> What more would you expect to justify the headline? For starters, that the allegation had any merit. If you read the article you'll find out that the object

> What more would you expect to justify the headline? For starters, that the allegation had any merit. If you read the article you'll find out that the objective statement made by the accuser regarding unscheduled stops was that the car required "rebooting or troubleshooting" that could take an hour, which had an inpact on how may hours the car would be driving. That's the full extent of the claims. From that point onward, everything is a string of unbelievable hyperboles, such as spinning the need to troubleshoot a reboot as prohibiting a driver from taking a break. In fact, the article quite clearly depicts the ex-employee as someone with an axe to grind, and is trying to hurt the company where it is more vulnerable even if he is grasping at straws.