3 ms·

I consider journalist sensationalist as well, but in this case: 1) Tesla is a stock market darling, so a lot of people have a lot of money riding on it. Some o

I consider journalist sensationalist as well, but in this case: 1) Tesla is a stock market darling, so a lot of people have a lot of money riding on it. Some of those people may make different decisions with extra information they didn't have previously like the commonness of electrical fires. So we're not always talking about industry experts here. Could just be Joe Smoe software developer who plowed his equity grant into the stonk after vesting. 2) Tesla does market big battery packs to go in the home as well, which means this is a safety issue for people considering that. It's not like they are replacing existing battery packs and know the details. They are replacing either nothing or a diesel generator from Home Depot, so they may not be familiar with the advantages and disadvantages. Tesla doesn't have a good reason to be more forthcoming than is legally required either, leaving it to journalists. So yeah, journalists just want eyeballs to sell ads to, but Tesla just wants to sell electric stuff. The latter has less reason to be truthful about the dangers.

JPKab 5y ago
But is there a safety issue here? What are the numbers? As a society, we wisely look at incidents and determine how isolated they are. A lot of the same people who get furious about people being afraid of the recent vaccines because of anecdotal reports jump onto these stories and immediately make statements like this. In both cases, the anecdotes should be treated like what they are, not lent credence without further information. I could just as easily say that Pfizer has less incentive to be truthful about the dangers of their products. But here's the thing: Neither Tesla or Pfizer wants to get sued or have their brand destroyed. That's a hell of an incentive to not sell dangerous products.
trixie_ 5y ago
‘Journalists’ burying the fact that it happened during testing proves they have ulterior motives.

JPKab 5y ago

But is there a safety issue here? What are the numbers? As a society, we wisely look at incidents and determine how isolated they are. A lot of the same people who get furious about people being afraid of the recent vaccines because of anecdotal reports jump onto these stories and immediately make statements like this. In both cases, the anecdotes should be treated like what they are, not lent credence without further information. I could just as easily say that Pfizer has less incentive to be truthful about the dangers of their products. But here's the thing: Neither Tesla or Pfizer wants to get sued or have their brand destroyed. That's a hell of an incentive to not sell dangerous products.

trixie_ 5y ago

‘Journalists’ burying the fact that it happened during testing proves they have ulterior motives.