8. Your legal threat is asinine in any event, so I will go ahead and name some names. Ashok Elluswamy, the current director of Autopilot software, is guilty of manslaughter. In sworn testimony, [1] Ashok Elluswamy on page 70 declared that he was specifically involved in staging the Autopilot demo video to misrepresent the capabilities of Autopilot to customers. This has been relied on by customers as a faithful representation of its abilities and has lead to multiple avoidable deaths. In his sworn testimony he repeatedly declared he had no knowledge of human factors, human factors engineers, or basic safety design concepts. On page 36, he explicitly abdicates responsibility for overall software safety by declaring that he is just a "software engineer" despite being the director of Autopilot software. He is grossly unqualified, made no efforts to retain or listen to safety expertise demanded of his job, and has deliberately deployed incomplete software with known critical defects to the public.

Elon Musk is personally guilty of manslaughter. For the same reasons as above. In addition, Elon Musk was publicly informed that Tesla ADAS would not stop for a school bus with the stop arm extended, as is required by law, in 2022-10 [2]. He was separately informed again in 2023-02 [3]. He took no action to correct the behavior or to recall the Tesla ADAS until the behavior is corrected. On 2023-03-15, a Tesla with ADAS engaged hit a minor exiting a school bus with the stop arm extended [4] causing serious injuries. This is recorded in the NHTSA SGO database [5] as Report ID 13781-5100 which definitively confirms that the ADAS system was operating at the time of collision. Elon Musk was informed that the Tesla ADAS would engage in grossly illegal and reckless behavior and then it did that behavior and caused serious personal harm to a member of the public. He has been separately informed of numerous other life-threatening safety defects and exactly zero corrective action has been taken to mitigate them.

9. Safety critical systems do fail. This is despite great efforts and care taken to rigorously tackle safety problems, the decades of experience in developing high quality safety protocols, and a solemn regard for the challenging task of keeping humans safe. Tesla throws all of this away and tackles problems with a callous disregard for human life and a "ends justify the means" philosophy that is incompatible with safety. Instead of transparency, they deliberately obfuscate their raw data, allow no independent evaluation or auditing, and then publish bogus safety reports like this [6] which include no actionable data at all that are meant to mislead customers into trusting unsafe systems with their lives. They do not even include the count of crashes used or the number of miles driven. They publish a single ratio and call that a safety report. In contrast, Waymo published this safety report [7] at 1,000,000 driverless miles. It exhaustively lists, describes, and analyzes every crash that occurred. It discusses methodology, comparisons, confounding factors, and all the other basic things expected from a real safety report.

Waymo is registered with the CA DMV to do driverless testing [8] and reports all vehicles, mileage, and contact events to the DMV. Tesla is not registered to do driverless testing and has not done any safety driver testing despite claiming their customers are "safety drivers" doing testing. They deliberately misclassify their Full Self Driving, L4, Beta program as a L2 Beta program to avoid mandatory reporting requirements that would reflect badly on them.

10. You can present exactly zero audited evidence that Tesla ADAS saves lives. The only support for that position is the unaudited Tesla marketing statements I pointed to above drawn from private data that Tesla does not allow anyone access to. Unaudited reports by the manufacturer are literally worthless. They have the largest possible conflict of interest to lie or misrepresent the data. All publicly available evidence points to the opposite with Tesla reporting to NHTSA over 700 accidents with no known survivors attributable to FSD in the SGO database over an estimated 350M miles. That is over 150x more deadly than the average human driver.

11. I do not want perfection. I want proven, audited safety statistics, robust safety processes that minimize avoidable deaths and risks and ratchet toward improved safety, and exhaustive safety testing to avoid safety regressions. Tesla provides exactly none of these. I would also like the people making safety-critical systems to have a respect for the humans lives they are putting at risk. Tesla and Elon Musk do not have that either.

In conclusion, your opinions are wrong in every conceivable way. Literally every single statement derived from your beliefs is harmful and detrimental to safety design and has been repudiated by decades of work by actual safety experts making products fit to depend on. And your argumentation style is anti-consumer and anti-social as you seek to burden others with proving your unsupported positions wrong to a ridiculous standard of proof that you yourself are unwilling to attempt and then threaten them in an attempt to cow them.

[1] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23574198-elluswamy-d...

[2] https://dawnproject.com/tests-reveal-that-tesla-fsd-will-dri...

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZiSZbWIrzA

[4] https://www.rflaw.net/howard-gene-yee-hits-10th-grader-halif...

[5] https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/ffdd/sgo-2021-01/SGO-2021-01_In...

[6] https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport

[7] https://storage.googleapis.com/waymo-uploads/files/documents...

[8] https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/vehicle-industry-services/auto...