Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A
Posts
4
Comments
1319
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Gee I wonder why he's being hostile to the guy calling him a paid shill 🤔

  • I recommend not talking to any AIs

  • In this case, probably because of the name she was saddled with.

  • Only cherry picked quotes, though they are pretty disturbing. I'd be very interested in the preliminary conversation, to see how things reached that point.

  • Not on lemmy you can't. The echo chambers are as bad here as they were on reddit.

  • What summary? Other than a few choice handpicked quotes, the article is filled with claims by the lawyers, but little actual text from the dialogue.

  • Yes, but this wasn't a rental. It was a free loaner.

  • Is a fuse not property? What is it, an idea?

    Have you watched the video?

    Yes.

    All she said was she didn't notice it for a few days.

    Yeah that part is hard to draw any conclusion on, given the utter lack of info about whether they informed her and she didn't realise, or wasn't informed, or anywhere in between.

    My comments are not really directed at her in particular, but mostly rather at the bunch of people in this thread proclaiming how they'd deal with the equipment. Assuming they made the choice with full awareness, I'm really really interested in how they twist their moral compass around to justify it. I'm fully certain if it was their property they would have a very different viewpoint.

  • There is a significant difference between "property destruction" and "not abiding by the terms of the contract". This situation falls under the latter.

    The suggestion we're replying to was to burn the fuse, not just pull it. How is that not maliciously damaging property?

    If you're that opposed to it, put your money where your mouth is and don't take the free loaner. She would have seen it the moment she stepped into it, there's nothing stopping her from returning the car.

    Objecting to surveillance in public is one thing, objecting to surveillance of private property that's on loan to you and that you can return at any time is just self entitlement.

  • Or you could not borrow the car.

  • It's interesting how many people here don't seem to have any sort of reservation at all about damaging stuff that doesn't belong to them. It's a car that's been loaned to you for free, that you're using voluntarily. What exactly makes you feel you have the right to just abuse it?

  • Well yeah, but it seems likely in this case the accelerator was being floored, dunno for how long. So much as I hate to give tesla a pass, they're probably not really at fault here unless new info appears.

  • Fair enough, I make no claims about the efficiency of acceleration. I just saw an issue with your scenarios that I pointed out.

  • Well you posited 2 scenarios, and this assumption was one of the major differences between the two.

    The greater acceleration is what will reduce efficiency big time.

    I'm not an expert, but the other comment provided a source claiming otherwise.

  • Legal liability can result from more than just destruction of property. It's not her property, there's likely limits on what she's allowed to do with it, period.

    I will not let a company watch my every move, period

    Then don't use somebody else's car? There's nothing in the law that says you can use another's property however you like.

  • I hope you mean the driver, because I have no intent of defending anybody here.

  • stopping and waiting for less time.

    There's an unstated assumption in there that's not true. Your average waiting time at the stoplight is mostly independent of your driving speed up to the light. For every time you reach a red light early, there's also a time you missed a red light.

  • Given it's not her property, that sounds like a quick way to a lot of legal liability.

  • Driver claims he was unconscious at the time, in case you're unfamiliar with the details so far.