this post was submitted on 12 May 2024
27 points (93.5% liked)

Fuck Cars

9777 readers
162 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 5 months ago (3 children)

The autopilot will turn off just before hitting them to make you liable anyway

[–] kashifshah@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That’s only if you didn’t subscribe to the Ludicrous package.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Nah even then. Ain't no way Tesla admits fault for anything

[–] kashifshah@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Until they go the way of PayPal, at least. Musk’s exit plan is Mars, remember?

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 months ago

Can we please speed up his exit plan?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Hux@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 months ago (3 children)

This reminds me of that Chinese law about being personally responsible for all medical debts of a person you run over—incentivizing killing the person, rather than injuring them.

[–] hungrybread@hexbear.net 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I've seen this in comments a lot but never a source, do you happen to have one?

[–] Hux@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Only source seems to be this Slate article:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2015/09/why-drivers-in-china-intentionally-kill-the-pedestrians-they-hit-chinas-laws-have-encouraged-the-hit-to-kill-phenomenon.html

In respect to that specific Slate article, Snopes had some issues with it and labeled the story as “unproven”:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chinese-drivers-kill-pedestrians/

The Snopes article does a nice job of pointing out the Slate article’s issues.

[–] hungrybread@hexbear.net 2 points 5 months ago

You're right about the Snopes article. It does do a decent job of pointing out that a lot of this reporting is rumor based.

This first anecdote (also highlighted by Snopes) is amusing

Double-hit cases" have been around for decades. I first heard of the "hit-to-kill" phenomenon in Taiwan in the mid-1990s when I was working there as an English teacher. A fellow teacher would drive us to classes. After one near-miss of a motorcyclist, he said, "If I hit someone, I'll hit him again and make sure he's dead." Enjoying my shock, he explained that in Taiwan, if you cripple a man, you pay for the injured person's care for a lifetime. But if you kill the person, you "only have to pay once, like a burial fee." He insisted he was serious—and that this was common.

So is it Taiwan or the mainland with these wild laws?

Another false claim about China, it seems.

[–] hungrybread@hexbear.net 0 points 5 months ago

Thanks for the links, it's much appreciated

[–] 3ntranced@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

That's been revised....right?

[–] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 2 points 5 months ago

That rumor is so stupid it doesn't even begin to stack up. Paying medical bills sucks, but killing someone even unintentionally puts you at risk of jail time. Vanishingly few people are going to choose a decade or more of hard labor in jail over paying a debt.

The only thing this whole rumor proves is that people will believe the most irrational things about China as long as it makes Chinese people look bad.

[–] magic_lobster_party@kbin.run 3 points 5 months ago

You will be liable either way. If you don’t do anything, you broke the terms of not being attentive enough.

[–] Technoguyfication@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I’m not aware of a single jurisdiction on the planet that makes Tesla liable for what the vehicle does when autopilot is enabled. In order to activate autopilot you have to accept about 3 different disclaimers on the car’s screen that state VERY clearly how you are still responsible for the vehicle and you must intervene if it starts behaving dangerously.

I’ve been driving with autopilot for over 2 years, and while it has done some stupid stuff before (taking wrong turns, getting in the wrong lane, etc.), it has NEVER come close to hitting another vehicle or person. Any time something out of the ordinary happens, I disengage autopilot and take over.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Condolences on owning a tesla

[–] Technoguyfication@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

You can think whatever you want, but my experience driving it has been perfectly fine. Range is great, the car is not falling apart like some people claim, it was not delivered with any issues, and chargers are plentiful where I live. Those are the main things I (and many others) care about in a vehicle. I don’t care what the CEO does or says online. I have a Ford as well and couldn’t even tell you who the CEO of Ford is.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Bro bought a Tesla just 2 years ago. Long after it was very widely known just how much of an arsehole Musk was, and after many other excellent EVs were on the market.

I'll let you draw the conclusions from those facts.

When I bought my car, there were no widespread plans for other manufactures to adopt NACS, you couldn’t get your hands on a Rivian for less than $100k, and I was commonly driving long distances for work so I needed a vehicle with long range that I could charge quickly on trips. Tesla checked all the boxes.

I haven’t experienced any of these super widespread quality or reliability issues people on the internet talk about. It was delivered with no issues, has needed very little maintenance (just tire rotations basically), and it’s not falling apart like some would lead you to believe. I don’t know what to say other than that my personal experience with the vehicle has been great, and that’s what I really care about in a vehicle. I don’t buy cars based off what the CEO says on Twitter.

[–] jose1324@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Hate Musk or not, the Tesla is still a very good car. In many markets still the better value often times.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Everything I've heard says that Teslas have had huge reliability problems.

[–] jose1324@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

These days not really. I'm gonna get downvoted to oblivion obviously because this is Lemmy, but generally the cars are more than fine these days

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

for context, do you own a tesla and if yes, what other car have you owned?

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

Unless you forget to put them in car wash mode, or it happens to combust while you're driving

[–] pufferfisherpowder@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Yeah and while Elon is the fucking worst I assume not everyone knows that he is the Tesla man. It's incredible actually how much he's intertwined with the brand. I would totally buy a Toyota or whatever and I couldn't tell you the name of their CEO, nor of any other car manufacturer, nor would I look up who they are beforehand.

Granted the poster above is on Lemmy so I assume he knows more about musky boy than he would like.

I have a Ford too and couldn’t even tell you who the CEO of Ford is. Teslas are great daily drivers, I don’t care what the CEO does or says online.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] whodoctor11@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Yet, you're guilty in any situation since you bought a stupid "self-driving" car

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] bufalo1973@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

The funny part will be once the car doesn't have a driver and is full autonomous. If the car kills someone, who's to blame?

[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The company that rented it to you, because fully self-driving cars won't be for private ownership, they'll just replace rideshare drivers.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Who's to say that will be immediate? Many people won't be quick to abandon their guaranteed-available vehicle, especially while every house and employer has parking.

[–] Sizzler@slrpnk.net 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

Not rhetorical question: has insurance ever immediately eliminated anything?

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago (5 children)

I hope this isn't law anywhere. You're liable for your car no matter what. You have to take control if necessary

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago

Reminds me of the Chinese issue: you run over someone, but they are likely not dead. Will you save their life but accept having to pay for whatever healthcare costs they have until they are recovered? Or will you run over them again, to make sure they die and your punishment will be a lot lighter?

[–] CanniBallistic_Puppy@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Pedal. To the. Metal.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Strange to assume that swerving will definitely kill one of them. What if you swerve off the road, or slam on the brakes? The reason the trolley problem works is that it's on rails and you're not operating it.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Even with autopilot I feel it's unlikely that driver would not be liable. We didn't have a case yet but once this happens and goes higher to courts it'll immediatly establish a liability precedence.

Some interesting headlines:

So I'm pretty sure that autopilot drivers would be found liable very fast if this developed further.

[–] DNOS@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Immagino having a car that doesn't pretend to drive herself but it's enjoyable to drive, a car that doesn't pretend to be a fucking movie because it's just a car, a car without two thousands different policies to accept in wich you will never know what's written but a car that you will be able to drive even though you decided to wear a red shirt on a Thursday morning which in you distorted future society is a political insult to some shithead CEO, a car that you own not a subscription based loan ,a car that keeps very slowly polluting the environment instead of polluting it with heavy chemicals dig up from childrens while still managing to pollute in CO2 exactly the same as the next 20 years of the slow polluting one not to mention where the current comes from, a car that will run forever if you treat it well and with minor fixes with relative minor environment impact and doesn't need periodic battery replacement which btw is like building a new vehicle ... This are not only a critical thoughts about green washing but are meant to make you reflect on the different meanings of ownership in different time periods

And yes I will always think that all environmentalists that absolutely needs a car should drive a 1990s car, fix it, save it from the dump fields and drive it till it crashes into a wall ...

[–] SinJab0n@mujico.org 1 points 5 months ago

Imagine not being forced to need a car at all.

Imagine being able to just sit down, watch memes, read something, watch a movie, maybe take a nap, or even take advantage of the journey and get ahead some tasks on ur way to our jobs.

Imagine being able to eat dinner on ur way home if our daily commute is kinda long, woldn't that be a dream?

Brothers, sisters, lets get some trains in our lives.

[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] user224@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

WRONG!!!

Hard braking may increase your insurance costs: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/technology/carmakers-driver-tracking-insurance.html

TL;DR: General Motors was selling customer driving data to LexisNexis which provided them to insurance companies. Hard braking also contributed to a higher risk factor.

[–] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 1 points 5 months ago

Nah bro if it's the choice between raising insurance cost vs killing people + jail time for manslaughter + eating the guilt for the rest of my life, i'll take the insurance.

Also wth america your capitalism and your priority is wack.

[–] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 1 points 5 months ago

I don't like the spying aspect but it is unironically true that if you slam your brakes at every red light you are driving in a dangerous fashion. It's more so about the pattern than a one off event though.

[–] monk@lemmy.unboiled.info 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm sorry, but this is the vanilla trolley problem. Save all but one or avoid going to jail.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

I think that's the point. There's a follow-up about killing the people tying others to the rails that fits.

[–] _Sprite@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

How fast am I driving down this two lane void with no guard rails

load more comments
view more: next ›