3 ms·

> please spare me the "if they can lower the number of car fatalities overall, they have every right to actively kill a few people here and there" spiel Why? I

> please spare me the "if they can lower the number of car fatalities overall, they have every right to actively kill a few people here and there" spiel Why? Instead of telling people not to make arguments, please make an argument against it. It love to read a well written argument. Until I do, I'll pick less accidents of a different kind over more accidents of the usual kind.

Tomte 8y ago
Simple ethics. If I have saved someone from drowning I still may not kill an enemy. Unsurprisingly the state will still imprison me. Are you seriously arguing the opposite, under the guise of „just asking questions“?
- donkeyd 8y ago
  I'm both asking a question and showing that I differ in opinion. There's no trying to hide it, it's pretty obvious. Ethiscs is a personal thing, so it's hard to argue in. Your argument though, is not in resonable. Tesla isn't willingly and actively killing people, like you write in your example. It's selling a product, that when used inappropriately, might cause accidents. Meanwhile, when used appropriately, it's saved many lives.
  - Tomte 8y ago
    The point isn‘t that some new technology leads to different failure modes. That‘s okay, and good if the total number of fatalities gets lower. But that isn‘t the case with Tesla. Tesla tries to get away with inadequate hardware and misleading advertising (I‘d even call it outright lies if you show a video touting the ease of unattended autonomous driving, and deep down on the page you bury in small print that availability depends on the jurisdiction — meaning „nowhere“) Tesla not only wants to make a lot of money, which means that getting adequate hardware is unattractive, they also need the „Elon as visionary“ nimbus, which also means they cannot concede that their initial estimate what they needed was simply wrong, and they seem to have money trouble on the horizon anyway. That‘s what makes the company scummy.

Tomte 8y ago

Simple ethics. If I have saved someone from drowning I still may not kill an enemy. Unsurprisingly the state will still imprison me. Are you seriously arguing the opposite, under the guise of „just asking questions“?

donkeyd 8y ago
I'm both asking a question and showing that I differ in opinion. There's no trying to hide it, it's pretty obvious. Ethiscs is a personal thing, so it's hard to argue in. Your argument though, is not in resonable. Tesla isn't willingly and actively killing people, like you write in your example. It's selling a product, that when used inappropriately, might cause accidents. Meanwhile, when used appropriately, it's saved many lives.
- Tomte 8y ago
  The point isn‘t that some new technology leads to different failure modes. That‘s okay, and good if the total number of fatalities gets lower. But that isn‘t the case with Tesla. Tesla tries to get away with inadequate hardware and misleading advertising (I‘d even call it outright lies if you show a video touting the ease of unattended autonomous driving, and deep down on the page you bury in small print that availability depends on the jurisdiction — meaning „nowhere“) Tesla not only wants to make a lot of money, which means that getting adequate hardware is unattractive, they also need the „Elon as visionary“ nimbus, which also means they cannot concede that their initial estimate what they needed was simply wrong, and they seem to have money trouble on the horizon anyway. That‘s what makes the company scummy.