wait and see approach is probably the best bet here though I wouldn't be shocked if things just continue business as usual for Tesla.

I know it's not the place to defend Tesla but I don't know how much clearer they can be about needing to pay attention while using FSD. Not Elon, but the vehicle and Tesla themselves. It does nag you a decent amount if your eyes wonder too much off the road and has constant reminders that this is "supervised" and not fully autonomous.

 

[Ralph]

I feel like this comes up every now and then and then nothing comes off it. Feel how you want about Tesla, they are paving the way for autonomous driving. Smart of Rivian to watch how things unfold for Tesla from a regulation standpoint while still planning their own path. A wait and see approach is probably the best bet here though I wouldn't be shocked if things just continue business as usual for Tesla.

I know it's not the place to defend Tesla but I don't know how much clearer they can be about needing to pay attention while using FSD. Not Elon, but the vehicle and Tesla themselves. It does nag you a decent amount if your eyes wonder too much off the road and has constant reminders that this is "supervised" and not fully autonomous.

Tesla's marketing dept, CEO and paid for social media posts regarding Robotaxi and FSD capability confuse the issue greatly. Saying different things in different contexts is not effective communication. No matter what appears on the vehicle screen.

 

[Great Gatsby]

Tesla's marketing dept, CEO and paid for social media posts regarding Robotaxi and FSD capability confuse the issue greatly. Saying different things in different contexts is not effective communication. No matter what appears on the vehicle screen.

That is a different conversation. I wasn't defending the communication, just the product. Tesla can (and has) been sued for misleading claims on FSD. The article speaks to investigations regarding FSD's ability to handle certain situations and not alerting the driver on time. As for that specific regard, I'd argue the vehicle itself does make it very clear you have to pay attention. Not sure what else can be enforced by the NHTSA from what the current product offers now. More nagging? Enforcing Tesla to use LIDAR?

 

[Ralph]

That is a different conversation. I wasn't defending the communication, just the product. Tesla can (and has) been sued for misleading claims on FSD. The article speaks to investigations regarding FSD's ability to handle certain situations and not alerting the driver on time. As for that specific regard, I'd argue the vehicle itself does make it very clear you have to pay attention. Not sure what else can be enforced by the NHTSA from what the current product offers now. More nagging? Enforcing Tesla to use LIDAR?

Same conversation.

You said, ".....but I don't know how much clearer they can be about needing to pay attention while using FSD."

Hence my response. I'll say again, no matter what the screen in the vehicle says if brand ambassadors and company employees (CEO, etc.) are permitted to sell the idea that the system can "drive itself" there is a problem. Tesla is marketing Robo Taxis and has strongly implied that the software/hardware stack is the same as one of their current vehicles (M3?).

The marketing of the concept that the vehicles can drive themselves has been successful. As evidenced by people on this (non Tesla) forum where people have described FSD/Supervised as a system that is fully capable of driving you from point A to B.

And it can...... except when it cannot.....

 

[Great Gatsby]

Same conversation.

You said, ".....but I don't know how much clearer they can be about needing to pay attention while using FSD."

Hence my response. I'll say again, no matter what the screen in the vehicle says if brand ambassadors and company employees (CEO, etc.) are permitted to sell the idea that the system can "drive itself" there is a problem. Tesla is marketing Robo Taxis and has strongly implied that the software/hardware stack is the same as one of their current vehicles (M3?).

The marketing of the concept that the vehicles can drive themselves has been successful. As evidenced by people on this (non Tesla) forum where people have described FSD/Supervised as a system that is fully capable of driving you from point A to B.

And it can...... except when it cannot.....

So your action item for the NHTSA is to tell Tesla to update their language on FSD and reel it back on the marketing? I'm genuinely asking to keep it constructive to the topic at hand. What would your suggestions be?

 

[mkg3]

The Investigation is for 9 accidents with a single fatality.

"The regulator said Tesla's degradation detection system, both before and after an update, has failed to detect or warn the driver appropriately under degraded visibility conditions such as glare and airborne obscurants.

The agency has identified nine crashes linked to the issue, including one fatal incident, and said additional crashes in similar conditions were found where drivers were not given enough time to respond."

 

[Ralph]

So your action item for the NHTSA is to tell Tesla to update their language on FSD and reel it back on the marketing? I'm genuinely asking to keep it constructive to the topic at hand. What would your suggestions be?

Glad you asked for what I would do. I would first stop the continued sale of FSD until Tesla was fully prepared to deliver data required to analyze safety in real time. The "we are not a car company, but a "AI, robotics, autonomy company" should be able to deliver data quickly.

As they have refused to do so, I would add the requirement that prior to (re)implementation, Tesla provide NHTSA query tools to survey the entirety of the data set. I would include Rivian and all other autonomous providers in this requirement.

That's just me. I would LOVE to enjoy the benefits of fully autonomous vehicles and fully expect to do so. But if we are to have confidence in the claim "safer than a human" we need to have transparency to the data.

 

[Zorg]

Good article on the dangers of great level 2 ADAS

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/04/self-driving-car-technology-tesla-crash/686054/

 

[zefram47]

As much I may personally not care for Tesla's methods, I was quite impressed with their ADAS abilities on a snowy/ice surface in the Out of Spec testing at the track recently. That doesn't say anything about how it would perform as visibility decreases with actual snow falling, but when I learned how to drive you weren't supposed to use cruise control in rain or snow, etc, for obvious reasons. While I still think it's not a great idea, AWD and more advanced traction/stability control enabled through electric drivetrains and modern sensor suites for ADAS make it far safer than it used to be. Tesla's capabilities on the slick track were better than what the average driver could've done.

 

[Rivianready]

Good article on the dangers of great level 2 ADAS

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/04/self-driving-car-technology-tesla-crash/686054/

Thanks for sharing. This article addresses some interesting legal issues. We are really in no man’s land at this point.

The link provided is a paywall. Here’s a a link in the Apple News App that more people may have access to…

https://apple.news/AykjhXt55TY--WwKtM-PdzA

 

[Donald Stanfield]

This issue is long overdue. It is past the time when the government needs to get off their lazy asses and start putting forth some regulations on this technology. Every licensed driver has had to demonstrate competency to a regulatory body before being permitted to drive on the public roadway. At a bare minimum, autonomous systems should be required to do the same.

They have hidden behind the loophole of "well we told people to pay attention". Either the system is capable of driving itself or it isn't, or it isn't in all conditions and should be limited in the ones where it is not. With how these systems aggregate data, it should be a trivial matter to prove whether or not these systems are safe to operate on public roadways.

 

[Rivianready]

This issue is long overdue. It is past the time when the government needs to get off their lazy asses and start putting forth some regulations on this technology. Every licensed driver has had to demonstrate competency to a regulatory body before being permitted to drive on the public roadway. At a bare minimum, autonomous systems should be required to do the same.

They have hidden behind the loophole of "well we told people to pay attention". Either the system is capable of driving itself or it isn't, or it isn't in all conditions and should be limited in the ones where it is not. With how these systems aggregate data, it should be a trivial matter to prove whether or not these systems are safe to operate on public roadways.

100% agree.

 

[R1T Beast]

Curious:

1: Would LIDAR vastly improve self driving in Tesla vehicles..??

2: If so, Tesla would not willingly add LIDAR in all of its previously equipped self driving vehicles, unless it were compelled..??

Sponsored