Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cybertruck's Many Recalls

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 463 posts

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#441

Post by Aeolun »

infecto wrote: post #301
saghm wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I agree. From the perspective of a customer, not being able to drive the car due to it being unsafe is the part that matters, not where and how the manufacturer has to fix it. If you're opposed to it based on the assumption that it wouldn't take as long, I agree that might be true, but by that logic we should be categorizing _all_ recalls based on length (regardless of whether it's a software update or o…

My model y has had a number of recalls and I never knew about it. From things to the UI not meeting government requirements to other software issues. It was never unsafe to drive.

Just because you didn’t crash doesn’t mean it was safe to drive.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#442

Post by Aeolun »

lupusreal wrote: post #241
aikinai wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be industry-standard term, but it’s certainly not understood that way by layman, including car customers. To the public, “recall” will always carry the implication that the vehicle needs to go back to the manufacturer for a fix.

I don't think that's true. Most people are accustomed to there being many "recalls" for trifling matters which can be simply ignored until maybe the next time they bring the car into the shop. A typical conversation about recalls: > "I changed your oil, and I also replaced one of your door seals because there was a recall for the rubber cracking in cold weather" > "Oh, okay." It doesn't colloquially imply that the ma…

Maybe for you? All the recall notices I’ve ever seen are of the “Device may electrocute you if used improperly” variety. Those were definitely very strong suggestions to immediately discontinue use and get a replacement.

Maybe this is one of those situations where the US uses this term differently from the rest of the world? In a way that waters the term down so much that it might as well be meaningless?

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#443

Post by infecto »

Aeolun wrote: post #440
infecto wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Specifically speaking on software and tesla most/all recalls are for items that no longer comply with a government rule. No argument, the rules should be followed but I do believe there is a shade of gray as a number of them are imo tail events. They should be fixed but I would not classify them as the car cannot be used because safety is an issue. "The Boombox function allows sounds to be played through an external…

Honestly, some of these read like “Three ton car can be driven into people if the steering wheel is applied in the wrong direction. Constitutes danger to public safety and cannot be used.”

That was my only point too. Tesla has lots of issues and the cyber truck is no stranger to it but most of the recalls people cite are not true safety issues.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#444

Post by qwerpy »

at_a_remove wrote: post #216

I recently saw one painted primer black and immediately felt like going home so I could watch Johnny Mnemonic . It appears to be a triumph of aesthetic over function, needing only EL-wire underlighting to look like it escaped from the Tron storyboards and into low-poly life. I could only wonder if the entertainment system comes with a hidden Sirius/XM channel that only plays vaporwave music.

I set the ambient light in mine to neon purple and play a synthwave playlist. Definitely a fun mood to drive with on dark city streets.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#445

Post by infecto »

Aeolun wrote: post #441
infecto wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My model y has had a number of recalls and I never knew about it. From things to the UI not meeting government requirements to other software issues. It was never unsafe to drive.

Just because you didn’t crash doesn’t mean it was safe to drive.

Have you even looked at the recall list or are you just spewing the usual Tesla hyperbole? Recalls should be fixed regardless but the vast majority of Tesla recalls are not base case safety fixes. Sure they comply with a government rule for some tail case but hardly the earth shattering situation where the car sits unable to drive because it’s unsafe. Font sizes, boom box drowning out the pedestrian noise…all kinds of things. Hence why I said every recall that I have gotten was not a true safety item. Unless you have experience or facts stop with the hyperbole.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#446

Post by schiffern »

lapcat wrote: post #424
schiffern wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, customers care about the safety of their vehicles. People can (and do) care about both safety and inconvenience, to varying degrees. The exact degree depends on the level of safety risk and the level of inconvenience. Your odd claim that people don't care about inconvenience is unsupported by data or just plain common sense. I see you didn't even try to refute that the article will predictably mislead the avera…

> Your odd claim that people don't care about inconvenience is unsupported by data or just plain common sense. This is a bizarre interpretation of my comment. Of course people care about inconvenience. But obviously the people who bring in their cars to a dealership for a recall care more about safety than about inconvenience, because ignoring the recall notice entirely would be much more convenient. > I see you didn…

  > The article didn't even mention inconvenience. That's a red herring
It's not a red herring, it's the primary point I was making.

Point is, the impression most people will undeniably take away from "many recalls" is that the vehicle must be in the shop all the time, and it's a terrible customer experience. This impression is of course incorrect.

Remember that most readers don't even read past the headline. You and I and most HN readers are the exception. Obviously the Cybertruck customers themselves know better (we both agree on that), but it's still misleading language that predictably leaves the wrong impression with potential customers.

You can argue that readers "ought to know better," but that's disingenuously ignoring the way the headline will actually be interpreted by real people in the real world.

The only surprise is how many smart people rush to defend the media using a transparently obvious "lie without lying" tactic, but I guess that's why it's so effective! Smart people don't even detect the mislead (Curse of Knowledge). The smart folks who do see it immediately get nerd-sniped into full-blown denial of the "lay misinterpretation" by the seemingly irresistible temptation of a smarter-than-thou semantics argument (see above).

I guess we're fine with media misinformation if we can tell ourselves it's because the reader is dumb, and if "other tribe bad" companies are the ones who got smeared.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#447

Post by colinng »

I think the tone of the article was really strong and, to me, it seemed biased because they repeated multiple times that “the buyers only care about looks.”

A more in-depth article might point to the CyberLandr, and until I went 4x4 camping, camped out of a truck, I didn’t realize how awesome a CyberLandr might be, or how nice it is that “Mother Nature’s pin striping” is a solved problem for a stainless steel skin. Or how nice it would be to do all that without all the engine noise (I get accused of “not being a car person” simply because I like peace and quiet - but EVs are cars so why can’t we love those too?).

I think the article intentionally mischaracterizes the reasons for wanting a CyberTruck, and prescribes that “you must be a shallow person who doesn’t care about practicality or reliability.”

Well thank you for telling me who I am!

Oh and why would anyone slander Tesla? It’s not like they are a publicly traded company where slander and praise affect the share or option prices. Surely they couldn’t have ulterior motives.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#448

Post by lapcat »

schiffern wrote: post #446
lapcat wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your odd claim that people don't care about inconvenience is unsupported by data or just plain common sense. This is a bizarre interpretation of my comment. Of course people care about inconvenience. But obviously the people who bring in their cars to a dealership for a recall care more about safety than about inconvenience, because ignoring the recall notice entirely would be much more convenient. > I see you didn…

> The article didn't even mention inconvenience. That's a red herring It's not a red herring, it's the primary point I was making. Point is, the impression most people will undeniably take away from "many recalls" is that the vehicle must be in the shop all the time, and it's a terrible customer experience. This impression is of course incorrect. Remember that most readers don't even read past the headline. You and I…

> My point is, the impression many people will unavoidably take away from "many recalls" is that the vehicle must me in the shop all the time, and it's a terrible customer experience.

I still think you're missing the point. The biggest problem from many recalls is not time spent in the shop; rather, the biggest problem from many recalls is many vehicle safety defects that are deemed worthy of a recall. In other words, many possible dangers from driving the vehicle. It's an indicator of poor design and quality assurance, which can also reduce the expected lifespan of the vehicle and slash its resale value.

> Remember that most readers don't even read past the headline.

Do we really need to care about these people?

I've been blogging for almost two decades now, and it's very hard to write a fully informative, fully accurate headline. There just aren't enough characters available, unless you write an absurdly long headline. I have no doubt that the news media experience the same problem. There's no good solution for willful ignorance.

I really have zero sympathy for how non-readers of articles ignorantly misinterpret headlines. You can't idiot-proof the news.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#449

Post by m463 »

bamboozled wrote: post #253
baron816 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every one I’ve seen has a wrap for this reason

Seems weird to buy an $80k car and then spend $6k on a paint job just to make it look decent...

on the other hand, I think several colors on the model S were a few extra $k.

Re: Cybertruck's Many Recalls

#450

Post by m463 »

system16 wrote: post #49
pbreit wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could not disagree more. They are the freshest looking vehicles on the road.

I think it looks ok from a distance. But up close it looks like a prop from the set of a Back to the Future remake.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ark+ii&iax=images&ia=images
Post reply on HN