At the current rate of horrible fiery deaths, FuelArc projects the Cybertruck will have 14.52 fatalities per 100,000 units — far eclipsing the Pinto’s 0.85. (In absolute terms, FuelArc found, 27 Pinto drivers died in fires, while five Cybertruck drivers have suffered the same fate, at least so far.)

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    I love Elon Bad posts, but I think it’s worthwhile to examine why Elon bad in this case.

    Like many reactionaries, Elon’s business philosophy is pure tech-bro-libertarianism. And like all libertarians, he’s stuck in the neoliberal mindset of less regulation (don’t scrutinize) and more efficiency (let me be cheap), in order to create the safe space that industrialists need to extract, er create.

    He’s literally said things like (paraphrasing)

    When I see a specification for three bolts I ask: why can’t we do it with two?

    His transparent reasoning is that if he’s allowed to cut corners, he’ll save money today and consequences can be dealt with when they arise.

    He’s following the software model of release a minimally viable product and patch it later. Only instead of user frustration at being beta testers, you fucking die maybe.

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Him and his libertarian friends fuck up left and right. Crashing startups and just getting more money for another. Constant recalls. Blowing up rockets until it works.

      Yet they hold the government to a standard of being perfect and high performing with no room for failure. NASA can’t be blowing up rockets. As soon as they do the world comes down on them.

      And Trump is the biggest fuckup of all these guys.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        Blowing up rockets until it works is a far better approach than trying to get everything to work on the first try and ending up with a hugely overpriced white elephant.

          • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            14 days ago

            How do you do something “correctly” when nobody knows what that is? If your main priority is to do it “correctly” you will never develop anything fundamentally new.

            • Zron@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              13 days ago

              A rocket is not fundamentally new and hasn’t been for almost 100 years.

              Rockets perform correctly when they deliver their payload to the correct orbit.

              You can calculate the energy density of fuels, the efficiency of your engines at various atmospheric pressures, and determine the payload size you can deliver with your engines and fuel. Blowing up rockets for “tests” is so 1950s. We have whole college programs on rocket design. We have desktop computers more powerful than anything available in the 1960s, and NASA managed to design the Saturn V, a rocket of similar size to starship, with the computers of the time and fucking slide rules. The Saturn V had its problem, but each rocket managed to deliver its payload and perform its part of the mission without blowing up.

              Your comment is classic tech bro. No understanding of real engineering principles and only a desire to shove some shit out of the door as fast as possible.

  • xapr [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    Cybertruck will have 14.52 fatalities per 100,000 units — far eclipsing the Pinto’s 0.85.

    Holy shit, that means the Cybertruck fatality rate is around 17 times higher than the Pinto’s!

    • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      Do you realize how fucking insane that is? From 1921 to 1951 the rate of auto deaths dropped by around 50%, and from 1921 to 2011 the rate dropped by 90%. This is not just due to regulations on cars and pedestrian travel, but also in very large part due to crash safety in cars that steadily improved. With crash safety becoming a science, and crash test dummies being invented, and crumple zones, and air bags and seatbelts and the laws thereof.

      Musk, asshole motherfucker that he is, is trying to destroy all of that.

      • xapr [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 days ago

        Absolutely! What’s weird is that Teslas have been top-rated for crash-worthiness in the past, so there are a few possibilities I can think of:

        • They need to be top crash-worthy, because of the stupid autopilot trying its best to kill the occupants
        • They need to be top crash-worthy, because otherwise any crash at all would result in a fiery death
        • The Cybertruck is an outlier and is not as crash-worthy as the previous Teslas
        • All of the above

        What was that rule of thumb for taking multiple choice tests? If you don’t know the answer, always select “all of the above”?