211–220 of 229 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Today I saw a diesel truck roll coal on anti-tesla protestors. We've gone full circle.
I'm curious if that's plausibly an act of criminal assault.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a downside to having a terrorism rider, other than higher premiums? For example, if your insurance company would otherwise have to declare a claim as due to non-terrorism, and just pay it (because they'd probably lose in court if they didn't pay), but because you had the terrorism rider , they decide to declare it as due to terrorism, and then you get a less-desirable experience? (For imagined example of les…
A comment above claimed: > insurance generally excludes riot and terrorism from coverage anyway If that's true, they'd have even more incentive to declare a claim as due to terrorism if you didn't have a rider. They could avoid paying it altogether.
But if you had a terrorism rider in those cases, then maybe it's worse for you, because then they wouldn't be denying the claim initially, but maybe instead you're stuck in a different process, with various downsides, and maybe less able to contest the assertion?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>99% of Tesla's were sold to green, left-leaning buyers source
That’s definitely an exaggeration. I’d bet it’s closer to ~60% green left leaning, and another ~30% libertarian, tech types. Would still mean at least 60% of his former audience is lost.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What sucks is that the cars* are actually very, very good cars. I've owned three of them so far, and I love driving and owning them. They take almost no maintenance, and I've only had one problem that needed me to take it into the shop, and it was for a recall that was totally handled in a day, and they gave me a loaner. Legitimately, Teslas have been the best cars I've ever owned, but thanks to Elon, I will never bu…
Tesla can continue to operate without Musk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A comment above claimed: > insurance generally excludes riot and terrorism from coverage anyway If that's true, they'd have even more incentive to declare a claim as due to terrorism if you didn't have a rider. They could avoid paying it altogether.
My question was about cases in which they wouldn't/couldn't deny claim due to terrorism on weak grounds, since they'd be taken to court for denying the claim, since the grounds are weak. But if you had a terrorism rider in those cases, then maybe it's worse for you, because then they wouldn't be denying the claim initially, but maybe instead you're stuck in a different process, with various downsides, and maybe less…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Throwing around Nazi salutes is normal? Are you writing this from an evil mirror universe?
You, and most who believe that, are ignoring the part where he said something like, "My heart goes out to you!" as he threw his hand from his heart out to the people in the crowd.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can buy supervised FSD right now. It works extremely well to the point testers are bored out of their minds - their channels became worthless since it barely makes any mistakes. It's overpriced and not available where I live, but I'd love one. It doesn't do everything under the sun as promised, but I'd rather drive less than more. The basic 10 year old Autopilot is already huge help. I'd say it's about 80% delive…
Yeah, that's the problem with a real Full Self Driving. It's either 100%, or it's not. 80% doesn't make the cut. Do you seriously believe the company was valued at >1T$ because investors believed that an "FSD 80% delivered" is enough ? Tesla and Elon claimed ALMOST 10 YEARS AGO, that the car will drive itself from Los Angeles to New York. Just think how insane this is, even today. And then look up the state of their…
I’m tine if you call it “some self driving”, I don’t care. I’m not going to put my car as a taxi, that’s stupid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My question was about cases in which they wouldn't/couldn't deny claim due to terrorism on weak grounds, since they'd be taken to court for denying the claim, since the grounds are weak. But if you had a terrorism rider in those cases, then maybe it's worse for you, because then they wouldn't be denying the claim initially, but maybe instead you're stuck in a different process, with various downsides, and maybe less…
Could the downsides of a rider really be worse than a lawsuit?
The question for that example scenario then is: would having a rider give the insurance company a viable option that is less-desirable to you.
(Such as because it delays you getting paid, you get paid less, it gets into a buck-passing Kafkaesque process between government and insurance company, there are less protections, etc.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes Tesla exactly a con? Their cars are amazing appliances, literally nothing in market like it, for less than a Toyota. FSD is largely delivered. Space internet for everyone (soon potentially also with Freedom™ now that Trump is involved in demonopolising space or whatever it's called) with a phone. Where is the con???
Before the inauguration, Tesla was trading at a P/E 30 times bigger than Toyota. Now it's about half that (110). Some say Tesla shouldn't be valued as a car stock; it should instead be valued as a Tech stock. Well, Tesla traded at a P/E about 4-5 times that of NVIDIA which itself had a high P/E compared to the other Magnificent 7 which in turn have a high P/E compared to the stock market in general. What exactly is T…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
He’s called a nazi because he does nazi signs, endorses the German far right party (not a literal nazi party in itself but endorsed by neo-nazis), keep getting closer and closer to say Hitler did nothing (apparently Hitler didn’t murder millions of people himself so no responsibility according to him). If Hitler was a candidate today, Elon would endorse him, period. He could tattoo a svastika on his forehead and peop…
He didn't say Hitler did nothing or that he wasn't responsible for the Holocaust. He made the very good point that one man can't do that amount of damage alone, and it relied on the power of a centralised state with excellent record keeping. There is a reason modern European states don't even collect this data! States are dangerous.
Your view is insanely warped. I don't know why.