4 ms·
This is true, and while I do despise the invasion of privacy, and everything that comes with owning a $100,000 piece of spyware, I do appreciate that barring co
by hardwaresofton 10y ago
This is true, and while I do despise the invasion of privacy, and everything that comes with owning a $100,000 piece of spyware, I do appreciate that barring conspiracy and a flagrant disregard for the law someone somewhere has some sort of technical data unlikely to be vulnerable to human memory/eyewitness accounts related to the crash.
Tesla has also convinced me that it is the type of company whose employees that would not seek to hide something data it correctly clearly supported. That's a completely unverifiable (and most likely incorrect) assertion on my part, and of course a result of brand-cultivation on theirs, but still some companies just can't claim that at all, and I think Tesla has a leg to stand on still.
- dragontamer 10y ago> someone somewhere has some sort of technical data unlikely to be vulnerable to human memory/eyewitness accounts related to the crash. I can agree with this. Having this information recorded should be a standard feature for cars of this price-range. However, the information should be in the customer's control (which should also be fairly passed onto Tesla through a subpoena if necessary). Its a basic tenant of "ownership". If you don't have primary control of the data, you really don't own it.