3 ms·

Now that's a title I would like to have on my business card. It just states upfront that you don't give a shit. :-)

by bhaak 6y ago

smt88 6y ago
It's terrifying how little Musk gives a shit. Tesla is testing unfinished self-driving technology via customers (which endangers those of us who don't even own Teslas) and Musk's reopening of his factory caused 450 cases of Covid. For someone who holds the lives of others in his hands, it is sad, disturbing, and enraging that he behaves like a clown and a teenage troll so much of the time.
- mam2 6y ago
  Nonsense all the way. - There was less percentage of covid in his plant than in the state the plant is. - Teslas are still less dangerous than other cars and im pretty sure tesla drivers also drink less while driving. Its just not more dangerous.
  - smt88 6y ago
    > There was less percentage of covid in his plant than in the state the plant is. I'm not comparing the plant's infection rate to the state's infection rate. That makes no sense. I'm comparing the plant's infection rate to 0%, which is the infection rate for a plant that is complying with the law and shut down. > Teslas are still less dangerous than other cars and im pretty sure tesla drivers also drink less while driving. Its just not more dangerous. Again, I'm not comparing Tesla safety rate to general safety rate. In both of these cases, I'm comparing the results to what they would be if Elon Musk didn't do something anti-social and irresponsible. Testing self-driving technology in the real world using non-professional drivers is incredibly irresponsible. Even a single death caused by that technology is preventable and completely under Musk's control.
    - mam2 6y ago
      Of course if you do nothing and everyone live in a shelter for 5 years the pandemic will be stopped. But that's not possible so you have to find a middle ground. A LOT of people including myself consider it's an exaggerated middle ground to shut down an entire economy for something that's not more lethal than going in the street for 2/3 of the population. You may disagree but you have to understand that it's largely in the interest of the government to act as the "most scared people" want to, because they are usually the loudest and it's the best way not to be criticized during reelection. So to me opening a plant an having a similar (and actually less because people actually wear mask at work) infection rate than in the general population is a better middle ground. Maybe an even better middle ground would have been to let the choice to people to come or not... I'm not sure we'll ever agree if you are on the uber-cautious side. same reasoning goes for the self-driving. basically it's a trade of between risk and reward. it's the same for medicine: there's no drug development without human testing and sometimes... human death.
      - input_sh 6y ago
        > But that's not possible so you have to find a middle ground. How about we set the middle ground as "respecting local regulation" at a specific time point? It's incredibly mindblowing to me that he basically said in public "we're gonna ignore your laws" and the local government was like "lol, whatcha gonna do".
        mam2 6y ago
        Don't take it too harshly but it's a very naive view of how the world works. 1/ most regulations com from how people behave, not the other way around, which is a good thing. 2/ civil desobedience is a good thing if you think some rules can have really bad social impact (i mean lockdowns are not slavery but there are mental health / economic impacts which have literally never even been considered in the public debate) 3/ in practical terms a rule can only exist if you have some police power to enforce it. which costs money. this also leads up to 1 and 2 which says it's impossible to create regulations which are disconnected of what people want. At the end of the day I'm pretty sure if you do a referendum in many countries (starting with the US), people will say they don't want a lockdown. You are probably not on the majority side.

Now that's a title I would like to have on my business card. It just states upfront that you don't give a shit. :-)

by bhaak 6y ago

Now that's a title I would like to have on my business card. It just states upfront that you don't give a shit. :-)

It's terrifying how little Musk gives a shit. Tesla is testing unfinished self-driving technology via customers (which endangers those of us who don't even own Teslas) and Musk's reopening of his factory caused 450 cases of Covid. For someone who holds the lives of others in his hands, it is sad, disturbing, and enraging that he behaves like a clown and a teenage troll so much of the time.

mam2 6y ago
Nonsense all the way. - There was less percentage of covid in his plant than in the state the plant is. - Teslas are still less dangerous than other cars and im pretty sure tesla drivers also drink less while driving. Its just not more dangerous.
- smt88 6y ago
  > There was less percentage of covid in his plant than in the state the plant is. I'm not comparing the plant's infection rate to the state's infection rate. That makes no sense. I'm comparing the plant's infection rate to 0%, which is the infection rate for a plant that is complying with the law and shut down. > Teslas are still less dangerous than other cars and im pretty sure tesla drivers also drink less while driving. Its just not more dangerous. Again, I'm not comparing Tesla safety rate to general safety rate. In both of these cases, I'm comparing the results to what they would be if Elon Musk didn't do something anti-social and irresponsible. Testing self-driving technology in the real world using non-professional drivers is incredibly irresponsible. Even a single death caused by that technology is preventable and completely under Musk's control.
  - mam2 6y ago
    Of course if you do nothing and everyone live in a shelter for 5 years the pandemic will be stopped. But that's not possible so you have to find a middle ground. A LOT of people including myself consider it's an exaggerated middle ground to shut down an entire economy for something that's not more lethal than going in the street for 2/3 of the population. You may disagree but you have to understand that it's largely in the interest of the government to act as the "most scared people" want to, because they are usually the loudest and it's the best way not to be criticized during reelection. So to me opening a plant an having a similar (and actually less because people actually wear mask at work) infection rate than in the general population is a better middle ground. Maybe an even better middle ground would have been to let the choice to people to come or not... I'm not sure we'll ever agree if you are on the uber-cautious side. same reasoning goes for the self-driving. basically it's a trade of between risk and reward. it's the same for medicine: there's no drug development without human testing and sometimes... human death.
    - input_sh 6y ago
      > But that's not possible so you have to find a middle ground. How about we set the middle ground as "respecting local regulation" at a specific time point? It's incredibly mindblowing to me that he basically said in public "we're gonna ignore your laws" and the local government was like "lol, whatcha gonna do".
      - mam2 6y ago
        Don't take it too harshly but it's a very naive view of how the world works. 1/ most regulations com from how people behave, not the other way around, which is a good thing. 2/ civil desobedience is a good thing if you think some rules can have really bad social impact (i mean lockdowns are not slavery but there are mental health / economic impacts which have literally never even been considered in the public debate) 3/ in practical terms a rule can only exist if you have some police power to enforce it. which costs money. this also leads up to 1 and 2 which says it's impossible to create regulations which are disconnected of what people want. At the end of the day I'm pretty sure if you do a referendum in many countries (starting with the US), people will say they don't want a lockdown. You are probably not on the majority side.