304
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
304 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
6793 readers
143 users here now
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's abysmal. Let's make it's extra hard where children are far more likely to be.
And have the presence of mind to do this after a collision and the vehicle is on fire.
There's a reason that building egress (at least for commercial) is the way it is, with things like push bars and opening outwards. It's because people do not think clearly in emergency situations.
… the back doors that have child locks already on them so THEY CANT be opened by said children…?
That’s what argument you want to use? Seriously? Lmfao the shit people come up with sometimes.
An emergency release should bypass the child locks. Looks like you're the one lacking imagination.
The emergency release does bypass the child lock. That's why it's in a hidden spot in the back doors, because otherwise the child lock would be pointless.
And the reason why it’s hard to access is so a kid can’t accidentally open it and fall out….
Having it bypass the child locks defeats the singular purpose of the child lock lmfao. What is with these arguments?
You can have adults sitting at the back with child lock on, you want any emergency system to bypass other systems that might block them.
Please, never work in safety.
You should NEVER have an adult in the back with the child lock on… since they couldn’t escape in an emergency….
Normal vehicles don’t have a bypass, so an adult would be locked in any vehicle if it was on….
Tesla’s atleast have a feature to overcome this….
It’s quite sad that you needed this explained…. Do you even own a drivers license? If you do, please turn it in for the safety of everyone on the road, not just the adults you lock in the back seat…
I guess you never forgot anything in your life.
Did you know you shouldn't carry people in your trunk? Yet by law the trunk needs to have a (glow in the dark!) way to be opened from the inside if it's not a hatchback vehicle. Crazy right?
An emergency measure has a purpose, it's to be used in an emergency. If it can be bypassed then it fails as an emergency measure. What's funny is that Tesla agrees because the emergency door release bypasses child lock, like it should.
Sure I have, and adults can be locked in the back of a normal car with zero way out.
Yet you want to argue that a hard to access release is bad..?
When this problem in a worse way has already ex is Ted for decades…?
Childlocks have zero override, and Teslas do, and yet the argument is child safety…?
Yes I know it overrides it… that’s not the argument. The argument was, children could be back there, it’s a stupid argument since you can lock them in the back to ANY vehicle, (but Tesla as you stupidly pointed out to ruin your own argument….), so to cry the children can’t find it… is the stupidest fucking argument that could be used to decry this..
Do you need this explained again? Or can you finally comprehend why the argument about children is a red herring?
It's as if you invented a parallel conversation in your mind...
It’s all child safety, yet you can’t grasp that?
Last message.
Child locks are so children can’t open the door and fall out of a moving vehicle, Tesla’s emergency release overrides said child lock. If it was easily accessible a child could use it and fall out of moving vehicle still. So hence why it’s not an easily accessible handle. Since doing that would endanger children in more situations… you’re a bloody moron if you can’t comprehend this.
Hence why it’s marginally hard to access… so it’s not randomly pulled.
Got it yet? Or do you need some diagrams? Because that’s too much work.
Yep, you invented a conversation that didn't happen the way the actual conversation did and now you're contradicting yourself.
Ok buhbye!
The ones that have to be enabled and I haven't stated thoughts on either way?
Yes so what difference does a hard to make emergency access do when in any normal car they can be locked in…?
It’s hard to access so kids CANT open the door while it’s moving and fall out. Thats why vehicles have the child lock feature available… it’s quite sad that you need this explained.
I think their point is that child locks are not on by default?
And? A child can be locked in the back of any vehicle with no way out, atleast teslas have a way to still get out… leave it on, and no law an adult is locked back there, with no override to get out. And that’s your Honda, not even a fancy electric car….
The point is, they’re crying about children being locked in the back, yet any current vehicle you’ve been able to chose to do that for bloody decades already, yet a car with a feature to overcome that is being decried. You were locked in the back of your parents car, it’s unsafe for children to be able to open doors while driving, so it’s prevented for their safety.
The hypocrisy that people show just to be mad at something with one actually comprehending why…