At the current rate of horrible fiery deaths, FuelArc projects the Cybertruck will have 14.52 fatalities per 100,000 units — far eclipsing the Pinto’s 0.85. (In absolute terms, FuelArc found, 27 Pinto drivers died in fires, while five Cybertruck drivers have suffered the same fate, at least so far.)
I believe 4 of the Cybertruck fatalities were from a single crash. While the truck may indeed be dangerous, there is hardly enough data yet to draw conclusions.
I mean, it’s fatal to my eyes, because it’s so ugly.
yeah certainly not enough to have statistical significance
Do they have emergency releases on the outside? I know a locked door of a car with traditional latching mechanisms won’t open. But an unlocked vehicle where a bystander cannot render aid in an emergency seems so… Short sighted.
It is on purposes. He wants a cyberpunk fantasy car. You know what you can do in many cyberpunk games? Blow up cars with the slightest of ease. They’re made of explodium in some games, and in Cyberpunk 2077 there is a quickhack (like a magic spell, but cyberpunk) that can cause the car to literally explode.
Can you imagine for one second if someone managed to find a way to consistently connect to Tesla vehicles AND found a way to cause the battery to overheat and burn? The door autolock will cause the passengers to be trapped and be burned alive.
I don’t think this is an accident. No one can be that stupid to make something like that by accident.
But at least its bulletproof!
No shit, it’s literally just a big bullet. Or a wrecking ball on wheels.
The only thing that makes the cyberfuck safe is it’s pricetag and it’s virgin protector looks
I’m guessing that some people at the National Transportation Safety Board are about to get fired by Elon Musk.
Can we like, mark this as NSFW?
Cybertruck will have 14.52 fatalities per 100,000 units — far eclipsing the Pinto’s 0.85.
Holy shit, that means the Cybertruck fatality rate is around 17 times higher than the Pinto’s!
Do you realize how fucking insane that is? From 1921 to 1951 the rate of auto deaths dropped by around 50%, and from 1921 to 2011 the rate dropped by 90%. This is not just due to regulations on cars and pedestrian travel, but also in very large part due to crash safety in cars that steadily improved. With crash safety becoming a science, and crash test dummies being invented, and crumple zones, and air bags and seatbelts and the laws thereof.
Musk, asshole motherfucker that he is, is trying to destroy all of that.
If you read the article is was specifically died by fire. Not any other cause of death.
Right but the specific issue with the Pinto was that it would explode into flames on a rear impact, so this is the appropriate metric.
Like deaths from other accidents would skew the numbers anyway becausd 70s cars were death traps compared to today, but even in that context, the Pinto’s explosions were alarming.
Beating it on that isolated metric is a very special kind of achievement.
Top of the line in utility sports.
Unexplained fires are a matter for the courts.
Tesla #1
i knew it!
Is it me or are there guts in this picture?
The driver was inside the vehicle at the time, so I’m sure some of that is his remains. But a lot is probably burned seat material and such. It’s hard to say for sure.
Hard to tell. The picture was widely used in the media, and they’re usually quite careful about that kind of thing. There’s something reddish in it, but it could be material from the truck or its contents. One of the photos the police released of his guns had some red foamy material in it, another photo had some stringy red material (plastic?) lying in the road, and there were various red items in the bed too. I’ll mark it NSFW just in case.
Looks like it 🤢
I would trust a Smart Fortwo more than the POS Cybertruck.
HUSH!!! DO NOT TELL THE CUCKWAGON OWNERS!!
1/6887 is not good odds.
Better than the early days of COVID when they were up in arms about having to smell their own breath.
cough.
Reads like clickbait. There’s 34K Cybetrucks, so the actual number of fire fatalities is rounded to 5, one of which is the trumptower guy (so 20% is already intentional). Not that these are encouraging numbers, but you can’t draw conclusions from an N of 4.
You can draw conclusions because there’s only 35,000 on the road. That is a terrible rate.
that’s how confirmation bias works, not statistical probabilities.
EM’s still a nazi and the CT is a horrible joke, but this is still insufficient data.
Are you telling me that 35,000 vehicles is not a sufficient sample size to assess safety? Are you for real?
No. Incidence is a measure of probability of events over time (or with cars alternatively over miles). If the number of events is low (and 4 is low), your confidence intervals are extremely wide (which is the statistical way to say, we have no idea what the real number may be). The comparison is striking, the pinto had 27 fires over 9 years in >3M vehicles. https://fuelarc.com/evs/its-official-the-cybertruck-is-more-explosive-than-the-ford-pinto/
Let’s add that idiots buy cybertrucks who disproportionately think it’s bulletproof…
Again, “analyses” like this make great clickbait but contribute very little to our understanding, and that will remain the case even regardless of you getting angry at me about it or not.
And the answer is"What is the Poisson Distribution" Alex.
There is literally a distribution that describes the occurences of low probability events in large populations. It was developed to study deaths by horse kick in the Prussian army. So confidence intervals never come into it. You’re applying Stats for Communications Majors reasoning to an adult problem.
Well, the problem is, even if I take the single case where this one guy exploded himself with his truck and compare it to the Pinto data, the poisson distribution difference will probably be statistically significant, yet the measure would be absolutely useless from a real-world perspective, because it has nothing to do with the vehicle’s design.
I’d also argue that many of these events might not even be entirely occurring independently from each other (i.e., some of the key assumptions of Poisson are incorrect here) when people do all sorts of stupid shit with these rolling garbage cans like shooting at them, submerging them, etc. in a meme-like fashion for Tiktok views. So 4 events might very well be influenced by non-design-based, non-random human factors, which applied to other vehicles could generate similar results, and if the analysis were serious, they would have individually reviewed how these whopping 4 events happened, accounted for reporting bias towards EV fires (especially Tesla) and compared it to the F150 or the Ford Lightning as an analogous vehicle.
And I know the internet tends to conflate condescension with competence, but seriously, you should understand the above-listed things as a stats teacher.
edits for clarity
It’s so great to be able to find comments such as yours, unfortunately it feels uncommon in Lemmy specially when certain names are mentioned, the bias and willfulness to shit on those are making people a bit blindsided and easy to guide through bad data usage. My first thought reading the title was about the statistical value of the numbers given, which doesn’t detract from the actual quality or lack thereof of the vehicle. At the moment using elon musk or tesla in a title of an article will increase the traffic automatically. Which is why we constantly get every single shitty comment made by him reported with useless data.
Yeah it’s part of the enshitification process. This is why Lemmy appears superior to reddit thus far. On reddit, the quintessential early “are you stupid?” response is enough to shut down the conversation. I’m glad it didn’t happen here.
And it’s not even that I disagree that Teslas have major safety design faults, you cannot put door opening mechanism on an electric actuator, because you’ll get trapped. I’d never buy a car that doesn’t have a mechanical door latch at hand (it’s hidden on teslas). Interestingly Teslas used to be considered one of the safest vehicles, but I think a lot of it is, the early EV adopter demographic is simply characterized by much safer driving, and as this demographic shifted, more and more reckless drivers obtained Teslas. (I’ve been driving EVs since 2017 and around 2022 the demographic shift, at least for Teslas, became very obvious)
I love Elon Bad posts, but I think it’s worthwhile to examine why Elon bad in this case.
Like many reactionaries, Elon’s business philosophy is pure tech-bro-libertarianism. And like all libertarians, he’s stuck in the neoliberal mindset of less regulation (don’t scrutinize) and more efficiency (let me be cheap), in order to create the safe space that industrialists need to
extract, er create.He’s literally said things like (paraphrasing)
When I see a specification for three bolts I ask: why can’t we do it with two?
His transparent reasoning is that if he’s allowed to cut corners, he’ll save money today and consequences can be dealt with when they arise.
He’s following the software model of release a minimally viable product and patch it later. Only instead of user frustration at being beta testers, you fucking die maybe.
An MVP should not be a beta version, but fully functional and bug-free. The idea is to reduce scope to not necessarily even release it (though that’s possible) but to have a solid foundation onto which to duct-tape bells and whistles.
The MVP of a car doesn’t have heated seats, heck the seats might not even be adjustable without a wrench, but it’s absolutely going to drive and drive well and be crash-safe. Because if it doesn’t it’s nowhere close to being a viable car, go back and fix that before spending time on those seats.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with a simplification mindset. Automotive manufacturers certainly do like to overcomplicate things. Unfortunately people like him only care about costs and not quality.
I think it’s also worth noting that Elon Musk is a scammer. Every other word out of his mouth is likely a lie. He’s been claiming to already have technologies available for his Tesla cars, his SpaceX rockets, etc, all ready to go and… it never happened. Tesla full self driving? The Tesla taxis? SpaceX on Mars? The Tesla laughably stupid robots? Even those were faked.
Claims after claims for decades and literally no results
The guy is a full on bait and switch yet everyone seems to lap up everything this scammer says.
Also, normally the cost savings should go to the client, not into some billionaires bank account.
You can’t use “literally” and “paraphrasing” like that.
You can’t use “literally” and
… be over 14
That’s literally not true.
Thank you, my pedantic friend. (I say this because I’m often the one making the comment and getting the eyerolls)
Normally I don’t point it out. But this one was just too much.
You just literally said (interpretive paraphrasing), “I like big butts and I cannot lie”
Seems like natural selection in progress.
Buy a Cybertruck, fuck around, see what happens.
It also handily preselects for douche.
