We now have a full year of data for the Cybertruck, and a strange preponderance of headlines about Cybertrucks exploding into flames, including several fatalities. That’s more than enough data to compare to the Ford Pinto, a car so notoriously combustible that it has become a watchword for corporate greed. Let’s start with the data…

  • KayLeadfoot@fedia.ioOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Alright, boss.

    If you can’t believe a PHD holder on their subject of expertise, and you won’t run your own analysis, I guess you’ll believe whatever you like no matter what anybody else says. Ok! I’m fine with that if you’re fine with that.

    I should probably explain: I do find it acceptable to include all the deaths in the Cybertruck… simply because 100% of the fatalities have been in Cybertrucks that burned. Isn’t that absolutely AGGRAVATINGLY ridiculous? That alone is worth the headline. Car fires are not common in 2025. Every single car built in 2025 should be safer than the Ford fucking Pinto!

    • notsoshaihulud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      If you can’t believe a PHD holder on their subject of expertise, and you won’t run your own analysis…

      …When you have such low numbers of cases you need to individually review each case because the risk of bias is exorbitant.

      Car fires are not common in 2025.

      They seem to be more common in EVs, so if you want to make a statement on the CT youcompare it to other EV trucks and if you spot a difference, THEN you can make the case about the CT being unsafe.

      Every single car built in 2025 should be safer than the Ford fucking Pinto!

      Perhaps excluding 99.7% of Pinto deaths makes this conclusion slightly less valid…