-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Adding driver attentiveness monitors is an admission Full Self Drive is many years away.
Cause of death not known at this stage. Must have been driving rather fast to go over the guard-rail like that. Speed limit in Suisse is 120 and in fact slower around those tunnel sections.
Google Translate
"In particular, the company would like to underline that "in the current state of the investigation" it is not certain what caused the death of the 48 year old, if the collision with the guardrail or the fire started from the batteries."
Last edited:
I don't really know why you're posting in this forum. You're not providing anything constructive to the discussion, just trying to spin everything is as negative a light as you can.
Other than trying to annoy people, I'd be interested to hear why you're here...?
Some people have fun annoying other people
I grew up as the eldest of four boys. That made me rather expectant of the purposely annoying behavior of the others.
Why are facts and only facts annoying ?
Contributions opposing your position are still helpful if correct.
Contributions opposing your position are still helpful if correct.
Waiting4M3
Active Member
your facts arent my facts...if you know so much about technical analysis, then bet all your salary as a short
bdy0627
Active Member
I don't know who you are responding to since I can't see their posts, but it sounds like shorts are indicating that the stock will go down based upon technical analysis. Traders and longs on Twitter are indicating the opposite, so I wouldn't get too concerned about it. I think many tend to see what they want to see on the charts.your facts arent my facts...if you know so much about technical analysis, then bet all your salary as a short
You're not opposing any position, you're just taking everything you can find and spinning it negatively. It's quite OK to have a bear case, and some here state it eloquently, but just lining anti-Tesla/Musk statements around the way you do isn't adding anything.
Come think of it, you're not a Mercedes Benz executive by any chance?
jhm
Well-Known Member
Driver inattention used to be blamed on texting and before that cell phone use. Now autopilot is the culprit. Of course, autopilot is not nearly as distracting as social media as you drive. In fact, it is so boring people's minds just wander for lack of stimuli.
Can we just get back to the idea that the human driver is always responsible for conduct of the car? Stop blaming all this technology for irresponsible drivers.
<Ok, time to stop channeling my dad voice and get back to drivin
Can we just get back to the idea that the human driver is always responsible for conduct of the car? Stop blaming all this technology for irresponsible drivers.
<Ok, time to stop channeling my dad voice and get back to drivin
Bought 9 more shares $295.xx was going to say $29x.xx anything in the 290s as a deal I don’t even pay that much attention ! Up to 717 shares. Feels good. Largest holding. By far.
Unfortunately since 300 didn't hold, I'd be very surprised if we didn't touch 280 now. I thought we'd have stronger support at 300.
About the Accident in Switzerland:
The Swiss police commented on the news about the person that died today in the car: Tödlicher Unfall mit einem Tesla im Tessin: Mann verbrennt in Wagen
"Dear commentators, we firefighters have a simple rule when a vehicle after an accident is burning. If you are not trapped, you are surviving. Are you trapped -> you die. Exception: First responders manage to pull you out. If a vehicle burns, it is always in full blaze until we are there. This is true for electric cars as well as for combustion engines. EVs don't burn more often than combustion cars. If the battery catches fire, it burns hard, but it does not explode - and it is extinguishable, still requiring larger amounts of water. We'll get used to the electric cars already - Our ancestors did manage it with the ICE cars with all advantages and disadvantages too."
My take: this is an unbiased comment from an expert who deals with burning cars the entire year through and we should listen to them.
I like the Swiss firefighters for this comment!
The Swiss police commented on the news about the person that died today in the car: Tödlicher Unfall mit einem Tesla im Tessin: Mann verbrennt in Wagen
"Dear commentators, we firefighters have a simple rule when a vehicle after an accident is burning. If you are not trapped, you are surviving. Are you trapped -> you die. Exception: First responders manage to pull you out. If a vehicle burns, it is always in full blaze until we are there. This is true for electric cars as well as for combustion engines. EVs don't burn more often than combustion cars. If the battery catches fire, it burns hard, but it does not explode - and it is extinguishable, still requiring larger amounts of water. We'll get used to the electric cars already - Our ancestors did manage it with the ICE cars with all advantages and disadvantages too."
My take: this is an unbiased comment from an expert who deals with burning cars the entire year through and we should listen to them.
I like the Swiss firefighters for this comment!
BobbyKings
S85D > M3P > S Plaid
I honestly never understood how being 4 times safer than the average car in use is supposed to be especially good. I'd assume the current car fleet includes a huge amount of older, cheaper and smaller cars which usually also means they have less safety features. No, that doesn't mean i say or want to imply that Teslas are especially unsafe. But i can't wrap my head around the figures and bring myself to believe it's the safest car around. At least when it comes to deadly accidents this simply doesn't seem to be true. I mean it's completely understandable that more accidents happen, given Teslas are damn quick and fun to drive. The following link contains a list of cars that seem to be relativly safe in that regard, if you scroll down to the part about "Lowest rates of driver deaths".
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/statusreport/article/52/3/1
It shows several cars having 0 deaths per "million registered vehicle years". I believe Tesla has sold something around 300.000 cars over the last years. More in the last 2 or 3 years than before, so altogether registered vehicle years should be in the range of 1 million years. There have not been 0 deaths.
So how does building the safest cars on the road (citing crash test data) translate into being 4 times safer, when it comes to deadly crashes and another dataset shows others cars are safer in that regard? Either a piece of the puzzle is missing or one of the datasets is flawed, but that doesn't really make sense. Probably i'm just stupid again and missing something ...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Poll
