Tesla driver pulled over after wearing new Apple vision headset on highway
A viral video showing a Tesla driver wearing an Apple Vision Pro headset on a highway was later confirmed to be a staged skit, prompting criticism of “ragebait” content that appears to glorify dangerous behavior for clicks. Commenters focus on the real safety and legal issues around using opaque AR/VR headsets while driving, contrasting them with regulated in-car HUDs and existing laws on obstructed vision and distraction. The incident also reignites broader concerns about Tesla culture, tech fandom, and how far people will go to show off new gadgets in public.
Authenticity of the Video
- Several commenters doubted the video from the start, noting cuts between freeway and parking-lot shots and lack of any filmed interaction with police.
- An update (via another article) confirmed it was a staged “skit,” not an actual arrest.
- Some argue this is classic “ragebait” made for clicks; others say even staging while moving a real car is still dangerous and possibly more serious because it was deliberate.
Safety and Legality of Headsets While Driving
- Strong consensus that driving with a Vision Pro is reckless: reduced peripheral vision, constrained field of view, and distraction are recurring concerns.
- Multiple comments emphasize that Vision Pro is not transparent AR; it shows a camera feed with nonzero latency and can fail, freeze, or go black, leaving the driver effectively blind.
- People note it likely wouldn’t pass a driving vision test and that headphones further reduce situational awareness.
HUDs vs Vision Pro
- Some non-drivers ask how this differs from windshield HUDs that project speed/navigation.
- Replies highlight:
- HUDs are limited, passive, driving-related info vs Vision Pro’s arbitrary apps, video, games.
- HUDs do not block peripheral vision and remain see-through even if they fail.
- Vision Pro uses video passthrough, can occlude the road with virtual windows, and has worse failure modes.
- California vehicle code excerpts are cited: restrictions on eyewear that impairs lateral vision and on windshield obstructions, with explicit carve-outs for mirrors, toll tags, GPS, dashcams, etc. Legal status of HUDs remains somewhat ambiguous but headsets are seen as clearly problematic.
Driving Behavior and Road Safety
- A commenter recently in an accident pleads for drivers to pay attention.
- Others complain about slow reactions at green lights, merging too slowly, and not signaling.
- Some defend hesitating at green lights because of frequent red-light runners, arguing drivers should go because it’s safe, not just because it’s green.
Tesla, Musk, and Car Design
- Many associate this stunt with Tesla “fan” culture and are uncomfortable being lumped in as owners.
- Debate over whether to judge Tesla more harshly than other automakers with their own scandals.
- Strong criticism of Tesla’s UI choices: touchscreens for critical controls, touch turn signals, and removal of physical gear selectors; some say this is cost-cutting disguised as “futuristic” and may be unsafe.
- Brief technical back-and-forth clarifies that even EVs still need a physical control for park/reverse/drive, even if there’s only one physical gear.
Public Use and Social Perception of Vision Pro
- Many view wearing Vision Pro in public (streets, vehicles, busy areas) as pure attention-seeking and “idiotic.”
- Comparisons are drawn to Google Glass “glassholes,” with some saying Glass now looks subtle by comparison.
- Some speculate porn and other non-work uses will be major but unspoken drivers of adoption.
- Opinions diverge on normalization: some think a “box on your face” will always be weird; others recall initial ridicule of AirPods and argue that, if any company can normalize face-worn computing, it’s Apple.