• Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    57 minutes ago

    Good, it’s such an incredibly stupid design. Literally no one was bothered by a slight handle for better UX.

      • Anarch157a@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Thus is the old debate between Allow list versus Deny list.

        On an Allow list system, everything is forbiden exceot what’s explicitly allowed, while on a Deny list, everything is allowed except what’s explicitly forbidden.

        Aviation companies work mostly on Allow list system, meaning even small changes and improvements require certification before it’s approved for use. If this system was in use by car companies, the consequences would be similar, only 2 or 3 companies worldwide, making a few models each, all of them much more expensive than what they are now.

        I’m glad that the automotive industry works mostly on a Deny list system. It keeps the barrier to entry lower for new manufacturers, innovation is faster and competition keeps prices reasonable.

        Occasionally, issues like this pop up, requiring a ban, but in this industry I prefer this than the alternative.

        • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          51 minutes ago

          Honest question - why do you prefer this?

          There’s nothing bleeding edge in cars these days except for security and drive train features. I have 2 cars - new EV and 15 year old economy Toyota and honestly aside from drive train itself there’s nothing I can find in the new car that makes me feel like my old car is missing something important.

          Car technology has stagnated so bad that “deny list” approach makes no sense since the innovation potential is so incredibly poor. We lose safety and uniform UX for what? Fashion? It’s kinda stupid.

  • Jackusflackus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    154
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    As they should, stupid over complicated and absolutely failure ridden unnecessary design. kinda like this poorly worded statement

    • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Musk nearly bankrupted Tesla when he insisted that the door handles must be flush after stealing the company from its original founders.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        I mean, “stealing” is a strong word. Elon bought them out, and they’re both enjoying a net worth in the hundreds of million.

        What’s more disturbing about Elon’s tenure as head of the company is how social media manipulation, insider trading, and blatant SEC violations can pump a company’s valuation into the stratosphere.

        Marc Tarpenning and Martin Eberhard both continued to contribute advances in engineering that far exceeded the Tesla project. But they’ll never have the kind of easy credit Elon secured through politics and media manipulation. So don’t expect to see them included among the ranks of “billionaire” any time soon.

        • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          edit-2
          16 hours ago

          “Bought them out” is a weak word too though. He placed loyal people on the board and had them vote to give him control of the company.

          And now he has been having them vote to give him absurd unseen before “salaries”

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            15 hours ago

            He placed loyal people on the board and had them vote to give him control of the company.

            He could place loyalists on the board because he bought a controlling interest in the company.

            And now he has been having them vote to give him absurd unseen before “salaries”

            The latest compensation package has virtually unattainable sales targets. And the compensation is almost entirely in equity that assumes a monumental increase in stock valuation.

            If he can manage it, I’d be tempted to say he earned it, except I know he’ll only “hit” the target by lying and market manipulation that will collapse as soon as he hits his mark.

        • Earthman_Jim@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          With any luck Elon with be in jail in a few years when Democrats try to prove we shouldn’t abandon this socioeconomic system entirely.

          • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            14 hours ago

            That would require a backbone not seen in democrats in generations. I’d bet money on him being a free man and never seeing the inside of a cell.

          • Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            16 hours ago

            That will never, ever, ever happen. Dems love an oligarch just as much, if not more, than republicans. China is the only country that prosecutes wealthy criminals.

            • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              16 hours ago

              China is the only country that prosecutes wealthy criminals.

              Unfortunately they also lockup anyone they just kind of don’t like for any arbitrary reason.

                • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  15 hours ago

                  Oh I agree, the US has taken a giant step toward the exact same fascist approach to government in the last few years

              • Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                15 hours ago

                I was pointing out a difference in the way America does things. If I started listing things both have in common, the list would literally never end. Besides, the similarity is surface-level. China’s economy isn’t propped up by for-profit prisons

                • freagle@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  Nor does China suffer the same recidivism rates, carceral rates, or parole rates that the US has. Nor does China accrue debt for prisoners tonthe tune of hundreds of dollars a day that they owe when they get out.

            • Earthman_Jim@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              16 hours ago

              Well, then I hope you guys are ready for a revolution unless you’re fine with a Blade Runner esc hellscape.

    • dantheclamman@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I have long observed that moving parts, particularly involving motors, are destined to give me grief as a car ages. The difference is that little motorized interior luxuries aren’t going to prevent people from pulling my unconscious body out of a burning wreck, while these door handles have for dozens of people

    • phar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I don’t think China or the US would be called nice in this regard.

      • gustofwind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Well, the US is very nice to corporations which is why they’re often left to self regulate, are regulated by former industry insiders, or are barely regulated through fines and settlements

        So yeah I suppose in this regard China is not being nice but being nice doesn’t effectively regulate corporations. This is in fact a good example of a functional government doing its job

        • phar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Your original statement said must be nice as in it must be nice for the governed. Not that the country was being nice. The governments of both countries are complete garbage. Must be nice to have this one thing work is different than either being a functional government for its people.

          • gustofwind@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Well it is in fact nice for the governed when their governments enforce good regulations. I’m not sure what’s in dispute here, do you not think it’s nice to have a proper regulation in place that will be followed?

            Your original statement called the US and China not nice so I just followed your grammar logic 🤷‍♀️

            Are you just desperate to have us acknowledge that these countries have serious flaws too?

            • phar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              12 hours ago

              I apologize if my original statement was not clear, I was also following suit and meant nice for the individual. Essentially I was saying one governmental nicety doesn’t make up for the country’s govt being a cluster fuck. Having the government perform one thing functional is not the same as a functional government. That was my point.

              • gustofwind@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                12 hours ago

                China and America are perfectly functional governments despite their flaws. Are you just looking for an opportunity to dunk on them?

                In the area of automative regulation America is the only developed nation to have increased traffic deaths over the past decade or so. You can go verify that fact.

                So when it comes to seeing China implement a basic automative regulation, it is indeed a “must be nice” situation.

                The problem with your original statement is that it’s stupid and patronizing

                • phar@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 hours ago

                  No it seems the problem is you appear to think because there are a few positives, the governments are functional. So I guess it depends on what you mean by functional. You are welcome to disagree, I was just clearing up what I meant. There are people that say at least Hitler made the trains run on time. I wouldn’t say functional though.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      There is a large demand for Teslas in China believe it or not. Very possible this is just motivated by trying to favor Chinese automakers more so than out of genuine safety concerns.

      • Annoyed_🦀 @lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I don’t think this have anything to do with Tesla, because a lot of chinese car does have this sort of door handle, and more and more are ready to follow the trend.

  • AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    It all depends on the details, I kid the article is blatantly wrong

    All Tesla models use flush, electronically actuated handles that blend into the bodywork

    I believe this is only the model s and x, a small minority of their vehicles.

    My model y has a physically presented handle - you press on one side to pop out the other - NOT electronic self-presenting. I believe that’s true of model 3 and y, the vast majority of teslas.

    That being said, there’s several things this may mean. Is it just the self-presenting they don’t like? What about buttons like on the cybertruck? What about the manual operated handle like on the model 3 and y? Or is the important part the electronic latch mechanism internally? I have no idea what safety features that has.

    If it’s literally just the self-presenting handles on the high end models like the article mentions, that’s probably no big deal. They don’t sell many of those and the model x especially is way overdue for redesign or to be ended. Hopefully it’s more than that though

    • dantheclamman@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I still feel the handles where you have to press to make it appear are unintuitive and an example of form over safety. I have used them in Ubers and I always have a quarter second remembering how to open them. I don’t want a first responder to have to deal with that delay.