this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
90 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37752 readers
22 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 37 points 1 year ago

I just got my Tesla back after 11 months in the shop waiting on Tesla to provide the parts needed after a relatively minor fender bender. I love that car, genuinely, but NOBODY should be buying a Tesla until they get their supply chain shit together. It's certainly the last time I buy a car from a manufacturer that isn't well-established (sorry, Rivian, Lucid, etc.)

[–] AlternateRoute@lemmy.ca 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] Teknikal@lemm.ee 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I knew Elon was a prat the second he sued Top Gear and lost over a Tesla review.

Top Gear were kinder than they really should have been.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fer0n@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] fer0n@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For anyone just reading the headline, it’s already been deleted:

[…] a now-deleted update to the electric carmaker's terms of service said the firm could sue customers for $50,000 or more if they resell during the first year of ownership without first getting written permission from Tesla. The provision seemed designed to deter scalping for a car expected to be available only in limited quantities after CEO Elon Musk's statement that Tesla "dug our own grave with the Cybertruck."

[–] Cap@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

The aim of the clause was to prevent scalping of the truck.

[–] ulkesh 12 points 1 year ago

Walking back yet another stupid action by Tesla. Why is it nearly everything Musk touches becomes so moronic? He wants to get to Mars so bad, he should just strap his ass to a rocket and aim it and go, and never return.

[–] BarrierWithAshes@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

This is something I'm surprised hasn't happened more often. Just look at how gung-ho Ferrari is with their lawsuits.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 1 year ago

🤖 I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:

Click here to see the summaryThe provision seemed designed to deter scalping for a car expected to be available only in limited quantities after CEO Elon Musk's statement that Tesla "dug our own grave with the Cybertruck."

It was still in the Tesla Motor Vehicle Order Agreement Terms & Conditions earlier today, but was removed from the document while we worked on this article.

Tesla may have decided to remove the clause after several news reports spread word of the change over the weekend.

Before the deletion, the document said Cybertruck buyers had to offer the car back to Tesla before any attempt to resell the vehicle within one year of delivery.

You agree that in the event you breach this provision, or Tesla has reasonable belief that you are about to breach this provision, Tesla may seek injunctive relief to prevent the transfer of title of the Vehicle or demand liquidated damages from you in the amount of $50,000 or the value received as consideration for the sale or transfer, whichever is greater.

"For the Cybertruck's first year on the market though, governmental documents indicate that Tesla will only offer dual- and tri-motor all-wheel drive models which will carry higher starting prices."


Saved 66% of original text.