• conciselyverbose@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    11 months ago

    So I’m assuming that means that they’re admitting that they put a safety hazard in all those prior cars and are assuming liability for every accident where infotainment systems may have been involved, right?

    • douglasg14b@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t think that’s how it works, and is a pretty toxic and non-constructive way to look at this.

      • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        If they’re going to lie to pretend they can’t include it because it’s unsafe when every single person on the planet knows with 100% certainty that it’s because they want their own cash/data hungry alternative instead, then putting said “unsafe” thing in their vehicles should absolutely expose them to liability.

        There absolutely is not a theoretical possibility that “safety” was a genuine consideration in any way in this decision.