• 0 Posts
  • 435 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle


  • How wonderfully evasive of you!

    • The reading is pretty clear to me that you’re implying that Tesla (and presumably EVs in general) catch fire more than non Tesla (or again, other EVs).
    • That is clearly proven wrong
    • You ignore your previous point and move the goalposts to your “defect” angle
    • When called on you moving the goalposts you claim the original reading of the original point is wrong
    • When called to clarify your original point, you refuse to explain it, and even claim to have no other way your claimed unknown point could be communicated
    • You claim victory with nothing to support it

    Should you ever want to change careers, you have a strong talent for doublespeak and propaganda. Pick up some Russian or Mandarin language skills, update your Linkedin, and you’ll be well on your way to a new career!

    Now with my own snark aside, I need to say this. You’re not an idiot. I know this. I’ve read many posts of yours where you accurately and passionately defend your position, even extending your the language of your arguments to make yourself understood by your audience. This current thread is out of character for you, and from what I’ve seen elsewhere, you’re better than this.

    I’m going to chalk this one up to you having a bad day and end the conversation here. I hope your day gets better, friend.



  • In looking for other information I did run across this quote. Its in an article from Forbes, so take it with a grain of salt, but the quote isn’t from the author but from Tesla corporate. It doesn’t offer a complete picture, but its the closest to your question I’ve run across so far so I thought I’d share it:

    “Tesla has reported that between 2012 and 2021 there was approximately one Tesla vehicle fire for every 210 million miles travelled. This includes fires that did not originate in the vehicle, like arson, structure fires etc. According to the National Fire Protection Association, the national average in the U.S. was one fire per 19 million miles travelled. This suggests Tesla’s EVs are 11 times less likely to catch fire than the average car,” Edmondson said." source








  • Do other car companies’ cars that lack defects tend to have this sort of fire situation?

    If you can point to any car company that produces a car lacking defects at all, I’m very interested to see it. With regard to EV fires vs cars that have ICE the numbers are very telling:

    “Data from the National Transportation Safety Board showed that EVs were involved in approximately 25 fires for every 100,000 sold. Comparatively, approximately 1,530 gasoline-powered vehicles and 3,475 hybrid vehicles were involved in fires for every 100,000 sold.” source

    60 times greater fire chance for pure ICE car than EV. 139 times greater fire chance for hybrid than EV. So if you are desiring to own a car with a much much higher likelihood it will catch on fire make sure it has an ICE engine and a gas tank.




  • Hmm, you’re making a good point and introducing two new not-yet-considered elements.

    1. Wolverine is only 5’3" (160cm) tall. Was he originally taller, but had a body destroying even, that only 80% of him was able to grow back rendering him shorter than he was before.

    2. Wolverine is Canadian. So neither the USA or Oz money rules apply, but instead Canadian rules. What those are, I do not now.




  • It’s probably more likely that HR is keeping HR busy, because what else are they supposed to do when the company isn’t hiring?

    I’m not in HR. In my experience there is good HR departments and bad HR departments. In both they were extremely busy all the time. There is a mountain of work HR does that has nothing to do with hiring and firing. Managing employee benefits, compliance with government regulations regarding workplace access, complex rules for reporting, tracking worker complaints and performance improvement plans for workers not meeting expectations.



  • From the little I’ve followed on this topic, any kind of kinetic space junk cleanup (meaning physically touching or capturing the junk) is going to be very very limited in effectiveness for the majority of the junk. For really large things, like an entire satellite still intact, it can make sense, but these are very few of the space junk pieces in orbit today.

    The problem is two fold: Space is huge and the junk is very far apart. There are hundreds of thousands of pieces of space junk (mostly small).

    The most promising approach to address the majority of the junk is a “directed energy” method. This would be using something like a laser to slightly push space junk into lower orbits where the thin air will slow it over time and it would fall back to Earth.