Tesla sued for wrongful death after fatal crash involving Autopilot

first_imgEnlarge ImageThis is the second lawsuit Tesla has faced this year following a fatal collision with Autopilot active. Nick Miotke/Roadshow Earlier this year, the family of a Tesla Model X owner who was killed in a collision when the car’s Autopilot was engaged filed a lawsuit against the automaker in California state court. Now, the Fremont-based automaker has a second, similar suit to contend with.The family of Jeremy Banner is filing a wrongful death lawsuit against Tesla, asking for damages in excess of $15,000, The Verge reports. According to NBC affiliate WPTV, the lawsuit was announced on Thursday, and it should be filed shortly in Palm Beach County, Florida. A Tesla spokesperson declined to comment.The collision occurred on March 1. Banner’s 2018 Tesla Model 3 was traveling southbound on State Highway 441 in Delray Beach when it struck an eastbound tractor-trailer. The crash ripped the roof off the Model 3, killing Banner. According to the NTSB’s preliminary report, Banner engaged Autopilot approximately 10 seconds prior to the collision, and the system did not detect the driver’s hands on the wheel “from less than 8 seconds before the crash,” the report states. The report says the vehicle was traveling about 68 mph before the collision, 13 mph over the posted limit. The NTSB notes that both data and videos show that neither the car nor the driver initiated any sort of evasive maneuver prior to the crash. The investigation is still ongoing.The crash has parallels with another, similar collision that also claimed the life of a Tesla driver. In May 2016, Joshua Brown’s Model S collided with the side of a tractor-trailer, killing him. The resulting preliminary report from the NTSB did not find Tesla at fault, and it also refuted claims that Brown had been watching a movie just before the crash. Tesla’s Model X gets artsy Tags Car Industry Electric Cars Comments 30 Photos Share your voice 17 2020 Kia Telluride review: Kia’s new SUV has big style and bigger value More From Roadshow 2020 BMW M340i review: A dash of M makes everything better 2020 Hyundai Palisade review: Posh enough to make Genesis jealous 50 Photos According to the NTSB’s preliminary report, Banner engaged Autopilot approximately 10 seconds prior to the collision, and the system did not detect the driver’s hands on the wheel “from less than 8 seconds before the crash,” the report states. The report says the vehicle was traveling about 68 mph before the collision, 13 mph over the posted limit. The NTSB notes that both data and videos show that neither the car nor the driver initiated any sort of evasive maneuver prior to the crash. The investigation is still ongoing.The crash has parallels with another, similar collision that also claimed the life of a Tesla driver. In May 2016, Joshua Brown’s Model S collided with the side of a tractor-trailer, killing him. The resulting preliminary report from the NTSB did not find Tesla at fault, and it also refuted claims that Brown had been watching a movie just before the crash.Banner’s family is the second family to file a lawsuit against the automaker. Earlier this year, the family of Walter Huang sought damages from the automaker due to perceived negligence on Tesla’s part. Huang’s Model X collided with a highway barrier while Autopilot was active in Mountain View, California. Following the crash, Tesla issued a statement casting blame on Huang while simultaneously touting the benefits of its system, although the NTSB’s preliminary report pointed to several contributing factors. Tesla Tragedy Tesla Model 3 barrels through the snow in Track Mode Teslalast_img read more

What is bitcoin worth Barclays has an answer to that

first_imgBitcoin, Ethereum are types of cryptocurrencies availableReutersBe it analysts, cryptocurrency experts, renowned researchers, no one has so far been able to derive the real value of bitcoin till date.However, analysts at Barclays think they have a useful method for tracking bitcoin trends — infectious disease models. And by their analysis, the cryptocurrency fever may have broken.The Barclays model divides the pool of potential bitcoin investors into three groups: susceptible, infected and immune.Just like any infectious disease, rise in prices is spread by word-of-mouth – via blogs, news reports and personal anecdotes – as nobody wants to miss out on the rally that made their friends and colleagues rich.”However, once full adoption is approached, the price decline is sustained and rapid,” Barclays analyst Joseph Abate wrote in a note to clients.”As more of the population become asset holders, the share of the population available to become new buyers — the potential ‘host’ population — falls, while the share of the population that are potential sellers (‘recoveries’) increases. Eventually, this leads to a plateauing of prices, and progressively, as random shocks to the larger supply population push up the ratio of sellers to buyers, prices begin to fall. That induces speculative selling pressure as price declines are projected forward exponentially.”The Barclays model suggests that awareness around cryptocurrencies is now almost universal, and only a small group of the population could now catch speculative interest, and buy in.”We believe the speculative froth phase of cryptocurrency investment – and perhaps peak prices – may have passed,” Abate said.Bitcoin has fallen by more than 50 percent in 2018, trading near $6,969 as of 9:00 a.m. Indian Standard Time.The cryptocurrency rose more than 1,300 percent last year, reaching a peak near $20,000 in December.While the cryptocurrency bounced back from past price collapses in 2011 and 2013, the high level of awareness this time around signals bitcoin may never return to its peak of nearly $20,000 in December, according to the Barclays model.last_img read more