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

Cybertruck Launch

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 592 posts

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#451

Post by SantalBlush »

talldatethrow wrote: post #405
SantalBlush wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely nobody thinks it's about controlling the driver when you're walking. You're debating a point that no one made.

The guy I responded to did basically that, trying to assign blame to drivers. Why would I care what some drivers do when I'm crossing the street? I assume all drivers are bad and act accordingly. The people that don't do that, are more likely to get hit. That's what I meant.

It's not a dichotomy. Both parties are responsible for traveling safely. The argument you're trying to put forth is disingenuous, because controlling drivers as a pedestrian is obviously a ridiculous idea; that's why we have laws.

It's arguing in bad faith to pretend there is nothing to be done about unsafe drivers or vehicles, or to pretend that only pedestrians are responsible for their own safety.

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#452

Post by dvngnt_ »

rchaud wrote: post #415
DennisP wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla has its own principles, and collaboration is a big part of them. One reason so many engineers apply to work at Tesla is that they get to see their ideas implemented quickly and without excessive bureaucracy.

Cybertruck was announced in 2019, and production was pushed back several times in '21, '22 and finally '23. Sounds pretty bureaucratic to me.

the slowness could be explained by many things unrelated to their own bureaucracy

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#453

Post by harambae »

sushid wrote: post #13
xp84 wrote: post #3

I'm rooting for it despite it being silly and not a practical pickup, strictly because every car people are buying looks identical (picture a crossover SUV from Toyota, Chevy, BMW etc. Basically shoe-shaped things). This looks like a concept car that would never come to market. I hope it sells really well and convinces others to bring actually-creative designs to market.

While I appreciate the unique design of the Cybertruck, I have a huge concern with its huge size and the potential safety risks for pedestrians. The trend of increasingly larger vehicles, like SUVs and trucks, has already raised issues regarding pedestrian safety. The Cybertruck, being notably larger than most contemporary cars in the same category, could exacerbate this problem, especially if it opens the door to si…

People bring this up a lot on Hacker News, but AEB (Automated Emergency Braking) is essentially standard at this point [0] on new vehicles (technically NHTSA just makes recommendations on this right now, but as a practical matter OEM's comply because someday soon it'll be mandatory without an explicit waiver).

Between the forward-facing camera (usually running some version of Mobileye EyeQ) and forward-facing radar, the odds of running over a pedestrian directly like you're thinking on a 2023+ vehicle is quite low. Even cross-traffic/bicycle/cutoff scenarios are pretty extensively covered if you read up on Mobileye's website.

Personally, I'd be more concerned with older cars without AEB hitting pedestrians than the "let's make it more enjoyable when pedestrians do get hit" sentiment that seems so common in these discussions here.

[0] https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/automatic-emergency-bra...

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#454

Post by PawgerZ »

mike_d wrote: post #27
discordance wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing weighs 8000 to 10000 lb (3629 to 4536 kg). That’s shockingly heavy to move around 200lbs meat sacks.

Most EVs weigh about that much, to the point that some cities are considering amending "No trucks" signs to also say no EVs.

"No truck" signs are for semi trucks, not pickup trucks. These semis (just the truck, no trailer) weigh 2-3x more than an average pickup truck/Cybertruck and 3-5x more than an average EV.

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#455

Post by Kirby64 »

iancmceachern wrote: post #430
mensetmanusman wrote: post #241

We welcome any and all creative attempts to convince the public to use evs, which are massively piling up on dealer lots.

Then they should make the equivalent of a corolla or a camry. The Volt, prius, etc. are what's needed, not model X and cybertrucks. Model X is worse for the environment than a small gas economic bevausr it uses so much damn electricity

Nobody is cross shopping a Model X and a small economy car. You need to compare 'worse for the environment' of a Model X vs. a medium-big SUV.

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#456

Post by iancmceachern »

Kirby64 wrote: post #455
iancmceachern wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they should make the equivalent of a corolla or a camry. The Volt, prius, etc. are what's needed, not model X and cybertrucks. Model X is worse for the environment than a small gas economic bevausr it uses so much damn electricity

Nobody is cross shopping a Model X and a small economy car. You need to compare 'worse for the environment' of a Model X vs. a medium-big SUV.

I'm not saying that.

I'm saying that if one's goal was to save the environment they would focus on making those small cars, and as many of them as possible. Not Model Xs, not cyber trucks, not roadsters, etc

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#457

Post by DiggyJohnson »

rpmisms wrote: post #330
dylan604 wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you recognize that your in a blind spot, are you prevented from adjusting your position because you've pulled too far forward to actually place yourself in the blind spot? I know I sometimes find myself in positions that I know well to avoid, but sometimes it takes a second for it to be realized. My favorite is being aligned next to a semi's trailer wheels. I will slow down to avoid sitting in that spot when movin…

I'll sit in a blind spot on a motorcycle happily, if there's no other traffic. If there is, I pull forward next to the window instead.

Not to over analyze, but no matter if I'm on a bike or car I've always thought you shouldn't drive alongside or in the blindspot of another vehicle if you can avoid it (by a minute change in speed).

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#458

Post by DiggyJohnson »

majewsky wrote: post #398
jtriangle wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yeah, I still owe like 15k on it...

I never owned a car, or a driver's license for that matter, so this is an honest question: Did you not realize this flaw during the test drive?

It may not be immediately obvious on a test drive, and it's not a problem unique to the Mazda.

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#459

Post by ianburrell »

freemanofthewan wrote: post #423
JohnFen wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Truck buyers cannot afford machines that get between them and earning their livelihood. In the city, anyway, most truck owners only use their trucks for commuting and rarely, if ever, actually use it as a truck. They are not relying on their trucks to earn a livelihood any more than car owners are.

How much of the US is classified as city? How much of the US is classified as rural? What is your point exactly?

83% of US population is urban. That includes suburban and ex-urban. Lots more land is rural, but land doesn’t buy trucks.

Re: Cybertruck Launch

#460

Post by TerrifiedMouse »

jejeyyy77 wrote: post #428
roflyear wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't support your argument whatsoever. Generally the safest cars are the cars that break quickly. They absorb energy through breaking.

lol, are you safer in a tank or a smart car?

Maybe it depends on at what speed you are going.

Crumple zones exist in cars because it’s better that the car absorbs (and deforms in the process) the kinetic energy of a crash than you the passenger inside.

Post reply on HN