A quote from an article in Wired:
Musk has stated that the Cybertruck’s silhouette was designed to be aggressive. “It is an armored personnel carrier from the future,” wrote Musk in October 2019, and then again in November 2023, and twice this year.
(Commentary) So, ah, why is a future armored personnel carrier a thing you think would be a growth market for rich civilians in America, Mr. Musk?
[#]IncomeInequality #Consequences
https://www.wired.com/story/the-uk-now-has-its-own-illegal-rubberized-cybertruck-on-the-road/#intcid=_wired-article-bottom-recirc_6ca6eae8-b25f-4daa-a5dd-0f6a881244cc_roberta-similarity1
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Urban_Hermit@mstdn.social
Major point in the article - the Cybertruck's (and Musk's) complete disregard for the safety of anyone else (no crumple zones, high mass) may make it impossible to get registered in any jurisdiction with adequate safety regulations that try to save the lives of both parties involved in any accidents.
(And again, it is an angular 4WD hatchback, like a AMC Eagle made by an angsty teenager as a welding project.)
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Urban_Hermit@mstdn.social
@Urban_Hermit The Cybertruck appears to be built on the principle that in an accident the driver will probably survive and anyone else's life is utterly irrelevant.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Black_Flag@syzito.xyz
@Black_Flag @Urban_Hermit if it doesn’t have crumple zones then the occupants are at risk of getting injured due to massive deceleration upon impact so even twats that buy the car get to experience the joys of Tesla engineering.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ginger_tosser@mastodon.scot
@ginger_tosser @Black_Flag @Urban_Hermit
Point proven here. Crashed into a wall (and possibly tree) caught fire (!!!) and killed 3.
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/3-dead-1-injured-california-cybertruck-crash/story?id=116303040
BTW, if you're curious, look up the stats for the highest fatality rate per vehicle class. Tesla really stands out there, and not in a good way. That's why Elmo wants to get rid of vehicle crash data collection.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Ehay2k@mastodon.social
@Black_Flag @Urban_Hermit
"Probably" not, since there are no crumple zones in the truck, the human bodies inside are the crumple zones. Back to 50s design patterns, also back to 50s 'how to kill the occupants' with an added function of 'making it extremely hard to escape from a burning vehicle'.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from hittitezombie@mastodon.me.uk
@Urban_Hermit
Don't be picking on AMC Eagles... or Matadors, or AMX's. 😉
But good memory!
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Sunny@universeodon.com
@Urban_Hermit
It's good to see this happening, Tesla being held accountable for an abomination.
from the article:
---Tesla’s VP of vehicle engineering Lars Maravy who last year told TopGear.nl that the Cybertruck falls foul of the European regulations requiring a rounding of 3.2 millimeters on protruding parts. “It is impossible,” he said, referring to the Cybertruck’s sharp paneling, “to make a rounding of 3.2 millimeters on a 1.4-millimeter sheet of stainless steel.”----
Lars is a in idiot or a liar or both.
Any radius whatsoever can be applied to the edge of a panel. Every normal car has rolled edges on panels. It may be more difficult because they chose 304 stainless for the skin, but every commercial kitchen has lots of rolled edges on their 304 stainless surfaces and equipment.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nlarson830@techhub.social
@nlarson830 somebody got one registered in the EU by attaching rubber to the 'sharp' edges and I think this one had the same modification but it turns out that Britain doesn't allow adhesive backed rubber pieces to be used to mitigate unsafe design.
They way bigger issue is the complete lack of crumple zones or even bumpers in the design. The CT was designed with a complete FU to anyone it hits. Being "the winner" in a crash was an actual selling point that Musk bragged about.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Urban_Hermit@mstdn.social
@nlarson830 no crumple zones to decelerate the mass in an accident? What if it hits an immovable object, like a wall, or commercial truck? That sounds, by making it as ridgid as possible, it will kill its own driver more often. Especially against that reinforced windshield.
Is it "innovation" to ignore 50 years of good design principles? That Titanic sub guy thought so.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Urban_Hermit@mstdn.social
@Urban_Hermit @nlarson830 TBH, Mr. Hermit, I see this as a positive.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from hittitezombie@mastodon.me.uk
@hittitezombie @nlarson830 I get what you are saying, FAFO. But, I have seen the aftermath of accidents where everything in the car was smashed up to the passenger compartment, and the people inside survived because the crumple zones and the mass in the front (the engine) took the force of deceleration. I don't want to see that remarkable design work lost or undone by selfish thinking.
Basically, Musk is a fool too rich to be told "no, that is a horrible idea" in the United States.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Urban_Hermit@mstdn.social
@Urban_Hermit @hittitezombie @nlarson830 I've been alarmed/fascinated by the neuralink brain implant and wondering whether he thinks he's too powerful to follow all the medical ethics while developing it.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from texhewson@datasci.social
@texhewson @Urban_Hermit @hittitezombie
My take on Musk is that he doesn't give a fuck about anybody else.
Only people or organizations that can bestow money or power are of any value to him.
Sociopathic conman....
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nlarson830@techhub.social
@nlarson830 @texhewson @Urban_Hermit @hittitezombie He wants to be Emperor of The World Elon The 1st. And if it takes the bodies of all mankind, Emperor of Mars too.
He doesn't believe that he should be stopped from doing anything he wants, also that everyone one else should do what he wants.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from DifferentDrummer@syzito.xyz
@DifferentDrummer @nlarson830 @Urban_Hermit @hittitezombie Ming the Merciless, Ruler of the Universe?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from texhewson@datasci.social
@texhewson
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from amiserabilist@beige.party
@Urban_Hermit @hittitezombie
Yes, a terrifically rigid frame/structure will over-G the occupants if it hits a very massive/immovable object.
There's a video of a 60's Impala and a Toyota Corolla(?) in a offset head-on crash test with dummies. Toyota passenger compartment was intact, Impala cab was very damaged and the driver dummy was 'killed'.
The CT is representative of Musk's psyche.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nlarson830@techhub.social
@Urban_Hermit @nlarson830 🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from treleanor@aus.social
@Urban_Hermit Musk: "If you are ever in an argument with another car, you will win.”
Can crashes are not arguments. Killing the other driver is not "winning."
Winning is when both cars are designed to minimize any injury or loss of life. Musk, with his adolescent libertarian mentality, is unable to see this.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from bodhipaksa@mastodon.scot
@bodhipaksa @Urban_Hermit Quote from an acquaintance in Indiana, “I really admire people who drive Hummers. It shows they really care about protecting their children.”
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from patmikemid@sfba.social
@patmikemid @Urban_Hermit “All I’m looking for is a sturdy, reliable vehicle that, in the event of a head-on collision, will completely fucking obliterate both the parents and kids in the car we slam into.”
https://theonion.com/conscientious-suv-shopper-just-wants-something-that-wil-1844930331/
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from bodhipaksa@mastodon.scot
@bodhipaksa @Urban_Hermit - Utopia 2.0. SirThomas More is too fucking woke.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from patmikemid@sfba.social
@bodhipaksa @patmikemid amazing that this is only an Onion article. I swear I have over heard people at work say some that is essentially identical. My own mother, who was so riddled with anxiety that she gave up driving after her divorce - for the rest of her life, pined a bit for the days when cars were big Cadillac like tanks, armored shells.
Of course those cars killed the passengers as often as people outside, but they felt like you didn't have to care about what was going on outside.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Urban_Hermit@mstdn.social
@Urban_Hermit @patmikemid I saw a head-on crash-test once involving one of those 1960's behemoths and a modern car. The behemoth disintegrated and the engine appeared to end up in the front seats. The occupants of the modern car would have been fine.
Last I heard, large SUV's were more dangerous for the occupants because a) the feeling of safety made the drivers act more dangerously, and b) they are top-heavy and roll repeatedly, often with fatal results for the occupants.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from bodhipaksa@mastodon.scot
@Urban_Hermit Armoured personnel carrier? What the hell?
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from treleanor@aus.social This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini