Technology

69109 readers

3092 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

L4s@hackingne.ws

1156

Tesla odometer uses “predictive algorithms” to void warranty, lawsuit claims (arstechnica.com)

submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by Washedupcynic@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world

139 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The lead plaintiff in the case, Nyree Hinton, bought a used Model Y with less than 37,000 miles (59,546 km) on the odometer. Within six months, it had pushed past the 50,000-mile (80,467 km) mark, at which point the car's bumper-to-bumper warranty expired. (Like virtually all EVs, Tesla powertrains have a separate warranty that lasts much longer.)

For this six-month period, Hinton says his Model Y odometer gained 13,228 miles (21,288 km). By comparison, averages of his three previous vehicles showed that with the same commute, he was only driving 6,086 miles (9,794 km) per 6 months.

Edit: I just want to point out that I just learned that changing your tires to ones of a different diameter can also affect how your spedometer clocks. So yeah, this issue is full of nuance and plausible things as to why this could not be true.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 80 points 5 days ago (4 children)

That cant be a defense?!

[–] knightly@pawb.social 70 points 5 days ago (1 children)

When accused of crimes, deflect by admitting to even bigger crimes.

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 25 points 5 days ago (1 children)

They cancel out

[–] Archer@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I have the worst fucking attorneys

[–] VanillaFrosty@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Double it and give it to the next defendant!

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

For Trump justice is indeed ike playing Uno

[–] Orygin@sh.itjust.works 24 points 4 days ago

I mean, VW tried to blame poor quality software (aka a bug) for their abnormal emissions, before it was discovered it's fully intended to cheat emissions testing.
I wouldn't put it above Tesla to do the same here.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 17 points 4 days ago

Sorry officer, I'm just really stupid.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Sure, but if you apply hanlon's razor whenever it's applicable, you're right more often.

"never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

It can definitely be both. Trump is exhibit A. Its never enough for them to get what they want, it has to hurt the other person or party on the other end of any interaction. They are thoroughly malicious and stupid

[–] scintilla@lemm.ee 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Nah fuck hanlons razor. Evil people can be stupid but they are still evil. If the incompetence reaches this point it is also malice.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm not saying both aren't possible. And I'm not saying both don't apply here.

But in general, if you make it a practice to remember Hanlon's razor, you will be both correct more often and generally happier. I'm just suggesting, do it for your own sake. Assume the best of intentions in people, because usually people do mean well. And also expect them to let you down by making genuinely stupid choices, because then you won't be surprised when they do.

[–] scintilla@lemm.ee 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I assume the best intentions of people that haven't repeatedly proven that they do not have the best of intentions. Telsa has repeatedly shown that they are willing to break the law to accomplish something they want and this isn't a huge step farther all things considered.

Never attribute to malice or stupidity that which can be explained by moderately rational individuals following incentives in a complex system.