• houseofleft@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Putting aside my “I am absolutely terrified for what will happen in the USA over the next 5 years” hat, I’m interested in seeing how the likely economic deregulation pans out over exports.

    As a EU citizen, if I have a choice between:

    • Unsafe and unregulated EVs from the US
    • More trustworthy and regulated EVs from elsewhere

    No way in hell would I purchase a USA backed EV. Similarly, if (big if here) countries ever get round to putting carbon taxes on goods, then the “drill baby drill” philosophy winds up putting huge tarriffs on american goods which are now made with extremely high emissions compared to elsewhere.

    I guess we’ll see? Last time Trump was president, he started a full on trade war, but surprisingly the noticable impact in the EU was pretty minor, so I guess we’ll see?

    • PuddleOfKittens@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      17 hours ago

      likely economic deregulation

      Friendly reminder that putting businesses in charge of regulation doesn’t result in deregulation, it results in different regulation - removing what hurts them and adding what helps them (protectionism, barriers to entry to hurt small fry, etc).

      • houseofleft@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 hours ago

        That’s such a good/interesting point!

        I guess by deregulation, I’m thinking removal of the kind of consumer focused safety regulations that I’d be interested in if I was buying an EV.

  • adarza@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    23 hours ago

    nothing to see here, folks. no conflicts of interest, no scamming share prices. no dangers to the public at all. nope. none of that. just business as usual. so move along now.

  • DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Regardless of who got elected, NHTSA was never going to do anything about this. Biden had 4 years to do something about Tesla FSD, and just “investigated” endlessly.

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Brought to you by the same people who complain about seat belt laws. You know, the laws that were created to protect other people from the whiners becoming human projectiles in a crash.

    • OutForARip@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Will that stop it crashing into you on the road when the other half drives their magggot mobile around?

  • Sibbo@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    22 hours ago

    “Full Self Driving (Supervised)” is not actually full self driving. “Supervised” means that the driver is responsible at all times.

    So since there is a driver watching, I’d imagine the bar for getting it licensed would be quite low anyways.

    • Soup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      12 hours ago

      It’s got that “100% Beef™” vibe. Like we’ve decided that the word “full” doesn’t mean anything anymore.

    • AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      16 hours ago

      A people who will accept a bait-and-switch like rebranding something that’s not full self-driving as “Full Self-Driving” can be conditioned to accept other forms of bait-and-switch. Case in point: the recent election

    • pedz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      20 hours ago

      It’s obviously not “full self driving” because I don’t have a driving license and cannot use a Tesla to drive me where I need to go. Same for people that can’t drive, like the blind.

      If they were truly autonomous cars, people wouldn’t need a driving license to use FSD.