• @londos
    link
    English
    651 year ago

    I will admit there was a time when he was pushing electric cars while traditional auto manufacturers seemed to be dragging their feet. It felt like he was on the right side of a big issue and shaking things up. I think it’s important to admit when we get it wrong. And boy did I get it wrong.

    • @masquenox
      link
      English
      71 year ago

      It felt like he was on the right side of a big issue

      No. No, he never was. Any leftist will tell you that the only solution to the car problem is public transport… not silly attempts to make individual cars more “eco-friendly.” That’s not leftism - that’s what we call “green capitalism.” And leftists have understood that loooong before Phony Stark skipped South Africa to avoid being drafted into the SADF to uphold the white supremacist state he benefited so richly from.

      • @londos
        link
        English
        301 year ago

        100% agree with you now. I wasn’t at that level of analysis at the time yet.

        • @masquenox
          link
          English
          151 year ago

          I wasn’t at that level of analysis at the time yet.

          Me neither. They really did a number on us.

      • @Hackerman_uwu
        link
        English
        141 year ago

        Do you think you could be a little more careful in your angry smearing of conscientious objectors please?

        My brother dodged the draft. He’s a theologian who spent years in exile due to his refusal to serve the corrupt apartheid government.

        Give a fuck about Edolf Twitler or don’t but leave the rest of us out of this. Cunt is your problem now anyway.

        Just, mind the facts while you rant if you don’t mind. Please.

        • @masquenox
          link
          English
          21 year ago

          Do you think you could be a little more careful in your angry smearing of conscientious objectors please?

          Perhaps you need to stop smearing conscientious objectors by pretending Phony Stark was one - you might just as well pretend Donald Trump was a conscientious objector if you apply that label to Musk.

          It’s out in the open now - Musk is as much a white supremacist as any National Party goon. And, like a lot of rich white kids whose families got rich off the opportunities and impoverished black labor the Apartheid-regime provided them with, Musk felt himself too entitled to actually do the dirty work himself. It was common knowledge here in South Africa at the time - the rich white kids from rich families got to opt out of the war, despite the fact thet they benefited the most from the Apartheid-regime.

          It is true that some of those rich white kids actually were against the Apartheid-regime… but Musk wasn’t one of them. His blatant support for white supremacism and his enabling of right-wing ideology proves that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

          • Snot Flickerman
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Exactly. If the reason you are “conscientiously objecting” is because you’re a rich Nazi shitheel who is too much of a pussy to fight for anything yourself, no one cares because you obviously don’t have a real conscience to be conscientous with.

            He is clearly fine with sending others to fight his battles for him. Can he be any more the Gen X version of Trump?

        • @masquenox
          link
          English
          71 year ago

          Wait, is this a bad thing?

          No, it’s a Musk thing - he claims him skipping out on doing his bit for the Apartheid-regime (the true reason for his family’s riches) was based on his (alleged) “stance” against the Apartheid-regime - but his overt white supremacism and his enabling of far-right ideologies kind of disproves all of that, doesn’t it?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        You’re pushing a very niche view as if it’s universal, I get why you’re doing it but you’re wrong to. There is no single solution to transport requirements and while the vast majority of leftists of course agree public transport is vital it’s not a magic solution for everything and outside the car hate bubble is very rare for anyone, even a leftwing person, to be staunchly anticar.

        You might not like it but it’s reality.

        • @masquenox
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You’re pushing a very niche view as if it’s universal,

          Oh, it used to be far, far more universal than it is now. They spent a lot of propaganda money to make it less universal.

          Considering how the rivets seem to be popping off the western propaganda model recently, I’m willing to bet that it might one day be a lot more universal once more.

          You might not like that, but that’s reality.

          • @[email protected]B
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

            universla

            Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

            I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -11 year ago

            I don’t mean to be rude but you’re confused and delusional, there isn’t a transport authority in the world that thinks we can totally do without cars - I’m all for idealism but it should be at least grounded in some form of reality.

            • @masquenox
              link
              English
              01 year ago

              Riiiight… I’m confused and delusional because you want to live in a world where Big Auto’s profit margins are prioritized over the needs of the public.

              Phony Stark might have a little blue check mark to sell you - he likes the way you think.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -11 year ago

                If I had my way then manufacturing would be publicly owned and based on open source principles, that wouldn’t change the fact that transport networks are still going to require cars.

                Do we over use cars? Yes. Can we totally do without cars, vans and specialist vehicles? No.

                They’re incredibly versatile and hugely efficient in certain usecase situations, the infrastructure is orders of magnitude cheaper and easier to maintain than any other alternative.

                Ecologically they can make a lot of sense too, especially fleet managed electric self-drive which is without a doubt where we’re heading.

                Investing in long distance passenger train networks isn’t a great strategy at the moment, by the time it’s half built it’s very likely efuels already on the market now will have significant adoption in aviation thus making flying a far less polluting means of travel than trains – but it’ll be too late to change because you’ve already released all that carbon from the huge steel works needed to make the tracks.

                What we should be doing is creating car friendly transport hubs allowing people to do first and return mile by car and linking all those transport hubs with efficient, affordable, safe, and reliable short and medium train lines. Cities should have tube and tram networks that are accomodating to all and which include the protections required for safety of the passengers, especially from other passengers.

                ‘women getting harassed doesn’t matter’ isn’t an acceptable answer, ‘disabled people can just stay home’ isn’t an acceptable answer, ‘People who need to transport stuff can’t’ isn’t an acceptable answer… Until rail based public transport can actually fill all the needs of the people it’s not a viable solution in it’s own.

                Mixed mode integrated transport network is what every single person who has any interest in transportation agrees is the best solution, everyone except the kneejerk flatearth anticar nuts of course.

                • @masquenox
                  link
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  If I had my way then manufacturing would be publicly owned and based on open source principles

                  You start off very well… but after that sentence you just take a running nosedive into bog-standard green capitalist apologia.

                  They’re incredibly versatile and hugely somewhat efficient in certain usecase extremely limited situations,

                  FTFY.

                  Ecologically they can make a lot of sense too

                  No. They absolutely fucking do not in any way, shape or form.

                  aviation thus making flying a far less polluting means of travel than trains

                  Never going to happen, genius. Just the massive infrastructure air travel requires makes this attempt of yours a joke. When it comes to efficiency, nothing beats trains - except ships. That’s not going to change any time soon - or possibly ever.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -11 year ago

                    You’re saying a lot of things in strong terms but not proving any evidence for why you’re right and groups like TfL who are regarded as one of the most advanced public transport networks in the world are wrong when they say mixed mode integrated transport networks are the only viable option.

                    Just adding swearwords and huffing like youre some expert talking down to a fool is a fun tactic in a discussion but when you don’t have anything to back it up then it just makes you look like a bloviating jackass.

                    Do you really think that running train lines to every rural house is ecologically more sound than cars? And we run them all empty on the of chance that someone wants to use them? Do we run a cargo line to ever farm and factory?

                    There are use cases where ecologically speaking personal vehicles are the only even vaguely sensible solution.

                    If you had a heart attack would you like the paramedics to spend an hour waiting for trains then another hour on trains taking you to the hospital? Maybe special ambulance trains that wizz past the others and delay everyone hours because the schedules got messed up while they were in sidings? No? Then we’re building roads anyway and it would be silly not to use them.

                    And yes air travel using efuels is ecologically far less impactful then train travel even on legacy lines (i.e. lines which have repaid their initial construction cost (ecological), these don’t really exist much because maintenance continues to add significant ecological cost.)

                    Cost over the life of infrastructure per person mile is actually very low for aviation, airports are cheaper than trainlines by a wide margin and planes are about the same cost as trains per served mile, a bit cheaper but thats largely due to economies of scale so I’ll be charitable and handwave it.

                    We need more trains, we get more trains by being realistic about where they’re useful and proposing and supporting sensible developments. Personally I am angry at the endless green flag waving idiots that opposed HS2 because it was going though forests, that is an amazingly good use of trains and have been already reducing both car and lorry use on some of the UK’s busiest roads while also serving as a great starting point to a integrated cargo network requiring only last mile trucking - but it got shit all over by so many people including idiots that shout on Facebook about how terrible cars are and then say the HS2 cargo transport plan was bad because it was built around mixed mode rather than some magic transporter or what most the lunatics actually seen to want a return to barbarism and the destruction of our modern society.