psud @ psud @aussie.zone

Posts

2

Comments

1,725

Joined

2 yr. ago

I don't think explosions were part of the safety design. The only picture I have seen of a cybertruck after a battery fire showed the rear of the vehicle destroyed but the cabin intact

The shape and solidness suggest it's much more dangerous to any vulnerable road users than to its occupants, just like every light truck used as an urban car

Police responding said it would have at least broken windows if set off in a less rigid vehicle. The cargo compartment is a double skin of stainless steel thicker than the steel used in the shell of normal vehicles

I'm orange pilled so I agree it's bad, but I can't see anything but aesthetics that makes it any worse than any other light truck commonly used as urban transport.

Sure Musk inspired it and set its target specifications and price, but it was Tesla engineers who designed it, Tesla factory workers who built it and Musk's companies don't seem to have suffered from his fall from popularity

Tesla doors lock when a key* has been disconnected for a short time while parked

a key being a phone via Bluetooth, an RFID card, or a dongle. The card is disconnected if removed from the reader area (such as by a bomb going off). Phones are disconnected if too far away or if the phone or Bluetooth are turned off, dongles are disconnected if moved too far away or destroyed, for example by that bomb or the fire

The vehicle is most likely set to unlock in a collision, but in this case it was parked so it's normal for it to lock when the key is not detected, that's how "walk away lock" works

A habit? The are 27 thousand of them, can you find ten that have spontaneously exploded?

Every car brand does this. Tesla is pretty close to unique in allowing owners to opt out, but nearly no one does

Tesla uses attentiveness data as part of their safety assessment of drivers for setting premiums for Tesla insurance as well as to ensure the driver is watching the road while the car is driving itself

The joke was the bit about emergencies being uncommon

Can Tesla just unlock any of their vehicles thirdly and access the video

Almost always yes, but it's the same for any modern car

Tesla allows owners to opt out of online services, in which case the video is stored locally briefly and Tesla cannot see anything from the car or do anything to it

Tesla employees got in trouble years ago for sharing sexy videos from random Tesla car drivers and passengers

So don't do anything in or near a Tesla you wouldn't want seen by randoms

I don't trust Elon, but I bought my Tesla before he unmasked himself, while I saw him as the guy who made electric cars cool and rockets reusable, and I still think it's a good, well made, and reliable car

My trust is increased by the recalls the cybertruck has had, as it shows the company is responsive to problems and of course it'll have problems being a new vehicle with a new battery using new technology.

So sure Musk sucks, but I still like the cars and rockets

I don't like JK Rowling either, but the Harry Potter stories are fine

It's promising that a cybertruck can go through that and still be remote unlocked

The car would lock shortly after it's key RFID card was removed from it's reader or phone key went out of range or offline

They can always be opened from inside either electronically or manually

I'm pretty sure the vehicle's warranty was voided when the driver detonated a bomb in the cargo area and shot himself, and they're not telling us whether it was the blast disturbing the key card or the fire deactivating the phone key, anyway it's interesting the vehicle could be remote unlocked after that blast and fire

There's a barrier between them which includes a window. It was sealed until the bomb went off

Someone pulled up in front of the Trump hotel, detonated their explosives and shot themselves.

I think Luigi if guilty was making a commercial statement. He allegedly attacked the health fund with the highest rate of claim denials with bullets marked with a statement about how they don't serve their customers fairly

Described so by his parents according to what I read.

We have known for 23 hours that it was definitely not a battery fire. Everyone who knew anything about battery fires knew it wasn't a battery fire from the very first videos

Have you been asleep for a couple of days?

The parts that failed were:

1. The "armoured glass" (remember the steel ball demo?) between the cargo area and the cabin
2. The other windows, so everything vented though the cabin
3. The tonneau cover over the cargo area

So don't carry armed explosives and pyrotechnics in a closed cybertruck

I wonder if both soldiers expected their hired electric trucks to suffer battery fires with the way they treated them. If they did they were disappointed

I think he thought he had a fuel/air bomb. They just need a blast to atomise the fuel and then another to detonate the fuel and air mix, fireworks might have been enough for both, with the launch charge doing the first step and the star burst doing the second

A fuel air blast would have seriously damaged the building

Also they served in Afghanistan at the same time

There's every chance they knew each other, the a good chance it wasn't widely known that they knew each other

FBI want us to believe the two soldiers each individually decided to hire an electric truck and use it to try and kill people and do damage

Awfully coincidental

I'm pretty sure that current theory has only one time dimension and some number of space ones