[pertsix]

It’s not the burden of society to prove the dangers of the technology we purchase on behalf of the businesses that sell it.

We recall consumer products for danger well below the numbers reported in the article above. A vehicle on the road should be held to an even higher standard.

[rmbyrro]

> We recall consumer products for danger well below the numbers reported

Aren't recalls related to systematic failure and severity, instead of absolute number of occurrences of an issue?

[pertsix]

It can be both.

[q1w2]

Safety testing has proven that Teslas are incredibly safe - probably some of the safest cars on the road. Both in crash tests and accidents per mile driven.

If someone is claiming that there is a safety issue despite the existing data, then yes, the burden of proof moves to them to validate their new claim.

[jevgeni]

Their claim IS the data.

[q1w2]

Except that the data leaked does not demonstrate that the Teslas are unsafe.

[jevgeni]

No, of course not, a company with a policy to sweep accident data under the rug can't possible be unsafe, can it?

[prepend]

Do we? I don’t think so. We recall vehicles based on an investigation and quantification of the risk.

The numbers here aren’t very high and they don’t reflect any serious risk of harm. Recall math is interesting to me, but it’s not just a function of customer complaints.

[erulabs]

I am wary of the word “society” when it means in this case “a counsel of my design”, but otherwise agree with the sentiment.