this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2025
958 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

62012 readers
3595 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
958
The Cybertruck Appears to Be More Deadly Than the Infamous Ford Pinto, According to a New Analysis (futurism.com)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/technology@lemmy.world
NSFW 164 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xapr@lemmy.sdf.org 82 points 1 day ago (3 children)

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!

[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] xapr@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 hour ago

Absolutely! What's weird is that Teslas have been top-rated for crash-worthiness in the past, so there are a few possibilities I can think of:

  • They need to be top crash-worthy, because of the stupid autopilot trying its best to kill the occupants
  • They need to be top crash-worthy, because otherwise any crash at all would result in a fiery death
  • The Cybertruck is an outlier and is not as crash-worthy as the previous Teslas
  • All of the above

What was that rule of thumb for taking multiple choice tests? If you don't know the answer, always select "all of the above"?

[–] Greee1911@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (3 children)

If you read the article is was specifically died by fire. Not any other cause of death.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 46 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

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 because 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.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Top of the line in utility sports.

Unexplained fires are a matter for the courts.

[–] Krompus@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

CANYONERO!

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Wish I could find data on all fatalities/100,000