Thunderf00t has lost last of his marbles and remaining bits of credibility

[AVGresponding]

Wonder if he'll make a video about this?

https://fuelarc.com/evs/its-official-the-cybertruck-is-more-explosive-than-the-ford-pinto/

[PlainName]

I am suspicious of the statistics used there. They say 5 fiery deaths in Cybertrucks vs 27 in the Pinto, resulting in 14.52/100K units for the Cybertruck and 0.85/100K units for the Pinto. But... there were 2 crashes and 1 incident for the Cybertruck, with the first crash resulting in 3 fatalities. The 1 incident is also suspect (don't know the details) so what we're actually looking at is 2 crashes. So the fiery crash rate is 5.8/100K units.

The Pinto I have no idea, but using the very variable number of people in a vehicle when it crashes seems rather suspect to me. Maybe one was full of illegal immigrants so 10 died in one incident. Or suppose the Pinto normally only had a driver because no passenger would be seen dead (sorry) in one. I would have thought bad incidents per unit would be a better think to compare than numbers burned.

[wraper]

Wonder if he'll make a video about this?

https://fuelarc.com/evs/its-official-the-cybertruck-is-more-explosive-than-the-ford-pinto/

I am suspicious of the statistics used there. They say 5 fiery deaths in Cybertrucks vs 27 in the Pinto, resulting in 14.52/100K units for the Cybertruck and 0.85/100K units for the Pinto. But... there were 2 crashes and 1 incident for the Cybertruck, with the first crash resulting in 3 fatalities. The 1 incident is also suspect (don't know the details) so what we're actually looking at is 2 crashes. So the fiery crash rate is 5.8/100K units.

The Pinto I have no idea, but using the very variable number of people in a vehicle when it crashes seems rather suspect to me. Maybe one was full of illegal immigrants so 10 died in one incident. Or suppose the Pinto normally only had a driver because no passenger would be seen dead (sorry) in one. I would have thought bad incidents per unit would be a better think to compare than numbers burned.

27 deaths for Pinto is the most lowballed estimate linked to fuel tank rupturing from the low-speed rear-end only. While 5 Cybertruck deaths include 3 deaths from hitting a tree at high speed, don't know about other two. It's called manipulation of statistics.

[Yrouel86]

It's called manipulation of statistics.

So perfect fit for thunderf00t garbage content 

[EEVblog]

In related news, just saw a lot of people on X yesterday and today (a few weeks late) blowing up about Technology Connections latest video with the 20min ICE/Trump rant at the end. How it's the end of his channel etc.
He limited comments to subscribers only.

[wilfred]

How is this related to TF? It appears entirely unrelated unless you want to stir the embers a bit and fire up this thread. It should work.

[EEVblog]

How is this related to TF? It appears entirely unrelated unless you want to stir the embers a bit and fire up this thread. It should work.

Both are big Youtubers covering technology related stuff, and this thread is about TF supposedly "losing credibility", it's literally in the title of the thread!
I said "in related news" because TC is also being called out for exactly the same thing, "losing credibility". So it's very related to the thread, and I wasn't going to go create another thread for for that so I mentioned it here.
The only difference is TC has seemingly done it in one video, and TF has done it over 20 or so videos or whatever.

[booscrawl]

In related news, just saw a lot of people on X yesterday and today (a few weeks late) blowing up about Technology Connections latest video with the 20min ICE/Trump rant at the end. How it's the end of his channel etc.
He limited comments to subscribers only.

Technology Connections isn't even on Twitter, but let's see the comments:
https://xcancel.com/nicholasmcraig/status/2017420393896714513

Let's take a look at Bluesky:
https://bsky.app/profile/techconnectify.bsky.social/post/3mdnt672umk24

I wonder if reading comments heavily biased towards a particular political orientation biases my perception!

[PlainName]

How is this related to TF? It appears entirely unrelated unless you want to stir the embers a bit and fire up this thread. It should work.

Both are big Youtubers covering technology related stuff, and this thread is about TF supposedly "losing credibility", it's literally in the title of the thread!
I said "in related news" because TC is also being called out for exactly the same thing, "losing credibility". So it's very related to the thread, and I wasn't going to go create another thread for for that so I mentioned it here.
The only difference is TC has seemingly done it in one video, and TF has done it over 20 or so videos or whatever.

Thunderfoot loses credibility for letting his hate of Musk override his logical brain. He doesn't, so far as I know, do politics.

TC hasn't lost technical credibility for posting a political rant, just pissed off the MAGA crowd.

Those are very different things and I though you wanted to keep politics out of here. Should we now post any and all technical channels (including all those free energy ones) here on the basis that they got cancelled, on youtube and, hence, related to this thread?

[wilfred]

TC hasn't lost technical credibility for posting a political rant, just pissed off the MAGA crowd.

Those are very different things and I though you wanted to keep politics out of here. Should we now post any and all technical channels (including all those free energy ones) here on the basis that they got cancelled, on youtube and, hence, related to this thread?

I'm pissed off at the MAGA crowd attitude to renewable energy. I heard there were wind farms off the east USA coast that were fully permitted and 60% complete that got cancelled. For a time at least. Ostensibly for national security concerns even though the Dept of Defense knew about it and signed off on it.

We had a political party here in Australia that favoured coal over renewable and have pivoted to nuclear. Which I am not opposed to in either case but I just want to not be lied to as to the reasons. Which is tactical political advantage, jobs in rural areas and provincial cities. I don't want to be told nuclear will be cheaper. And I don't think we need it badly enough for a private company to lay down the capital cost. Which means taxpayers will foot the cost. It takes a long time to see a return on a nuclear plant. Plus Australia more than any other populated continent can least afford the water.

[EEVblog]

Technology Connections isn't even on Twitter, but let's see the comments: https://xcancel.com/nicholasmcraig/status/2017420393896714513

He use to be big on Twitter, but the account was deleted and he moved to Bluesky when Elon bought it.

Let's take a look at Bluesky:
https://bsky.app/profile/techconnectify.bsky.social/post/3mdnt672umk24
I wonder if reading comments heavily biased towards a particular political orientation biases my perception!

Bluesky is (infamously) unique in that it's almost entirely an extreme left leaning user base.

[EEVblog]

Thunderfoot loses credibility for letting his hate of Musk override his logical brain. He doesn't, so far as I know, do politics.

He's done a few:

[vk6zgo]

Wonder if he'll make a video about this?

https://fuelarc.com/evs/its-official-the-cybertruck-is-more-explosive-than-the-ford-pinto/

I am suspicious of the statistics used there. They say 5 fiery deaths in Cybertrucks vs 27 in the Pinto, resulting in 14.52/100K units for the Cybertruck and 0.85/100K units for the Pinto. But... there were 2 crashes and 1 incident for the Cybertruck, with the first crash resulting in 3 fatalities. The 1 incident is also suspect (don't know the details) so what we're actually looking at is 2 crashes. So the fiery crash rate is 5.8/100K units.

The Pinto I have no idea, but using the very variable number of people in a vehicle when it crashes seems rather suspect to me. Maybe one was full of illegal immigrants so 10 died in one incident. Or suppose the Pinto normally only had a driver because no passenger would be seen dead (sorry) in one. I would have thought bad incidents per unit would be a better think to compare than numbers burned.

27 deaths for Pinto is the most lowballed estimate linked to fuel tank rupturing from the low-speed rear-end only. While 5 Cybertruck deaths include 3 deaths from hitting a tree at high speed, don't know about other two. It's called manipulation of statistics.

There were many more Ford Pintos made than Cybertrucks & they collectively travelled millions of miles.
The very low numbers of Cybertrucks, & lower distances travelled make statistical comparisons deceptive.

[CatalinaWOW]

There are many, many things that make the statistics deceptive.  I am quite sure that the demographics of the Pinto drivers and Cybertruck drivers are very different.   Less sure about what difference that makes.  The Pinto fatalities arguably were caused by the driver of the other car.  But I suspect that Cybertruck drivers as a group have worse statistics no matter what vehicle they are driving.

[paulca]

There are many, many things that make the statistics deceptive.  I am quite sure that the demographics of the Pinto drivers and Cybertruck drivers are very different.   Less sure about what difference that makes.  The Pinto fatalities arguably were caused by the driver of the other car.  But I suspect that Cybertruck drivers as a group have worse statistics no matter what vehicle they are driving.

Yea I spot the over simplifications, the under sampling and the cherry picking in the "Headline stats" he sets as  his premise.  Then the next 25 minutes are him leveraging his own cherry picked position based on those stats.

Even the ones where he does an experiment to "prove" his "conclusion", all the experiment does is prove the values of his metrics mathematically, but only as a tiny component of his already constructive argument.  The value in his metrics is wrong, not the experimental output values of them.

[Yrouel86]

How is this related to TF? It appears entirely unrelated unless you want to stir the embers a bit and fire up this thread. It should work.

Both are big Youtubers covering technology related stuff, and this thread is about TF supposedly "losing credibility", it's literally in the title of the thread!
I said "in related news" because TC is also being called out for exactly the same thing, "losing credibility". So it's very related to the thread, and I wasn't going to go create another thread for for that so I mentioned it here.
The only difference is TC has seemingly done it in one video, and TF has done it over 20 or so videos or whatever.

Technology Connection is also afflicted by EDS.
Before he fled Twitter I had a couple of interactions with him, one was about him using Starlink in his office while at the same time blaming Musk for it, basically he couldn't stand having to use it.
But the more interesting one was about Optimus, he couldn't stand it that Tesla became part of the discourse on the topic and, quote, "had the audacity" of making a robot (as if Tesla had to ask permission or something before starting that new project) and now poor Alec had to hear all about it...

And now he's on BlueSky which has become refuge for folks like him...

That said TF lost his credibility by repeatedly lying and spreading misinformation (literally the start of this thread has him spreading Starlink/elections conspiracy nonsense), Alec is more your run of the mill EDS and unless he starts blaming Musk for how you're using your dishwasher wrong he's far from TF levels of bullshit

[AVGresponding]

-snipped all the tedious fanboi rant-

You do realise that no matter how much you suck Musk's d*ck, he isn't going to offer you a $10m/year job and a hatful of Tesla shares?

[wraper]

-snipped all the tedious fanboi rant-

You do realise that no matter how much you suck Musk's d*ck, he isn't going to offer you a $10m/year job and a hatful of Tesla shares?

Do you realize that no matter how much you hate Musk, it won't make misrepresentation of facts to become a reality?

[Tangent_Tracker]

I get the feeling there are a lot of folks who's pensions are tied up with Musk's trillion(s) dollar scams   

[cunningfellow]

Bluesky is (infamously) unique in that it's almost entirely an extreme left leaning user base.

Don't sell Bluesky short.  It is also the preferred hangout people that want to share CSAM

[PlainName]

Bluesky is (infamously) unique in that it's almost entirely an extreme left leaning user base.

Don't sell Bluesky short.  It is also the preferred hangout people that want to share CSAM

Do you have a reputable source for that?

[AVGresponding]

-snipped all the tedious fanboi rant-

You do realise that no matter how much you suck Musk's d*ck, he isn't going to offer you a $10m/year job and a hatful of Tesla shares?

Do you realize that no matter how much you hate Musk, it won't make misrepresentation of facts to become a reality?

I don't hate him, or anyone; it's too draining. I have utter contempt for his cons, particularly in view of the fact they aren't really necessary; Tesla would have been successful without the lies, as it was a deservedly market leading brand in its time, and pushed the EV charging networks forward when no-one else wanted to spend any money on it. Falcon 9 is a success, if with caveats. Tesla battery grid storage pushes up the usefulness of intermittent renewable energy sources.

On the flip-side, Hyperloop was always vapourware, Starship is better at burning money than doing anything useful, Optimus or whatever the "robot" is called is a joke; it's a bloody waldoe, not a robot, the new Roadster has taken $250m in deposits and delivered nothing in 8 years, Cybertruck is badly designed and badly built and has utterly failed to deliver what it promised, the HGV has yet to show any of its alleged potential, X is ten times the dumpster fire it was when it was Twitter, and Musk can't open his mouth without coming across as a complete fool at best, and Nazi at worst (this in the opinion of neutrals, not you or I).

[Yrouel86]

On the flip-side, Hyperloop was always vapourware,

Just an idea and a couple of student competitions.
Nothing wrong in exploring ideas like that.

Starship is better at burning money than doing anything useful

Funny TF literally said the same thing about Starlink...

Optimus or whatever the "robot" is called is a joke; it's a bloody waldoe, not a robot,

Except the progress has been tremendous especially for something that was supposed to be just an arm with some LEDs according to TF...

the new Roadster has taken $250m in deposits and delivered nothing in 8 years

Yeah it's late boohoo

Cybertruck is badly designed and badly built and has utterly failed to deliver what it promised

Funny how this was treated like you just treated the roadster...
And speaking of the design, it has been the least criticized thing about it. In fact I've read many opinions that wished Tesla had put all that new tech inside a more normal looking chassis because it's the look that has been the most polarizing.
And Ford is for example adopting the 48V architecture...

the HGV has yet to show any of its alleged potential

Uh, another thing that wasn't supposed to exist in the first place, an "empty husk" TF called it...
And speaking of, I saw your previous posts asking for an example of TF lying, well there you go: 16t battery and 5t of cargo capacity.

X is ten times the dumpster fire it was when it was Twitter,

Twitter was said to not be able to last days after Musk bought it, then days became weeks and it was supposed to go down any minute and yet...
Also BlueSky is right there, seems you'll fit perfectly...

Did you notice the recurring theme by the way?
Just in case I'll spell it out: prediction after prediction, reality keeps going in the opposite direction.
The only argument you folks have left to latch on after "it's not going to happen" is "it's late". Laughable.

and Musk can't open his mouth without coming across as a complete fool at best, and Nazi at worst (this in the opinion of neutrals, not you or I).

But sure you're the "neutral" one 

[AVGresponding]

On the flip-side, Hyperloop was always vapourware,

Just an idea and a couple of student competitions.
Nothing wrong in exploring ideas like that.

It wasn't an original idea, it's from the 19th century, and he pushed it as the next transport revolution, when it never could be, to anyone with any genuine engineering knowledge. You are either in denial, ignorant of engineering, or untruthful.

Starship is better at burning money than doing anything useful

Funny TF literally said the same thing about Starlink...

Don't change the subject of the quote, it's dishonest. I didn't say anything about Starlink, but since you raise it, I think it's irresponsible and environmentally unsustainable.

Optimus or whatever the "robot" is called is a joke; it's a bloody waldoe, not a robot,

Except the progress has been tremendous especially for something that was supposed to be just an arm with some LEDs according to TF...

I don't care what you think TF said; the fact remains it isn't a robot, it's still just a waldoe, which is what I said, and you quoted. Stop misrepresenting what people say.

the new Roadster has taken $250m in deposits and delivered nothing in 8 years

Yeah it's late boohoo

I suspect you'd have a different attitude if you'd paid $250,000 for an 8 year wait for nothing, and no product in sight. Or maybe you'd be happy to donate a quarter of a million dollars to Elon, I really can only speculate here.

Cybertruck is badly designed and badly built and has utterly failed to deliver what it promised

Funny how this was treated like you just treated the roadster...
And speaking of the design, it has been the least criticized thing about it. In fact I've read many opinions that wished Tesla had put all that new tech inside a more normal looking chassis because it's the look that has been the most polarizing.
And Ford is for example adopting the 48V architecture...

You contradict yourself in your own statement. And Ford will move to 800V when they see the rest of Big Auto doing it. And once again you're trying to change the context of the quote. I'm beginning to suspect you might have an agenda besides disagreeing with TF's POV.

the HGV has yet to show any of its alleged potential

Uh, another thing that wasn't supposed to exist in the first place, an "empty husk" TF called it...
And speaking of, I saw your previous posts asking for an example of TF lying, well there you go: 16t battery and 5t of cargo capacity.

Getting your maths wrong isn't lying, it's an error, unless it's deliberate ofc. My point wasn't about TF's maths, but then you knew that and just wanted to change the context of the quote to try and put words in my mouth. The fact remains that it isn't yet a viable product able to compete with a normal diesel truck. Whether it ever becomes so is another matter, but the fact is, right now it's effectively just a prototype in beta, while they fix all the problems, such as horrible reliability.

X is ten times the dumpster fire it was when it was Twitter,

Twitter was said to not be able to last days after Musk bought it, then days became weeks and it was supposed to go down any minute and yet...
Also BlueSky is right there, seems you'll fit perfectly...

Once again, you're ignoring what I actually said. X remains because Musk is pouring cash into it; it's losing money.

Did you notice the recurring theme by the way?
Just in case I'll spell it out: prediction after prediction, reality keeps going in the opposite direction.
The only argument you folks have left to latch on after "it's not going to happen" is "it's late". Laughable.

Yes, I did notice a theme. You constantly twist what people say. I suspect you are a very dishonest person. Or possibly delusional. Or both. Either way, I'll lose no sleep.

and Musk can't open his mouth without coming across as a complete fool at best, and Nazi at worst (this in the opinion of neutrals, not you or I).

But sure you're the "neutral" one 

I never claimed to be. Once again you misrepresent what I actually said. Once or twice I could pass of as accidental, but eight times in a single post? I have to assume it's deliberate and you're a troll.

[Yrouel86]

And Ford will move to 800V when they see the rest of Big Auto doing it.

I meant 48V as in the low voltage side that runs electronics etc that's typically 12V.
Switching to 48V is one of the many new things the Cybertruck implemented.

Getting your maths wrong isn't lying, it's an error, unless it's deliberate ofc.

It was deliberate, so much so that the same talking point carried over to the second video he made about the Semi where to reinforce the point he deliberately picked stupidly small 500Kg concrete barriers from a random european vendor to claim the Semi was only hauling 5t.

Yes, I did notice a theme. You constantly twist what people say. I suspect you are a very dishonest person. Or possibly delusional. Or both. Either way, I'll lose no sleep.

Point was that many of the things you listed weren't even supposed to exist, then after they came about folks like you had to find something else to latch on, then when things become too successful to deny, like Falcon 9 which you also mentioned, those topics either get dropped or the argument become pedantic nitpicks at best.

In other words the same arguments you made were made even about Falcon 9 back then and now even you acknowledged it's successful.

So no, I wasn't twisting anything just leaning on the fact that history is not on your side.

and Musk can't open his mouth without coming across as a complete fool at best, and Nazi at worst (this in the opinion of neutrals, not you or I).

But sure you're the "neutral" one 

I never claimed to be. Once again you misrepresent what I actually said. Once or twice I could pass of as accidental, but eight times in a single post? I have to assume it's deliberate and you're a troll.

That I misread. My bad.