4 ms·
Claims about what will happen in the future and on what timeline are obviously speculative and best guesses at best. No reasonable person would interpret them a
by epgui 4y ago
Claims about what will happen in the future and on what timeline are obviously speculative and best guesses at best. No reasonable person would interpret them any other way.
- detaro 4y agoA reasonable person might come to the conclusion that they weren't "best guesses" though, but instead knowingly misrepresenting the situation.
- epgui 4y agoBut that would just be failing to assume good faith from the onset, which is a problem on its own (especially if we’re trying to interpret legal stuff).
- detaro 4y agoWe're talking about this years later, looking at years of context, that's hardly "failing to assume good faith from the onset".
- epgui 4y agoI’m not sure what you mean exactly. If you’re suggesting that repeated failure to meet ambitious target deadlines is more indicative of bad faith than a single failure to do so, well… I don’t think it works like that. The bar for abandoning the presumption of good faith, and the principle of charitable interpretation, is very high.
- Dylan16807 4y ago> I’m not sure what you mean exactly. If you’re suggesting that repeated failure to meet ambitious target deadlines is more indicative of bad faith than a single failure to do so, well… I don’t think it works like that. Sure it does! Elon Musk isn't 5, right? He's capable of observing the rate of progress and adjusting his pronouncements.
- epgui 4y agoFailure to improve forecasting skills is valid criticism, but that doesn’t amount to bad faith.
- Dylan16807 4y agoIt's bad faith if you believe he does have the capability but intentionally doesn't use it. And isn't listening to his advisors.
- bagels 4y ago"If you give me $10,000 today, tomorrow I will deliver your car" ... Three years later: "I'll deliver your car tomorrow"
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- epgui 4y agoSounds like a contract with specific terms! If we’re going to look at this as a contract, we’re going to need more than intuition: we’re going to need some contract law, and we’re probably going to need to look at all the disclosures and fine print involved in the purchase of FSD.
- 7e 4y agoFraud does not need a contract. My understanding is that it has three elements: First, the perpetrator has to provide a false statement as a material fact. Second, the perpetrator had to have known that the statement was untrue. Third, the perpetrator had to have intended to deceive the victim.