Alaska Darin Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Yeah, GM went under because it was too busy addressing consumer safety to be worried about their business plan. That's what they're known for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Yeah, GM went under because it was too busy addressing consumer safety to be worried about their business plan. Whatever way you want twist the argument is fine with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 Gotta admit... Toyota made one nice FJ40 (Original Landcrusier) back the 1970's... The they "Yuppiefied" then Landcrusier into a luxury wagon. Try finding one of these that is not in a heap of rust (which they did in the matter of minutes of coming off the line): FJ40 Sure the "J" nomenclature stands for Jeep... Those rides were anything but fake... Unlike the "Fake Jeep" Crusier they are pumping out today. My gosh everything rusted in the '70's. Back then we could relate to Fred Flintstone with daylight coming through the floors of many cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 My gosh everything rusted in the '70's. Back then we could relate to Fred Flintstone with daylight coming through the floors of many cars. every post from eii starts off "back in the day" who needs progress ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 My gosh everything rusted in the '70's. Back then we could relate to Fred Flintstone with daylight coming through the floors of many cars. I don't know the guy I am working with tonight is driving a 1978 Ford F-100 Lariat with just a very few small specks of rust on it... And it was an Illinois car since coming off the line. Looks kinda like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 And another case of faulty accerators is proven. Linky OK, well this one is driver error, but I'm certain EVERY other one was due to faulty accelerators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 My gosh everything rusted in the '70's. Back then we could relate to Fred Flintstone with daylight coming through the floors of many cars. If it weren't for the Japanese getting in the market heavy and showing the big 3 how to build cars, they still would be producing junk. Probably with Obama's blessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 And another case of faulty accerators is proven. Linky OK, well this one is driver error, but I'm certain EVERY other one was due to faulty accelerators. But she insists she had her foot on the brake! Isn't that good enough??? I guess Toyota should change the car so that if you press the gas all the way to the floor, the brake automatically kicks in. That'd stop the stupid people from doing stupid things at least... It's like the 80s all over again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 But she insists she had her foot on the brake! Isn't that good enough??? I guess Toyota should change the car so that if you press the gas all the way to the floor, the brake automatically kicks in. That'd stop the stupid people from doing stupid things at least... It's like the 80s all over again... Suddenly, the annoying Windows Vista "Are you sure you want to do that? Really? You're sure now?" messages seem downright prescient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 But she insists she had her foot on the brake! Isn't that good enough??? I guess Toyota should change the car so that if you press the gas all the way to the floor, the brake automatically kicks in. That'd stop the stupid people from doing stupid things at least... It's like the 80s all over again... "How odd... When I paste the link into the first post, it truncates the link, breaking it. When I put it in a regular post, it works just fine... Same paste. Very odd." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 Hey Fez... 50 bucks if you guess who said that in my post above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 But she insists she had her foot on the brake! Isn't that good enough??? I guess Toyota should change the car so that if you press the gas all the way to the floor, the brake automatically kicks in. That'd stop the stupid people from doing stupid things at least... It's like the 80s all over again... It should be good enough. She isn't an evil corporation, so her having intended to press the brake should be equivalent to her having pressed the brake. Actually, Toyota should be expected to pay for ALL damage she caused (and maybe double or treble, just because they're evil), because being the evil corporation that it is, it should have known that someday an unfortunate individual would make such a readily expectable and easily curable problem. Heck, she should get additional compensation for the trauma Toyota caused her by having its electronic gas pedal control her mind and make her press it to the floor when she wanted to brake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 Hey Fez, any comments on what I said above? I am not denying that there are fakers out there that will take advantage of what is going on... There always will those people. What about "ghost in the machine?" Obviously our home computers do strange and odd things from time to time with no explanation. Modern vehicles are computers, it is a very real possibility that there are "ghosts" in the software, hardware or whatever... Again, the troubling part is that we will be doing 65 down the highway. So basically if you, me, or others can't explain what is happening in our own PC 100% of the time for 100% of the situations... NOBODY should pass judgement what is happening in somebody's car. They say it accelerated uncontrolled... Then it accelerated uncontrolled. Face it, you have no way of explaining "ghost in the machine" even when it is happening in our own home computers. Toyota and all other car companies need to suck it up. The burden is on the car companies. Comes with the territory when dealing with computers. They don't like it, go back to the old mechanical way of doing things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 It should be good enough. She isn't an evil corporation, so her having intended to press the brake should be equivalent to her having pressed the brake. Actually, Toyota should be expected to pay for ALL damage she caused (and maybe double or treble, just because they're evil), because being the evil corporation that it is, it should have known that someday an unfortunate individual would make such a readily expectable and easily curable problem. Heck, she should get additional compensation for the trauma Toyota caused her by having its electronic gas pedal control her mind and make her press it to the floor when she wanted to brake. Just because the black box said one thing, it does not make it true. There are glitches in computers all the time. The professor from SIU was able to short circuit the vehicles and have it show no code among other things. If you can't be 100% sure what is going on in every computer every time... Then ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN and may be believable. Again, prove that there can't be a ghost in the machine. With computers, nobody can. Don't get me wrong, I am not defending the woman's actions... She might very well have caused the problem and probably did. Yet, I am still going to defend the woman as a consumer. I am sorry, this is the sad state that our cars have become. I always said: "Thank God our vehicles do not behave like our desktop computers and are built the way the computer industry pumps its crap out" and: "just imagine what problems people will face." Guess what? That day has come. The right and moral thing to do in all this is to clearly fall down on the side of consumer protectionism even if there are people out there faking it and "spoiling it" for others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 Just because the black box said one thing, it does not make it true. There are glitches in computers all the time. The professor from SIU was able to short circuit the vehicles and have it show no code among other things. If you can't be 100% sure what is going on in every computer every time... Then ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN and may be believable. Again, prove that there can't be a ghost in the machine. With computers, nobody can. Don't get me wrong, I am not defending the woman's actions... She might very well have caused the problem and probably did. Yet, I am still going to defend the woman as a consumer. I am sorry, this is the sad state that our cars have become. I always said: "Thank God our vehicles do not behave like our desktop computers and are built the way the computer industry pumps its crap out" and: "just imagine what problems people will face." Guess what? That day has come. The right and moral thing to do in all this is to clearly fall down on the side of consumer protectionism even if there are people out there faking it and "spoiling it" for others. You're not defending her, but you fall down on the side of consumer protectionism even when those consumers are faking it. Just how much money would you have given the old guy that found his own insulin needle in his Coke can? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 Just how much money would you have given the old guy that found his own insulin needle in his Coke can? Why? Was the Coke can computer driven? People like you and Fez can't even explain what is happening with your own computers 100% of the time... How can you judge others. I have a hunch it may be driver error, it may not also. You gotta take her word for it even if you believe she may have caused it. There is no way to prove what really happened. So yes I can not defend her and still defend her... What are we going to start trusting computers over humans more? Be careful what you wish for. Can yo be 100% certain that there was no glitch and that there never will be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 Why? Was the Coke can computer driven? People like you and Fez can't even explain what is happening with your own computers 100% of the time... How can you judge others. I have a hunch it may be driver error, it may not also. You gotta take her word for it even if you believe she may have caused it. There is no way to prove what really happened. So yes I can not defend her and still defend her... What are we going to start trusting computers over humans more? Be careful what you wish for. Can yo be 100% certain that there was no glitch and that there never will be? Sheesh. You are getting a little out there w/ this one. It's called a "reasonable doubt" for a reason. Before any testing on the car was performed, perhaps you give her the benefit of the doubt. Now that there is nothing wrong with the car (other than it having run into a wall), the onus is on her. But if you're going to get existential, can we even be certain that your spelling error was caused by you and not your computer. I think you'd be able to guess my answer to that question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 Sheesh. You are getting a little out there w/ this one. It's called a "reasonable doubt" for a reason. Before any testing on the car was performed, perhaps you give her the benefit of the doubt. Now that there is nothing wrong with the car (other than it having run into a wall), the onus is on her. But if you're going to get existential, can we even be certain that your spelling error was caused by you and not your computer. I think you'd be able to guess my answer to that question. A little? I am always out there! How do we know there is nothing wrong with the car, just like the computer I am on right now? No. The onus should be on the computer. This isn't a harmless desktop application that goes willy nilly. I do admit, Toyota is in quite a pickle. They need to start thinking outside the box and not go down their usual road... This can be a company killer. This isn't sludging anymore Toto. Oh... Bad spelling kills no one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passepartout Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 Toyota blaming the Dems for their woes. It will only get worse before it gets any better. In fact, IT WON'T GET ANY BETTER! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts