3 ms·

Empirical tests did not catch diesel gate. As I mentioned before plaintiff has low chances. The court will never get their hands on the source code, and Tesla c

• gruez 2y ago
  >Empirical tests did not catch diesel gate. It literally was. If you check the wikipedia page, you'd see that it was discovered because researchers from West Virginia University were testing emissions, and found it generated more emissions than expected. They weren't filing lawsuits on some vague suspicion, like the emissions smelled worse than normal, or they found some shady patents. Moreover the diselgate comparison fails because evidence of cheating in odometers are trivial to collect, compared to emissions cheating. >Also per the argument in the lawsuit, it get's worst as you get close to warranty expiration. Again, with all the legwork they put into making that site, they can't find a Tesla owner that's close to warranty expiration? I suppose the latter might be more work, but if you're filing a lawsuit surely you'd want a slam dunk case, rather than beating around the bush with vague circumstantial evidence? >The court will never get their hands on the source code, and Tesla can just roll one of their overnight updates. [...] Maybe there is a surprise witness they did not disclosed it yet. That's not how lawsuits work. One of the first things that happen in a lawsuit is discovery, where each side can ask the other side to produce documents relevant to the lawsuit, like the odometer source code. Conversely "surprise witnesses" aren't a thing outside of courtroom dramas. The entire process is ensure the trial is over the facts of the case, rather how well each side can blindside the other with surprise witnesses/evidence.
  • belter 2y ago
    We will know when it get's settled before going to trial....