Enough Musk Spam
For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.
No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.
Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.
Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.
Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.
view the rest of the comments
I can't help but wonder what the dashcam and computer thinks of that shit ๐๐คฃ
The glorified cruise control should be disabled if there are modifications like that.
As much as I hate cybertrucks and the sort of people who would buy them, I hate the diminishing of our property rights even more and thus have to object to the notion of manufacturers punishing people for exercising their right to modify their property. Frankly, the "glorified cruise control" ought to be Free Software to begin with so that the owner could modify it as well, to be compatible with the horns. (The owner would of course be legally responsible for the result, but that goes without saying since it's how property law has worked for hundreds of years.)
What should happen is that if the modifications make the car unsafe (whether because of the cruise control, the horns themselves failing pedestrian safety standards, or otherwise), the government prohibits the owner from driving it on public roads. But the keys are that it would be a restriction by government (not the manufacturer) of how the thing could be used affecting the public (not whether it's allowed to exist at all).
Yeah, without the last part I would've argued about safety, but restricting the use while allowing modification seems quite good. Except I'm not sure how to enforce safety checks often enough
Oh I'd certainly hope so, that's a given. Still seems like it would trigger some sort of constant warning though.