Tesla Cybertruck's stiff structure, sharp design raise safety concerns -experts
www.reuters.com
The angular design of Tesla's Cybertruck has safety experts concerned that the electric pickup truck's stiff stainless-steel exoskeleton could hurt pedestrians and cyclists.

Tesla Cybertruck’s stiff structure, sharp design raise safety concerns - experts::The angular design of Tesla’s Cybertruck has safety experts concerned that the electric pickup truck’s stiff stainless-steel exoskeleton could hurt pedestrians and cyclists.

  • SpaceBishop@lemmy.zipEnglish
    6110·
    11 months ago

    could hurt pedestrians and cyclists

    I dare you to convince me that anyone still buying Tesla would not see that as a benefit. That’s going to be the number one selling point of this thing after articles like this make their rounds.

      • Albbi@lemmy.caEnglish
        285·
        11 months ago

        Why the fuck do people hate on the one class of people using the most efficient form of transportation that also provides exercise in a world that can’t stop spewing greenhouse gasses (For electric cars, those greenhouse gasses are being spewed at the power plant instead of from the car itself) and people don’t get enough exercise?

        Fucking. Madness. Cyclists should be applauded and not targeted.

          • Albbi@lemmy.caEnglish
            11·
            11 months ago

            I’d like to see the information debunking this. In my area, 89% of power is from fossil fuels. My naive understanding of this is that this will still generate emissions, although I would expect the capabilities of reducing harmful emissions to be much better at a power plant instead of having to build it into every vehicle. So my thinking is that emissions are still happening, just not necessarily where people are living and with better emissions management.

            Damn, the parent comment to mine got deleted, so nobody will see this anyway.

        • CADmonkey@lemmy.worldEnglish
          31·
          11 months ago

          I don’t know about other cities, but locally we have a very nice and well paved city-spanning network of bicycle paths that are parallel to, but separate from, the city streets. And we have a group of guys on their $10k bikes who ignore these paths to ride three across in a lane during rush hour on roads that will beat their wheels square, ignoring all red lights and stop signs. They make it hard for me to ride, because I get associated with these people by virtue of riding a bike.

          People don’t hate cyclists. They hate those cyclists.

          This is of course excluding those who hate everything which isn’t horrible for the planet. They hate bikes, electric cars, smaller cars that don’t burn much gas, vegetables, and any woman with a spine.

        • BearOfaTime@lemm.eeEnglish
          49·
          11 months ago

          Most efficient?

          Human bodies are god awful at converting fuel to useful mechanical energy.

          • hperrin@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            11 months ago

            I’m pretty sure they meant most efficient in terms of emissions, not energy conversion. Even if you count farting as emissions, bikes put out basically no emissions. You’d have to get 100% of your electricity from renewables to match them in an electric car.

          • misophist@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            11 months ago

            I’m sure that would be relevant if my body was attempting to push an entire car to work every day. When I cycle to work, I’m carrying at most 15 kilos of bike and belongings with me. With the efficiency multiplier of gears and wheels, I believe my 8 kilometer trip burns about 200 kilocalories. I don’t think that much energy will move an entire 2000 kilo car very far at all, whether it’s powered with electricity or petrol.

            • BearOfaTime@lemm.eeEnglish
              12·
              11 months ago

              And how much food does that require you to ingest? What did it take to produce that food, deliver it to you, and take it away when you shat it out?

              So easy to ignore all the inbound energy that was utilized for your body to produce 2kc.

              • misophist@lemmy.worldEnglish
                2·
                11 months ago

                200 kcals is like 1/10 of the average person’s daily intake, so maybe 1/3 of an average meal? Not much at all, comparatively. If you’re still concerned about efficiency, slap a small electric motor on the bike, but even a fully human-powered bike is more energy efficient than driving an entire car.

        • chakan2@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1022·
          11 months ago

          I’ll give you an honest answer. I live in a rualish area. There’s a 2 lane highway that’s roughly 50 miles from my city to another one. 55 and a lot of blind curves. Farmers in semi trucks use that road all the time for hauling stuff.

          Every summer there’s a pack of cyclists that try that route. They barely do 25. Every summer one of them does on one of the corners. You simply can’t stop a semi fast enough when something is doing half the speed limit, especially on a sharp corner.

          They’re a fucking menace. There literally hundreds of miles of trails to ride in my area, but they have to be on that one particular road. They’re simply the most self centered assholes in the universe IMO.

          • hperrin@lemmy.worldEnglish
            9·
            11 months ago

            That sounds like a problem with your county. If that many people are dying, wouldn’t it be worth building a separated bike path?

            • Throwaway@lemm.eeEnglish
              16·
              11 months ago

              I don’t know his county specifically, but often times the roads are designed to fit in an area, with a set number of lanes, and built to that width. You cant add bike paths with out redesigning, buying more land, and building miles amd miles of path. And for what? Five bozos to ride through in fair weather?

              Not enough benefits to justify the costs. Plenty better things to spend money on.

          • Throwaway@lemm.eeEnglish
            513·
            11 months ago

            Yeah,itd be one thing if they were using it for transport and actually not blocking traffic and being safe about it, but none of that is true. They all think they’re Lance Armstrong or something, and its the tour de france. People have places to be!

            • chakan2@lemmy.worldEnglish
              611·
              11 months ago

              That’s the crux of it. They could ride on the sidewalk and slow down…or they could simply move over and let traffic pass. But they don’t. It’s some holy war to piss off as many people as possible while wearing spandex.

              All the hardcore cyclists I’ve known are miserable insufferable people so it makes sense. Middle managers on their second or third marriages that hate their lives. There’s plenty of sport out there that offers superior fitness and doesn’t do damage to your prostate…but, whatevs.

      • kattenluik@feddit.nlEnglish
        162·
        11 months ago

        You have serious issues and world view problems to even begin to think things like that about people.

          • kattenluik@feddit.nlEnglish
            2·
            11 months ago

            Why do you believe they are joking? What indicates that especially with this behavior being common?

            • Darkenfolk@dormi.zoneEnglish
              11·
              11 months ago

              Oh fuck off, this behavior is not “common” more often than not people say shit like this to get a raise out of someone, or as a joke in the “image people actually behaving like this” way.

              • kattenluik@feddit.nlEnglish
                1·
                11 months ago

                I’m sorry but that’s not right at all, and people do actually think like this in the US and it is common.