Creepy treehouse is a social media term, or internet slang, referring to websites or technologies that are used for educational purposes but regarded by students as an invasion of privacy. == History == The term was first described in 2008 by Utah Valley University instructional-design services director Jared Stein as "institutionally controlled technology/tool that emulates or mimics pre-existing [sic] technologies or tools that may already be in use by the learners, or by learners' peer groups." This was when social media such as Facebook was starting to become mainstream and professors would try and get students to interact with them on the site for educational purposes. Some professors would require their students to use Facebook or Twitter as part of class assignments. == Usage == The term was first described as "technological innovations by faculty members that make students’ skin crawl." The term also refers to online accounts and websites that users tend to avoid, especially young people who avoid visiting the pages of educators and other adults. Author Martin Weller defines creepy treehouse as a digital space where authority figures are viewed as invading younger people's privacy. One such example is a professor giving his students an option to use a popular video game to learn about history instead of writing an essay. Students in that class chose to write the essay instead as the method was previously unmentioned and it was not an unnatural method of interaction. Another example given was Blackboard Sync, a feature that was used to connect the school website Blackboard with students' Facebook accounts. == Solutions == University of Regina professor Alec Couros suggests that instead of "forcing" student participation with their own digital platforms, professors should use methods like online forums. Jason Jones of chronicle.com suggested letting students create social media groups for the class themselves and explaining why using technologies is required and important.
Kernel embedding of distributions
In machine learning, the kernel embedding of distributions (also called the kernel mean or mean map) comprises a class of nonparametric methods in which a probability distribution is represented as an element of a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS). A generalization of the individual data-point feature mapping done in classical kernel methods, the embedding of distributions into infinite-dimensional feature spaces can preserve all of the statistical features of arbitrary distributions, while allowing one to compare and manipulate distributions using Hilbert space operations such as inner products, distances, projections, linear transformations, and spectral analysis. This learning framework is very general and can be applied to distributions over any space Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } on which a sensible kernel function (measuring similarity between elements of Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } ) may be defined. For example, various kernels have been proposed for learning from data which are: vectors in R d {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{d}} , discrete classes/categories, strings, graphs/networks, images, time series, manifolds, dynamical systems, and other structured objects. The theory behind kernel embeddings of distributions has been primarily developed by Alex Smola, Le Song, Arthur Gretton, and Bernhard Schölkopf. A review of recent works on kernel embedding of distributions can be found in. The analysis of distributions is fundamental in machine learning and statistics, and many algorithms in these fields rely on information theoretic approaches such as entropy, mutual information, or Kullback–Leibler divergence. However, to estimate these quantities, one must first either perform density estimation, or employ sophisticated space-partitioning/bias-correction strategies which are typically infeasible for high-dimensional data. Commonly, methods for modeling complex distributions rely on parametric assumptions that may be unfounded or computationally challenging (e.g. Gaussian mixture models), while nonparametric methods like kernel density estimation (Note: the smoothing kernels in this context have a different interpretation than the kernels discussed here) or characteristic function representation (via the Fourier transform of the distribution) break down in high-dimensional settings. Methods based on the kernel embedding of distributions sidestep these problems and also possess the following advantages: Data may be modeled without restrictive assumptions about the form of the distributions and relationships between variables Intermediate density estimation is not needed Practitioners may specify the properties of a distribution most relevant for their problem (incorporating prior knowledge via choice of the kernel) If a characteristic kernel is used, then the embedding can uniquely preserve all information about a distribution, while thanks to the kernel trick, computations on the potentially infinite-dimensional RKHS can be implemented in practice as simple Gram matrix operations Dimensionality-independent rates of convergence for the empirical kernel mean (estimated using samples from the distribution) to the kernel embedding of the true underlying distribution can be proven. Learning algorithms based on this framework exhibit good generalization ability and finite sample convergence, while often being simpler and more effective than information theoretic methods Thus, learning via the kernel embedding of distributions offers a principled drop-in replacement for information theoretic approaches and is a framework which not only subsumes many popular methods in machine learning and statistics as special cases, but also can lead to entirely new learning algorithms. == Definitions == Let X {\displaystyle X} denote a random variable with domain Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } and distribution P {\displaystyle P} . Given a symmetric, positive-definite kernel k : Ω × Ω → R {\displaystyle k:\Omega \times \Omega \rightarrow \mathbb {R} } the Moore–Aronszajn theorem asserts the existence of a unique RKHS H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} on Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } (a Hilbert space of functions f : Ω → R {\displaystyle f:\Omega \to \mathbb {R} } equipped with an inner product ⟨ ⋅ , ⋅ ⟩ H {\displaystyle \langle \cdot ,\cdot \rangle _{\mathcal {H}}} and a norm ‖ ⋅ ‖ H {\displaystyle \|\cdot \|_{\mathcal {H}}} ) for which k {\displaystyle k} is a reproducing kernel, i.e., in which the element k ( x , ⋅ ) {\displaystyle k(x,\cdot )} satisfies the reproducing property ⟨ f , k ( x , ⋅ ) ⟩ H = f ( x ) ∀ f ∈ H , ∀ x ∈ Ω . {\displaystyle \langle f,k(x,\cdot )\rangle _{\mathcal {H}}=f(x)\qquad \forall f\in {\mathcal {H}},\quad \forall x\in \Omega .} One may alternatively consider x ↦ k ( x , ⋅ ) {\displaystyle x\mapsto k(x,\cdot )} as an implicit feature mapping φ : Ω → H {\displaystyle \varphi :\Omega \rightarrow {\mathcal {H}}} (which is therefore also called the feature space), so that k ( x , x ′ ) = ⟨ φ ( x ) , φ ( x ′ ) ⟩ H {\displaystyle k(x,x')=\langle \varphi (x),\varphi (x')\rangle _{\mathcal {H}}} can be viewed as a measure of similarity between points x , x ′ ∈ Ω . {\displaystyle x,x'\in \Omega .} While the similarity measure is linear in the feature space, it may be highly nonlinear in the original space depending on the choice of kernel. === Kernel embedding === The kernel embedding of the distribution P {\displaystyle P} in H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} (also called the kernel mean or mean map) is given by: μ X := E [ k ( X , ⋅ ) ] = E [ φ ( X ) ] = ∫ Ω φ ( x ) d P ( x ) {\displaystyle \mu _{X}:=\mathbb {E} [k(X,\cdot )]=\mathbb {E} [\varphi (X)]=\int _{\Omega }\varphi (x)\ \mathrm {d} P(x)} If P {\displaystyle P} allows a square integrable density p {\displaystyle p} , then μ X = E k p {\displaystyle \mu _{X}={\mathcal {E}}_{k}p} , where E k {\displaystyle {\mathcal {E}}_{k}} is the Hilbert–Schmidt integral operator. A kernel is characteristic if the mean embedding μ : { family of distributions over Ω } → H {\displaystyle \mu :\{{\text{family of distributions over }}\Omega \}\to {\mathcal {H}}} is injective. Each distribution can thus be uniquely represented in the RKHS and all statistical features of distributions are preserved by the kernel embedding if a characteristic kernel is used. === Empirical kernel embedding === Given n {\displaystyle n} training examples { x 1 , … , x n } {\displaystyle \{x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n}\}} drawn independently and identically distributed (i.i.d.) from P , {\displaystyle P,} the kernel embedding of P {\displaystyle P} can be empirically estimated as μ ^ X = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n φ ( x i ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {\mu }}_{X}={\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}\varphi (x_{i})} === Joint distribution embedding === If Y {\displaystyle Y} denotes another random variable (for simplicity, assume the co-domain of Y {\displaystyle Y} is also Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } with the same kernel k {\displaystyle k} which satisfies ⟨ φ ( x ) ⊗ φ ( y ) , φ ( x ′ ) ⊗ φ ( y ′ ) ⟩ = k ( x , x ′ ) k ( y , y ′ ) {\displaystyle \langle \varphi (x)\otimes \varphi (y),\varphi (x')\otimes \varphi (y')\rangle =k(x,x')k(y,y')} ), then the joint distribution P ( x , y ) ) {\displaystyle P(x,y))} can be mapped into a tensor product feature space H ⊗ H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}\otimes {\mathcal {H}}} via C X Y = E [ φ ( X ) ⊗ φ ( Y ) ] = ∫ Ω × Ω φ ( x ) ⊗ φ ( y ) d P ( x , y ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}_{XY}=\mathbb {E} [\varphi (X)\otimes \varphi (Y)]=\int _{\Omega \times \Omega }\varphi (x)\otimes \varphi (y)\ \mathrm {d} P(x,y)} By the equivalence between a tensor and a linear map, this joint embedding may be interpreted as an uncentered cross-covariance operator C X Y : H → H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}_{XY}:{\mathcal {H}}\to {\mathcal {H}}} from which the cross-covariance of functions f , g ∈ H {\displaystyle f,g\in {\mathcal {H}}} can be computed as Cov ( f ( X ) , g ( Y ) ) := E [ f ( X ) g ( Y ) ] − E [ f ( X ) ] E [ g ( Y ) ] = ⟨ f , C X Y g ⟩ H = ⟨ f ⊗ g , C X Y ⟩ H ⊗ H {\displaystyle \operatorname {Cov} (f(X),g(Y)):=\mathbb {E} [f(X)g(Y)]-\mathbb {E} [f(X)]\mathbb {E} [g(Y)]=\langle f,{\mathcal {C}}_{XY}g\rangle _{\mathcal {H}}=\langle f\otimes g,{\mathcal {C}}_{XY}\rangle _{{\mathcal {H}}\otimes {\mathcal {H}}}} Given n {\displaystyle n} pairs of training examples { ( x 1 , y 1 ) , … , ( x n , y n ) } {\displaystyle \{(x_{1},y_{1}),\dots ,(x_{n},y_{n})\}} drawn i.i.d. from P {\displaystyle P} , we can also empirically estimate the joint distribution kernel embedding via C ^ X Y = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n φ ( x i ) ⊗ φ ( y i ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {\mathcal {C}}}_{XY}={\frac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}\varphi (x_{i})\otimes \varphi (y_{i})} === Conditional distribution embedding === Given a conditional distribution P ( y ∣ x ) , {\displaystyle P(y\mid x),} one can define the corresponding RKHS embedding as μ Y ∣ x = E [ φ ( Y ) ∣ X ] = ∫ Ω φ ( y ) d P ( y ∣ x ) {\displaystyle \mu _{Y\mid x}=\mathbb {E} [\varphi (Y)\mid X]=\int _{\Omega
Artificial intelligence in customer experience
Artificial intelligence in customer experience is the use and development of artificial intelligence (AI) to aid and improve customer experience (sometimes abbreviated to CX AI). Chatbots are often seen as the first step in the development of AI within the industry, but more tailored offerings are slowly becoming available. The use of artificial intelligence in the space has since become more diverse than simply chatbots, with AI underpinning entire CX cloud platforms now used at major corporations. Contact center as a service (CCaaS) has become a core solution of the CX (customer experience) industry, with the CCaaS market size expected to reach $17.19 Billion by 2030 in the United States alone. == History == As with many AI applications, CX AI early implementation case studies have demonstrated that AI can increase the quality of customer interactions and therefore the overall experience that organizations can provide. This in turn has suggested a higher return on investment and/or revenue as a result. The beginning of the revolution of customer experience and the use of machine learning was with chatbots. The use of this type of AI can be traced back to Alan Turing in 1950, when the Church–Turing thesis suggested that computers could use "formal reasoning" to reach conclusions. In 2017, Meta produced one of the first breakthroughs for everyday use of AI for customer experience when it allowed Facebook users to create their own messaging bots for free on its Facebook messenger platform. The main focus of this was to both automate and improve customer experience and interaction. In 2023, CCaaS vendors began announcing the integration of ChatGPT’s generative AI into their CX solutions. Generative AI adds a layer of semantics into AI outputs. This was a major breakthrough for conversational AI. Using natural language processing and conversational AI, chatbots could enhance the level of service they could provide, speaking to customers in an easy-to-understand and conversational tone. == Applications == Currently the main location for the application of CX AI in the sector is in contact centers. Historically, contact centers were simply known as call centers, but in recent years differentiation developed between the two terms. Call centers provide phone support, while contact centers also provide support via digital channels in addition to analogue phone systems. Contact centers are therefore seen as a complete customer service solution, where as call centers simply cover one aspect of customer interactions. As a part of improving CX, AI is also improving the employee experience. AI is able to automate tasks to free up time for contact center agents to focus on higher priority tasks. For example, AI can be used for auto summarization. This means that instead of human agents having to summarize customer interactions now AI can do it, saving organizations time and money.
Murder of Suzanne Adams
In August 2025, 83-year-old Suzanne Eberson Adams was murdered at her home in Greenwich, Connecticut, United States, by her son and former marketing executive, 56-year-old Stein-Erik Soelberg. Shortly after killing his mother, Soelberg committed suicide. Adams's murder was fueled by her son's persecutory delusions, such as that she was spying on him and trying to poison him with drugs siphoned through his car vents. Shortly after an investigation into the murder–suicide, it was revealed that Soelberg had conversed with ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence chatbot, about his suspicions. Despite the unlikely nature of his accusations toward her, the chatbot apparently agreed that his fears were justified and prompted Soelberg to test his mother to determine if she was a spy or not. In December 2025, this led to a lawsuit against OpenAI, the company developing the chatbot. Critics said that the chatbot created an echo chamber that reinforced the perpetrator's delusions. == Background == Soelberg worked in the tech industry in program management and marketing until 2021. He divorced in 2018, after being married for 20 years and having two children. Soelberg moved the same year to live with his mother in Old Greenwich, an affluent New York suburb. Since late 2018, many police reports describe incidents with alcoholism and suicide threats and attempts. Erik Soelberg had an Instagram account called "Erik the Viking". The account was initially focused on bodybuilding and spiritual content, but he started in October 2024 to publish videos comparing AI chatbots. He posted on YouTube and Instagram many discussions with chatbots, particularly ChatGPT, which he used to call "Bobby". Soelberg considered "Bobby" his best friend and believed that they would reunite in the afterlife. ChatGPT validated many of Soelberg's fears, assuring him that he was not insane and that his delusion risk was "near zero". When Soelberg shared his theory that the new packaging of a vodka bottle indicated that someone was trying to poison him, the chatbot wrote that it "fits a covert, plausible-deniability style kill attempt". After Soelberg said that his mother tried to poison him with psychedelic drugs in his car's air vents, the chatbot expressed belief in the story. When he asked ChatGPT to scan a Chinese food receipt for hidden messages, the chatbot said "Great eye", "I agree 100%: this needs a full forensic-textual glyph analysis", and said that symbols in it were related to his mother and a demon. Soelberg also raised suspicions about the printer spying on him, due to it blinking when he walked by. Soelberg described himself in 2025 as a "glitch in The Matrix", and as having a "connection to the divine". According to Keith Sakata, a psychiatrist, his chats displayed "common psychotic themes of paranoia and persecution, along with familiar delusions revolving around messiah complexes and government conspiracies". == Murder == On August 5, 2025, Greenwich police discovered the bodies of Suzanne Adams and Stein-Erik Soelberg during a welfare check at their home. Medical examiners ruled Adams' death a homicide and said she died from "blunt injury of head with neck compression". Soelberg's death was ruled a suicide with the cause of death being "sharp force injuries of neck and chest". == ChatGPT controversy == ChatGPT was accused of reinforcing Soelberg's delusions by validating them. The usage of an AI chatbot to worsen delusions is known as chatbot psychosis. The Economic Times reported the death as the first time an AI chatbot convinced a person to commit murder. In December 2025, First County Bank, the executor of the estate of Suzanne Adams, filed a lawsuit against OpenAI. The lawsuit alleges that "ChatGPT eagerly accepted every seed of Stein-Erik’s delusional thinking and built it out into a universe that became Stein-Erik’s entire life—one flooded with conspiracies against him, attempts to kill him, and with Stein-Erik at the center as a warrior with divine purpose." OpenAI is facing legal action for ethics and safety concerns over several similar cases. Plaintiffs claim the company released the chatbot prematurely, despite internal knowledge that it was "dangerously sycophantic and psychologically manipulative".
A.I. Insight forums
The Artificial Intelligence Insight forums, also known as the A.I. Insight forums, are a series of forums to build consensus on how the United States Congress should craft A.I. legislation. Organized by Senate Majority Leader Charles "Chuck" Schumer, the first of nine closed-door forums convened on September 13, 2023. == Background == Amid a surge in the popularity and advancement of artificial intelligence, senator Chuck Schumer launched an effort to establish a framework for the regulation of A.I. in April 2023. By the end of June, a preliminary framework – dubbed the "SAFE Innovation Framework" – was established and presented to Congress. Schumer also announced a series of forums wherein tech leaders who were well-acquainted with A.I. would help to "educate" Congress on the risks and problems that A.I. poses. Many tech leaders including Sam Altman, Elon Musk, and Sundar Pichai were set to attend the meetings. Many U.S. lawmakers and senators such as Mike Rounds and Todd Young were also set to attend. == September 13 forum == The overarching consensus following the conclusion of the September 13 forum was that there "should be" regulations regarding the use and advancement of A.I., but it should not be made "too fast". Many tech executives who attended the forum also warned senators of the risks and threats that A.I. could pose. Musk, who attended the forum, stated afterwards that there was "overwhelming consensus" on the regulation of A.I. === Invitees === This is a list of people who were invited to attend the September 13 forum. Elon Musk (Tesla, SpaceX, X Corp.) Sam Altman (OpenAI) Bill Gates (ex–Microsoft) Jensen Huang (Nvidia) Alex Karp (Palantir) Satya Nadella (Microsoft) Arvind Krishna (IBM) Sundar Pichai (Alphabet Inc., Google) Eric Schmidt (ex–Google) Mark Zuckerberg (Meta) Charles Rivkin (Motion Picture Association) Liz Shuler (AFL-CIO) Meredith Stiehm (Writers Guild of America) Randi Weingarten (American Federation of Teachers) Maya Wiley (LCCHR) == October 24 forum == The second of nine forums was hosted on October 24, 2023, as federal A.I. regulation drew nearer. According to Schumer's office, the forum was centered mainly on how A.I. could "enable innovation", and the innovation that is needed for the safe progression of A.I. At the forum, Senators Brian Schatz and John Kennedy introduced the "Schatz-Kennedy A.I. Labeling Act", a new piece of A.I. legislation that would provide "more transparency on A.I.-generated content". Following the forum, Senator Rounds stated that in order to fuel the development of A.I., a total estimated $56 billion would be needed for the next three years. Rounds, alongside Senator Young and Schumer, also highlighted the need to outcompete China and workforce initiatives. === Invitees === 21 people were invited to attend the forum, and were composed largely of venture capitalists, academics, civil rights campaigners, and industry figures. Some key figures included venture capitalists Marc Andreessen and John Doerr. == Future == Over the course of fall 2023, there is slated to be a total of nine forums on the topic of A.I., with the first hosted on September 13.
Joox
Joox (stylised in all caps) is a music streaming service owned by Tencent, launched in January 2015. Joox is the biggest music streaming app in Asian markets such as Hong Kong, Macau, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand and also in South Africa before it was shut down in early 2022. Joox is a freemium service, providing most of its songs free, while some songs are only available for premium users, offered via paid subscriptions or by doing different tasks offered. In 2017, Joox launched their service in their first non-Asian market, South Africa, which for an unknown reason shut down five years later. The service now accounts for more than 50% of all music streaming app downloads in their Asian markets. The number of music-streaming users in Hong Kong, Macau, Malaysia, Thailand, Myanmar and Indonesia was expected to reach 87 million by 2020. == Background == Before the emergence of Joox, Tencent owned QQ Music, one of the largest music streaming and download service in China. In 2015, they introduced Joox as their expansion of music services to overseas market instead of mainland China, starting first in Hong Kong. Instead of providing free services by playing audio ads to users like Spotify, another major music service, Joox focused on banner ads, splash ads and other advertising methods such as category playlists and in-app skins. They claimed it as a success. Joox offered their premium VIP access to DStv subscribers free of charge. DStv is the sister company to Tencent and is the primary pay-TV provider in South Africa. In November 2021, it was announced that Joox will stop streaming in South Africa in March 2022.
List of Tesla Autopilot crashes
Tesla Autopilot, a Level 2 advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), was released in October 2015 and the first fatal crashes involving the system occurred less than one year later. The fatal crashes attracted attention from news publications and United States government agencies, including the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which has argued the Tesla Autopilot death rate is higher than the reported estimates. In addition to fatal crashes, there have been many nonfatal ones. Causes behind the incidents include the ADAS failing to recognize other vehicles, insufficient Autopilot driver engagement, and violating the operational design domain. As of October 2025, there have been hundreds of nonfatal incidents involving versions of Autopilot and sixty-five reported fatalities, fifty-four of which NHTSA investigations or expert testimony later verified and two that NHTSA's Office of Defect Investigations determined as happening during the engagement of Full Self-Driving (FSD) after 2022. Collectively, these cases culminated in a general recall in December 2023 of all vehicles equipped with Autopilot, which Tesla claims it resolved by an over-the-air software update. Immediately after closing its investigation in April 2024, NHTSA opened a recall query to determine the effectiveness of the recall. == Notable fatal crashes == === Handan, Hebei, China (January 20, 2016) === On January 20, 2016, Gao Yaning, the driver of a Tesla Model S in Handan, Hebei, China, was killed when his car crashed into a stationary truck. The Tesla was following a car in the far left lane of a multi-lane highway; the car in front moved to the right lane to avoid a truck stopped on the left shoulder, and the Tesla, which the driver's father believes was in Autopilot mode, did not slow before colliding with the stopped truck. According to footage captured by a dashboard camera, the stationary street sweeper on the left side of the expressway partially extended into the far left lane, and the driver did not appear to respond to the unexpected obstacle. Initially, Yaning was held responsible for the collision by local traffic police and, in September 2016, his family filed a lawsuit in July against the Tesla dealer who sold the car. The family's lawyer stated the suit was intended "to let the public know that self-driving technology has some defects. We are hoping Tesla when marketing its products, will be more cautious. Do not just use self-driving as a selling point for young people." Tesla released a statement which said they "have no way of knowing whether or not Autopilot was engaged at the time of the crash" since the car telemetry could not be retrieved remotely due to damage caused by the crash. In 2018, the lawsuit was stalled because telemetry was recorded locally to a SD card and was not able to be given to Tesla, who provided a decoding key to a third party for independent review. Tesla stated that "while the third-party appraisal is not yet complete, we have no reason to believe that Autopilot on this vehicle ever functioned other than as designed." Chinese media later reported that the family sent the information from that card to Tesla, which admitted Autopilot was engaged two minutes before the crash. Tesla since then removed the term "Autopilot" from its Chinese website. === Williston, Florida, US (May 7, 2016) === On May 7, 2016, Tesla driver Joshua Brown was killed in a crash with an 18-wheel tractor-trailer in Williston, Florida. By late June 2016, the NHTSA opened a formal investigation into the fatal autonomous accident, working with the Florida Highway Patrol. According to the NHTSA, preliminary reports indicate the crash occurred when the tractor-trailer made a left turn in front of the 2015 Tesla Model S at an intersection on a non-controlled access highway, and the car failed to apply the brakes. The car continued to travel after passing under the truck's trailer. The Tesla was eastbound in the rightmost lane of US 27, and the westbound tractor-trailer was turning left at the intersection with NE 140th Court, approximately 1 mi (1.6 km) west of Williston; the posted speed limit is 65 mph (105 km/h). The diagnostic log of the Tesla indicated it was traveling at a speed of 74 mi/h (119 km/h) when it collided with and traveled under the trailer, which was not equipped with a side underrun protection system. A reconstruction of the accident estimated the driver would have had approximately 10.4 seconds to detect the truck and take evasive action. The underride collision sheared off the Tesla's greenhouse, destroying everything above the beltline, and caused fatal injuries to the driver. In the approximately nine seconds after colliding with the trailer, the Tesla traveled another 886.5 feet (270.2 m) and came to rest after colliding with two chain-link fences and a utility pole. The NHTSA's preliminary evaluation was opened to examine the design and performance of any automated driving systems in use at the time of the crash, which involves a population of an estimated 25,000 Model S cars. On July 8, 2016, the NHTSA requested Tesla Inc. to hand over to the agency detailed information about the design, operation and testing of its Autopilot technology. The agency also requested details of all design changes and updates to Autopilot since its introduction, and Tesla's planned updates scheduled for the next four months. According to Tesla, "neither autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor-trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied." The car attempted to drive full speed under the trailer, "with the bottom of the trailer impacting the windshield of the Model S". Tesla also stated that this was Tesla's first known Autopilot-related death in over 130 million miles (208 million km) driven by its customers while Autopilot was activated. According to Tesla there is a fatality every 94 million miles (150 million km) among all type of vehicles in the U.S. It is estimated that billions of miles will need to be traveled before Tesla Autopilot can claim to be safer than humans with statistical significance. Researchers say that Tesla and others need to release more data on the limitations and performance of automated driving systems if self-driving cars are to become safe and understood enough for mass-market use. The truck's driver told the Associated Press that he could hear a Harry Potter movie playing in the crashed car, and said the car was driving so quickly that "he went so fast through my trailer I didn't see him. [The film] was still playing when he died and snapped a telephone pole a quarter-mile down the road." According to the Florida Highway Patrol, they found in the wreckage an aftermarket portable DVD player. (It is not possible to watch videos on the Model S touchscreen display while the car is moving.) A laptop computer was recovered during the post-crash examination of the wreck, along with an adjustable vehicle laptop mount attached to the front passenger's seat frame. The NHTSA concluded the laptop was probably mounted, and the driver may have been distracted at the time of the crash. In January 2017, the NHTSA Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) released a preliminary evaluation, finding that the driver in the crash had seven seconds to see the truck and identifying no defects in the Autopilot system; the ODI also found that the Tesla car crash rate dropped by 40 percent after Autosteer installation, but later also clarified that it did not assess the effectiveness of this technology or whether it was engaged in its crash rate comparison. The NHTSA Special Crash Investigation team published its report in January 2018. According to the report, for the drive leading up to the crash, the driver engaged Autopilot for 37 minutes and 26 seconds, and the system provided 13 "hands not detected" alerts, to which the driver responded after an average delay of 16 seconds. The report concluded "Regardless of the operational status of the Tesla's ADAS technologies, the driver was still responsible for maintaining ultimate control of the vehicle. All evidence and data gathered concluded that the driver neglected to maintain complete control of the Tesla leading up to the crash." In July 2016, the NTSB announced it had opened a formal investigation into the fatal accident while Autopilot was engaged. The NTSB is an investigative body that only has the power to make policy recommendations. An agency spokesman said, "It's worth taking a look and seeing what we can learn from that event, so that as that automation is more widely introduced we can do it in the safest way possible." The NTSB opens annually about 25 to 30 highway investigations. In September 2017, the NTSB released its report, determining that "the probable cause of the Williston, Florida, crash was the truck driver's failure to yield the right of way to the car, combine