News: 0177052481

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

China Bans 'Smart' and 'Autonomous' Driving Terms From Vehicle Ads (reuters.com)

(Thursday April 17, 2025 @11:39AM (msmash) from the how-about-that dept.)


China is banning automakers from using the terms "smart driving" and "autonomous driving" when they advertise driving assistance features, and it will tighten scrutiny of such technology upgrades. From a report:

> The [1]mandate on vehicle advertising was delivered by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology in its meeting with nearly 60 representatives from automakers on Wednesday, according to a transcript seen by Reuters and confirmed by one of the attendees. The move follows a fatal accident involving Xiaomi's best-selling SU7 sedan in March that triggered widespread concerns over vehicle safety.



[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/china-bans-smart-autonomous-driving-terms-vehicle-ads-2025-04-17/



This is probably necessary in the US as well (Score:4, Interesting)

by Inglix the Mad ( 576601 )

I know everyone wants a self-driving car next week... but right now the tech is not near ready.

Re:This is probably necessary in the US as well (Score:5, Insightful)

by ls671 ( 1122017 )

Indeed. Not especially a China fan but this sounds like a really good idea if you consider that things like Tide pods often have a "do not eat" warning on them. Cars shouldn't be advertised as too smart or self driving IMHO.

Re: (Score:2)

by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

I think the "do not eat" thing is just arse covering, in case anyone is dumb enough to try. This is the government saying that those terms are misleading and should not be used.

I remember more than one post on the Tesla owners forum from people asking things like "if I get autopilot can I take a nap on the way to work?" The name and the description was clearly confusing, not helped by the fact that nearly a decade ago Musk promised it could actually do that in the next year, so 2017.

Pretty amazing (Score:2)

by stabiesoft ( 733417 )

China is much more interested in truth in advertising than the west. How long has musk been allowed to advertise FSD/autopilot in the US unrestricted? Anyone know, has the new rule in China caused tesla to rename and come clean about their driving assist option?

Re: (Score:3)

by skam240 ( 789197 )

> How long has musk been allowed to advertise FSD/autopilot in the US unrestricted?

One day longer than in China? Wait, the law probably hasn't come into effect yet since they just announced it so the exact same amount of time.

Re: (Score:3)

by Pinky's Brain ( 1158667 )

Not much different from the German ruling.

Not a bad move (Score:2)

by Mr. Dollar Ton ( 5495648 )

It isn't like the cars are either particularly "smart" or truly "self-driving" anyway. More importantly, the drivers should know driving is their responsibility while in that seat.

Cruise control (Score:3)

by Dan East ( 318230 )

Makes me wonder how we managed to live with cruise control since 1948, considering the car will just smash itself recklessly into anything while maintaining a very fast and dangerous rate of speed. It's just a good thing it wasn't named "Smart speed control" or "Autonomous speed control" because those words cause accidents.

Re: (Score:3)

by Firethorn ( 177587 )

This is what gets me with people who confuse "autopilot" with "full self-driving". I've had so many people tell me that they consider "autopilot" to be a deceptive term because it isn't capable of full hands-off driving.

Me, I always consider that even if autopilot is engaged, you normally still have not just one, but TWO pilots in the cockpit of a plane ready to handle stuff.

Of course, I'm retired USAF and while I don't have my pilot's license, I had started training for it.

Anyways, the first autopilots on

Re: (Score:2)

by thegarbz ( 1787294 )

I'm not sure why you think that is relevant. Cruise control is objectively not sold as a self driving system and at no point did it even advertise by itself to have the ability to steer or brake. The driver had to be present at all times.

The courts have ruled on this by the way because stupid people exist: [1]https://chapmanlawpllc.com/202... [chapmanlawpllc.com] If it were labelled as "autonomous speed control" that lawsuit would have very much gone the other way.

Incidentally cruise control which can apply the brake is called "ad

[1] https://chapmanlawpllc.com/2023/09/05/silly-laws-and-cases-grazinski-v-winnebago-when-cruise-control-isnt-autopilot/

The reason why worry kills more people than work is that more people
worry than work.