• Flying Squid
    link
    239 months ago

    The car shouldn’t have been present in the first place. It wasn’t a place for cars to be at that moment.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        159 months ago

        A funny thing about life is a lot of things happen unofficially, and humans do fine at adjusting to such situations.

        • @DoomBot5
          link
          English
          -49 months ago

          Plenty of humans also accidently wander into places they’re officially not allowed to be in, much less unofficially.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        69 months ago

        It was the Chinatown Lunar New Year’s celebration. What do you think?

      • quirzle
        link
        fedilink
        19 months ago

        I don’t believe it was, based on the other cars present in the videos.

      • FaceDeer
        link
        fedilink
        -89 months ago

        And were the “violators will be set on fire” signs posted?

          • FaceDeer
            link
            fedilink
            -49 months ago

            I didn’t realize that a “fireworks show” meant “showing how fire works (by burning down any cars that happen to be present).”

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              39 months ago

              They always have fireworks in Chinatown on Chinese New Year. No human would be dumb enough to park there.

              • quirzle
                link
                fedilink
                29 months ago

                No human would be dumb enough to park there.

                There’s at least 3 other cars parked there clearly visible in the videos.

              • FaceDeer
                link
                fedilink
                -39 months ago

                But if one did anyway, torching their car would be fine?

    • FaceDeer
      link
      fedilink
      -9
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      If you were to turn down the wrong street, maybe park in the wrong spot, you’d consider it reasonable if a mob torched it?

      • Flying Squid
        link
        179 months ago

        I’m pretty sure I’m not a self-driving car. I’m also pretty sure if I saw a big crowd of people, I wouldn’t keep driving forward.

        • @Everythingispenguins
          link
          39 months ago

          Crap self-driving cars are now self aware, posting on the Internet, and think they are human. Everybody grab a torch

        • FaceDeer
          link
          fedilink
          -149 months ago

          I didn’t say they’d torch you. The scenario can include them graciously allowing you to depart your car before they burn it to the ground.

          Seriously, you think it’s reasonable for a mob to destroy a car because its presence “triggered frustrations in the crowd”? Bear in mind this isn’t France we’re talking about, where torching cars to express frustration is part of the common culture. This is San Francisco.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            149 months ago

            I think it’s reasonable for a mob to destroy one of the many self-driving cars that have been pissing off San Francisco residents for a very long time now when it tries to drive into them during a big celebration where cars weren’t even supposed to be.

            Who got hurt here? Waymo? Fuck Waymo.

            • @Olhonestjim
              link
              49 months ago

              Waymo’s insurance company anyway. And Waymo’s reputation.

            • FaceDeer
              link
              fedilink
              -7
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Alright, so you’re fine with mobs destroying the property of anyone that “pisses them off.” I’d say that’s a slippery slope, but you’re already basically at the bottom.

              • Flying Squid
                link
                99 months ago

                I’m fine with mobs destroying something that has been a public menace for years.

                Why are you making personal attacks? I did not attack you. Are you able to carry out a conversation with someone you’re disagreeing with and not make personal attacks?

                • FaceDeer
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -79 months ago

                  What personal attacks? I’m giving you ample opportunity to clarify your position on this matter, and it keeps ending up in support of mob violence and lawlessness. I think that’s a terrible position to take, but that’s an attack on the position, not the person.

                  • Flying Squid
                    link
                    39 months ago

                    What personal attacks?

                    This one:

                    I’d say that’s a slippery slope, but you’re already basically at the bottom.

                    As for my position, I supported it very well. If a public menace is allowed on the streets, then I have no problem with people taking the law into their own hands.

                    Sorry, I’m not a legal absolutist. I don’t believe that every law should be followed no matter what the situation or circumstance. And there are some laws which I refuse to follow entirely. Like the one here in Indiana which says that I can’t use cannabis.

                    These cars are a public menace. They block traffic for no reason, they drive into people, they keep getting into accidents.

                    Bay area first responders also think they’re a menace. So yes, people should listen to ambulance drivers and firefighters when they are telling them that the city is giving its blessings to something inherently unsafe and I do not have an issue when they take care of the problem themselves.

                    Maybe you would sit back and let the government-sanctioned orphan crusher keep crushing orphans and stand in the way of anyone who would pull the off switch because that would be lawlessness, but I would turn it off.