BYD will pay for the crash its assisted driving causes. Not the driver.
In Level 2 systems, the legal burden stays with you. Remain present, concious, eyes on and ready to take control and if it fails, it is your problem.
BYD says it is testing the opposite.
God's Eye is BYD's driver assist system. A and B are its LiDAR-equipped tiers
that handle city driving.
For these users in China, BYD says: if the car is judged responsible and the crash is linked to its assisted driving, it will cover the direct economic loss for 1 year. Which means vehicle damage, third-party damage, personal injury. Full payout, no stated cap and this was the thing, that was the hardest for me to believe. I had to find multiple sources, to confirm this. 😅
This is not an insurance product. It is a manufacturer putting its balance sheet
behind its own software and this speaks extreme level of confidence in its technology.
While researching for it, I realized that BYD has done this before. It backed automated parking the same way in 2025, and as per reports, the parking feature use jumped from 21% to 93%.
Furthermore, there are already 3 million assisted driving BYD cars already on the road. They have plenty of data to develop their future technologies.
As a summary - on paper this is still Level 2 but commercially, BYD is taking L3-style responsibility.
I think the debate will change. Currently people ask how good these systems work and their questions are valid. I posted last year a footage of Xiaomi SU7 falling in a pond while being put in auto parking. (read the post as I explain the fallacy of composition and why it wasn't a failure really) 👇
x.com/etechvolution/status/2…
But now if you consider the chinese customer preferences and China Speed along with this BYD liability promise, the future looks really bright for BYD.
This will force local competition to match and at the end, it is only going to benefit the end consumers and enable autonomous driving leadership for Chinese OEMs at an even faster pace.
While the rest of world debates who is responsible, BYD turned it into a sales feature.
Would this make you trust assisted driving more, or ask harder questions?
___
Hi, I am Haseeb
Automotive & E-mobility Consultant - Services 👇
etechvolution.com/consulting
I write a newsletter about what I see on the ground in EV, charging and automotive, for 2,550 readers. 👇
etechvolution.com/
One car in a pond doesn’t mean the industry is sinking. (But imagine if this was a European car...)
We need to talk about this video without falling into a trap.
There is a concept explained by economist Thomas Sowell called the Fallacy of Composition. It’s the error of assuming that what is true for a part must be true for the whole.
We make this mistake constantly in the Automotive & EV debate.
We see a brilliant Chinese car review and assume the entire industry is flawless. Or, we see a video like this, a car trying to park itself into a pond, and assume the tech is just dangerous hype.
Both views miss the real story.
I’ve written before that China’s competitive edge isn’t just investment or engineers. It is the consumer's mindset.
The failure you see in this video? In China, that is often the calculated cost of speed. And the consumers accept it.
The "Innovation Loop" Difference:
1. China: Incremental & Agile Chinese consumers are unique. They are:
✅ Tolerant of novelty and early mistakes
✅ Passionate about change
✅ Willing to pay for "beta" tech
✅ Far more open to autonomous driving (61% Robo Taxi acceptance vs 24% in Germany)
This creates a powerful loop:
Companies launch bold products faster → Consumers adopt and provide data → Companies iterate immediately. They don't wait for perfection; they improve incrementally on the road.
2. Europe: Disruptive & Cautious In Europe, we often get stuck in the "R&D Trap."
We wait for disruptive innovation, technology that is 100% proven and perfect, before we let it near a public road. We start with ultra-luxury models (S-Class, 7 Series) because the massive R&D costs make the tech too expensive for a €35k car. We wait years for it to trickle down. By the time it does, the opportunity for mass data collection is lost.
The Takeaway
Yes, Chinese EVs are absolutely price competitive and leading on tech. There is zero doubt. They will learn from this failure and improve tenfold, leveraging development cycles they’ve already shrunk from the industry standard of 4-5 years down to just ~2 years.
But if a European car manufacturer did this... the brand would be crucified. We demand perfection.
Let’s stop blindly bashing our own industry based on viral clips, but let’s also stop ignoring why we are slower. We are playing a game of "Perfect & Proven" in a world that is rewarding "Fast & Iterative."
EU OEMs don't need to lower our safety standards, but they absolutely need to speed up their development and test cycles.
The real question for EU Consumers / Policy Makers:
- Are we willing to adapt the Chinese Consumer Mindset?
- Could deregulating (or shifting our own mindset) have a similar impact for the automotive industry in Europe?
- Or are we too culturally risk averse to catch up?