> Oh, so this is an actual recall and not just a software update.
In an era of software-defined vehicles, the difference is one of convenience, not impact/consequence. Not really worth pointing out, unless you're a service department telling owners how to plan their week.
No, but we own one of their vehicles and in years have never experienced a recall that involved physically recalling the vehicle. This one doesn't apply to us, but if it did, that alone would immediately make it stand out compared to every other recall we've experienced with the product (which have never had any effect on us whatsoever).
The thing is, to most people, "recall" is a strong word that carries major implications.
Yeah, sure, you might be smart enough to understand that the word has a legal definition, and sometimes a recall is an absolute nothingburger. For example, Tesla once had to do a recall because some warning icons on the screen were legally deemed to be a couple pixels too small. Yet, when news outlets announce "Tesla recalls every Model 3 ever made", it's TECHNICALLY true, but will be highly misleading to the general population who now thinks every Model 3 has to be returned.
EDIT: Also, FWIW, even when a recall DOES require a physical change of the car, Tesla's mobile service can often come to you to do it. You don't need to take it to a service center.
That’s nonsensical, IMO. Software updates should not be considered recalls at all. Unless it’s a critical safety issue that makes the vehicle unusable.
Awesome. Let's do that, right after we stop calling "place this sticker, which contains a warning about materials in the seatbelt tensioner system, on page 234 of your owner's manual" a recall, too.
> I wonder how they compare to the rest of the auto manufacturers, in this regard.
Most recalls in 2024: Chrysler (72), Ford (67), BMW (36), GM (34), Hyundai (25), Mercedes-Benz (28)
Least: Tesla (16), Mazda (6), Rivian (8), Nissan (18), Toyota (16), Porsche (13)
Another way to look at it is number of people impacted, which changes the "leaderboard". In order of most people to least: Tesla, Chrysler, Ford, Honda, GM, BMW, Kia, Toyota,.... Porsche. Obviously, conflating factor is popularity of brand.
Tesla has many small tweaks on their cars from year-to-year and even less. It's not as bad as it used to be (I haven't heard of any plywood in use inside the componentry).
Fords recall numbers have skyrocketed in recent years. So Fords real comparison to its previous self, 2015 they had 68. Why isn’t Fords roughly doubling of recalls news?
It's reasonably well known that Ford has had a very bad year for recalls; it's definitely made the rounds in the auto world, and breaks through to the mainstream news from time to time.
>Why isn’t Fords roughly doubling of recalls news?
Oh, I don't know, maybe because Tesla is bigger than the rest of the entire industry combined?
Besides, safety recalls are what matters. I get lots of small qualtiy-related recalls that are so minor I don't even bother getting them done. Meanwhile, Tesla does what it can to avoid quality recalls, because for a while it was a marketing blurb for them.
A "recall" means that a safety defect or a failure to meet federal standards has been identified in a vehicle and the manufacturer is required to fix it free.
It is a recall no matter how the manufacture decides to implement the fix. If they can do it OTA, great. That will be more convenient for most owners.
I'm 39 and did the same. I found myself annoyed by the repetition and humour that brought me back to being 9 years old, but also curious about where it would progress and what the underlying story might be revealed to be, if anything. Without the grating components stemming from being an old person, I'd probably like it or see the appeal better.
The humour is practically the raw embodiment of how little kids joke and play. If you're around little kids (especially boys often), you see skibidi toilet antics erupt from time to time whether they've seen it or not. Goofy facial expression, nonsensical voices and singing, over-exaggersted comical violence, constantly escalating battles, etc.
> U.S. officials said in September that China had struck a “framework for a TikTok deal.” However, in the following weeks, China has not confirmed that such a deal was agreed to.
> Many experts believe China’s strategy is to keep talking while making few concrete agreements.
Almost everything with this administration is just lawless uncertainty so it's hard to tell, but has that actually happened yet? The last info I could find is that some sort of rough deal was solidifying, but that even things like the investor makeup or components was still up in the air. That was just two weeks ago.
I don't think it has moved to the new structure yet, or the "all the servers in the US with Oracle control of the algo". Maybe they're just getting ready in advance.
Alternately, a motivated subgroup can often coerce platforms. A lot of platforms will engage such moderation simply because enough people brigaded to flag/report something.
I have a very big hobby code project I’ve been working on for years.
AI has not made me much more productive at work.
I can only work on my hobby project when I’m tired after the kids go to bed. AI has made me 3x productive there because reviewing code is easier than architecting. I can sense if it’s bad, I have good tests, the requests are pretty manageable (make a new crud page for this DTO using app conventions).
But at work where I’m fresh and tackling hard problems that are 50% business political will? If anything it slows me down.
“It’s not a problem for me so I struggle to see why it’s a problem for anybody else”.
The lack of empathy throughout your comments here is staggering.
I’m a fantastic baker. I can bake a much better cake than my grandma ever could, but I can’t bake the cake I had in my childhood without a box. “Just but two” is nonsense dumb advice.
You can't bake the cake you had in your childhood. You already had it. Even if it had all the same atoms in the same positions it would not be the same, because you are not the same.
reply