Offering a fix once the car has already hit the market signals a deep mistake in the procedural strategy. Companies are rushing features to market faster than safety testing can keep up. Such glitches can be deadly when a software that has been explicitly trusted with ensuring safety fails to do so. Autonomous tech might promise convenience, but at the cost of some safety compromises.
Urgency of The Fix
The seriousness of this fix comes into sharp focus when remembering the fatal March 2025 crash of the SU7 that claimed three lives. The car’s warning system didn’t warn the drivers enough to switch to manual control in uncertain and tough road conditions.
In plain terms, the car suddenly reached the limits of its “Smartness” and the drivers lulled into thinking that tech had everything handled and had very little time to take over and avoid the accident. The transition from relaxed passenger to alert driver is the biggest problem in autonomous driving.
It’s a reminder that road scenarios are way more spontaneous than lab simulations. Software promising convenience, but failing in the face of messy road chaos, kills the entire rationale of using an autonomous vehicle. These cars need to be fail-proof in a real world and a real road where margin of error is measured in lives and not just some broken glasses in a simulator.
Over The Air Band Aid
Xiaomi’s strategy is an over-the-air solution that would fix the bug remotely without having to drag thousands of cars back to the dealership. Now, in hindsight it again feels a convenience that the consumers don’t have to go through the struggle of taking the car to the dealership and getting it fixed over some days.
But on a deeper level, it begs a tougher question; if the system can be fixed with a quick software push, why wasn’t it caught before the cars ever hit the road?
The Pattern
Even more worrisome is the evident pattern that either signals negligence or incompetence. This isn’t Xiaomi’s first recall for any of their models after they had been launched. The fact that they also patched their YU7 SUV at the same time creates the impression that the company is using consumers as beta testers, discovering flaws only after tragedies or near-misses.
The pattern raises an even bigger question that in the hunger to dominate the EV and self-driving market, are automakers putting speed and innovation ahead of basic safety? China’s swift roll-out of new Level 2 autonomous driving safety rules, set to take effect in 2027, makes the lesson clear: the regulatory playbook is finally catching up to technology. The authorities have taken the SU7 incident as a turning point, exposing the human cost of rushing innovation without adequate safeguard.
By tightening the regulations, authorities are making a statement that the race to lead the EV revolution can’t be won at the expense of basic safety. The future of EVs and self-driving cars will depend less on engineering breakthroughs and more on building public trust and corporate accountability.
Discover more from Being Shivam
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.