111–120 of 121 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uhh... I'm pretty sure vehicle safety improvements have more to do with that than anything.
Which are enacted largely through legislation.
I guess the question is where the line is drawn between sensible and "nanny-state" regulation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The Veyron has a range of 50 miles at top speed, for example. That top speed being 250mph. Who drives 50 miles at 250mph? And where do they do it? And, more importantly, they can refill in the blink of an eye and travel 50 more.
Well, if you have to refuel every eight minutes, then the time to fill up becomes quite relevant. Not to mention that the main problem will be tyres, as those likely won't do a whole lot of miles at such speeds. Qoute: " In testing Michelin had run the Veyron’s massive meats on its tire dyno at 270 mph — the fastest it can spin — for 20 seconds, then at 250 mph for 20 seconds. It repeated that cycle two more times. T…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
sigh. knee-jerk reaction to ban dangerous things. first of all, a minivan can kill you doing 10mph. second, cars with this much power (and more importantly, top speed), have been around for a long time. you can build an 8-second quarter mile car in your garage and drive it on the street. more nanny-state nonsense. "think of the children".
That "nanny state nonsense" witnessed road deaths fall from 25 per 100K in 1930 to 10 per 100K since 2010. We've halved road deaths per every 100K of population! I'll take my nanny state nonsense where people are still alive, over the libertarian wet dream where they're dead. I really think it boils down to that some people value their own personal enjoyment over other people's safety. The sad truth is that you could…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That "nanny state nonsense" witnessed road deaths fall from 25 per 100K in 1930 to 10 per 100K since 2010. We've halved road deaths per every 100K of population! I'll take my nanny state nonsense where people are still alive, over the libertarian wet dream where they're dead. I really think it boils down to that some people value their own personal enjoyment over other people's safety. The sad truth is that you could…
Uhh... I'm pretty sure vehicle safety improvements have more to do with that than anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which are enacted largely through legislation.
Crumple zones, seat belts, and air bags are a far cry from setting hard limits on performance characteristics of the vehicle, even if those same requirements may have had a negligible impact on vehicle performance. I guess the question is where the line is drawn between sensible and "nanny-state" regulation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Top speed is a different beast altogether than acceleration, and I doubt you drive 200mph on public streets.
certainly not 200mph, but he i'm betting he breaks the speed limit. should we ban cars that go above 65mph? on second thought, never mind, i probably know your answer. "ban everything dangerous until there's no possible way anyone can get hurt" is not what freedom is.
that seems like a good way to increase road fatalities
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"the old 0-60 time" The _current_ 0-60 time, you mean. Especially with this: "And Tesla only compares with cars currently in production." considering this is only a teaser tweet, there's a slight hint of irony there. "Currently in production" is also very different from "fastest production cars". Very selective. This happened last time Tesla announced something like this - people fell over themselves to install it in…
One of the meanings of "old" is "former or previous." And I see no irony. The teaser tweet is stated using the future tense. It will be the fastest car in production once it comes, unless some other car maker has a big surprise between now and then. As for the Wikipedia stuff, I offer no defense of it, but I'm not surprised. Wikipedia suffers from plenty of fanboyism.
But it's not the biggest thing in the world. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cars that can go this fast or close enough have been around for decades.
Indeed. But people who own supercars and other kit cars capable of such feats were rare and expensive. Electric vehicles are going to take something, once rare, and make it common. Once it becomes common, the accident incidents will be more than just statistical noise, and legislative action may follow. The NHTSA and FMCSA are currently working on a proposal for large commercial vehicles that would artificially limit…
Your argument is comparable to banning sharp knives because someone started selling them cheaper than butter knives. Both types have always been sufficiently available and dangerous that making one more common than the other isn't going to change anything
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the meanings of "old" is "former or previous." And I see no irony. The teaser tweet is stated using the future tense. It will be the fastest car in production once it comes, unless some other car maker has a big surprise between now and then. As for the Wikipedia stuff, I offer no defense of it, but I'm not surprised. Wikipedia suffers from plenty of fanboyism.
"We don't compare against cars not currently in production. Our car, not currently in production, is faster." But it's not the biggest thing in the world. :)
There's also the weird aspect that the car itself has been sold for months, they'll just become faster once the update hits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
certainly not 200mph, but he i'm betting he breaks the speed limit. should we ban cars that go above 65mph? on second thought, never mind, i probably know your answer. "ban everything dangerous until there's no possible way anyone can get hurt" is not what freedom is.
should people have freedom to drive however they want, on roads used by plenty of other people too? that seems like a good way to increase road fatalities
but don't let that stop you from passing 20 more laws, and then banning people from driving altogether after you realize that, as it turns out, criminals don't follow the law.
which is already happening, just look at the autonomous driving effort. which i'm sure makes you very happy. soon, nobody will drive, we will all be living in a perfect harmonious utopia of robotic sentience.