181–190 of 315 posts
Reading this entire story, it baffles me that as of today I can still add a "Full Self-Driving Capability" option when ordering a Tesla.
I have a really hard time believing that non-violent crimes should result in a person being locked in a cage. I'd rather see restrictions that limit their ability to do more damage, like when a reckless driver gets their license revoked. Besides, a free person with a job can pay back their debt to society, literally, with money, instead of the rest of us paying their living costs. EDIT: As comments point out, it is a…
In short: you don't want them to feel any consequences beyond having to pay back the money. I'm sure that'll work great as a deterrent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the only people who go to Jail for fraud are the ones whose fraud hurts specifically investors Minus all the other fraud convictions constantly being handed down in America, sure.
I think the OP meant more, "the only rich people". Having enough money to have the direct line to someone important in a political party is valuable. Enough prosecutors have a mind for future ambitions and understand that some battles just aren't worth fighting. That doesn't make for straight up immunity, but it does change the calculus enough that so long as no one else really cares about your crime, they can let it…
This ignores the other side of the calculus: the political and career benefits of high-profile takedowns. I don't claim this balances across the power spectrum. But it's a far cry from the dystopia OP posits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are at least four replies at this moment missing the point entirely, it's incredible how knee-jerk these are to defend Tesla against a defense of Tesla .
If the point is so opaque that four separate comments miss it, then maybe it was not well described in the first place. It’s less a knee-jerk defense of Tesla and more of a knee-jerk “what are you talking about that’s absurd” because at face value it’s an exceptionally absurd claim.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty disgusting how little jail time she's receiving for the scope of her crimes.
11 years is quite a long time and seems suitable for scamming some idiots out of their money. IMO the reason it seems low is that people get such unreasonably long sentences for doing far less.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 2019 Musk publicly stated Model 3's would support robotic taxi functionality in 2020 No evidence these forecasts were made in bad faith. Delusion isn’t criminal. It’s mis-selling in the here and now, in absolute terms, in a way that causes damage, that is problematic.
I don't think Musk deserves the benefit of the doubt. His history of just lying about this sort of stuff (outside of Tesla-related claims) is too long and rich for that.
Neither do I. But that's a civil matter. Criminal conviction doesn't turn on the release of the benefit of doubt.
Any bets she actually reports? Odds anyone? I feel a woman of her means and personality may try to disappear, go off grid. Does she still have access to money? Were her assets frozen?
That would be a bad idea. Skipping town on a sentence puts one in a rarified category where enforcement is now a federal problem, and the FBI has long memories, an international reach, and no statute of limitations on how long they can hunt a person who is sentenced. At which point, if they fall back under US custody, they get to start their sentence (as well as go on trial for the additional penalties associated wit…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm an FSD Beta user... 1000s of other Beta testers Ah, so the hundreds of thousands or millions who bought FSD years ago should be happy that a few thousand of you get to test out a system with your own lives. Great. Edit: Don't bother responding if you're a Tesla or Elon fanboy/fangirl. I'm not interested in being insulted any longer by you folks.
There are 400,000+ Beta users currently (US and Canada). You are being fooled by the headlines. The people in the EU have a legitimate beef (not being able to use the functionality). "test a system with our own lives" is silly hyperbole and you know it.
No, I actually believe that, because I have some morals and ethics around introducing dangerous and untested black-box AI into a several-ton machine with no physical consrtaints as to it's location (aka: a moving car), as in I wouldn't do it myself nor use a product like Tesla that was developed in such a shoddy manner.
It's pretty fucking rude to assume you know what's in my head, and I wish I could insult you as hard as you insulted me with that statement, but that would just be tit for tat and HN isn't about that kind of insulting remark.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone guilty of wage theft getting hit by that law? Just saying, in practice its clearly not about jailing menaces to society.
Do you know of anyone that’s been convicted of wage theft, sent to prison, convicted of a new count of wage theft, sent to prison, and convicted of a new count of wage theft … or did you just want to flog your hobbyhorse regardless of how poor the fit was?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> have 0% faith the current hardware will ever run a real level 5 solution Me either! But that’s not fraud. It’s delusion. We don’t criminalise it because the difference between genius and crazy is often only apparent ex post facto .
Is the key difference that no one can prove the current hardware will be unable to reach a level 5 solution? Taken to the (more) absurd we wouldn’t have this issue if the claim was the cars could fly, be boats, or time travel. People wouldn’t buy the “capability” either. This is a fascinating murky area and seems there’s no market solution beyond caveat emptor
I think so. It's interesting to discuss and think about, because the grey area is incredibly complex. (Not that we get too far into it on these kinds of forums.)