Hacker News Reader

Comment by buvanshak | Hacker News Reader

> there communication is enough to deduce the limits of their technology..

Not deducing. By what they explicitly state in the manual. About the "need to keep hands on the wheel always". So again. I am not "deducing" it.

>So why isn't the person who coined the term 'homo sapien' blatantly evil for coining the term?

I don't know. Was the person who coined the the term trying to sell human beings as being wise? Are people suffering because of this word? What is your goddamn point?

Tesla is evil because they use lies to SELL. use lies and project a false image to get INVESTMENT. Please keep this in mind when coming up with further examples.

>The existence of imperfectly stated motivations doesn't cause a cessation of causal history.

Ha. Now you are talking about "history" that does not exist yet. Are you really this misguided or just faking it?

View on HN

You clearly don't know what deduce means. You've also clearly haven't understood anything I've said during this entire conversation. Or even much of what you've said, since you don't seem to realize you've refuted your own points.

> Tesla is evil because they use lies to SELL. use lies and project a false image to get INVESTMENT. Please keep this in mind when coming up with further examples.

You've utterly failed to establish that they are lying.

> Are you really this misguided or just faking it?

Tesla already has an established history. Therefore, it is not necessary to speculate about future history.

>You clearly don't know what deduce means.

Please explain.

>You've also clearly haven't understood anything I've said during this entire conversation.

Oh I understood you just fine. I just find it stupid.

>You've utterly failed to establish that they are lying.

That is because you are overly generous with assumptions to justify their claims, which is typical of people who are apologetic of fraudulent entities such as Musk

>Tesla already has an established history...

But they haven't save the planet yet. Please give some thought about what you are writing before responding.

> That is because you are overly generous with assumptions to justify their claims, which is typical of people who are apologetic of fraudulent entities such as Musk.

No, I actually conceded. I gave up the generous assumptions on safety, backed by data, because you claimed we couldn't generalize from that data and I agree that doing such a generalization would be in some ways misleading.

This is what I mean by a lack of understanding on your part. Even in the post where you are telling me that you understood me just fine, but find my ideas to be stupid, you don't actually address what I'm saying.

As a consequence, I'm not going to continue this conversation. Have a nice day.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com