[johnp314]

Well, the OED definition of 'recall' is "official order to return to a place" and a software update or fix requires no return to the place of purchase. I wonder how may legally defined 'recalls' Microsoft Windows has experienced with each new version.

[0xEF]

I think the gist is "recall" is the same saying "safety issue that needs to be fixed in the software or hardware" since we don't have a word for software issues, which carry a bit more weight on a fly-by-wire vehicle like the Cybertruck.

Interesting to note that this thread seems to be full of a lot of people choosing to be pedantic over the word "recall" rather than taking a critical look at the Cybertruck and it's issues. While I agree that language is important (and dynamic), I suspect that discussion around this vehicle is also charged by politics and sycophantic thinking.

If I remove my personal opinions about Musk, I find that I actually do not hate the Cybertruck. Sure, I think it looks absolutely stupid and it bothers me that the flat paneling does not line up perfectly, but I am also cheering on it's attempts to break some rules, try something different and possibly spark some future innovation. With that in mind, it's easy for me to expect that it will have problems since anything new that breaks the mold tends to, so with that reframing, a lot of recalls make sense and could even be looked at as good since solutions are being developed.

[mewpmewp2]

People are pedantic over this because they have a strong association from their past with this term and now it is being used unexpectedly. No matter how bad Tesla's issue might be, then maybe a different wording has to be used to highlight the issue. As right now it seems as if when the term is used it is almost intentionally made to seem as if the vehicle has to be physically transported back which would be a logistical and financial disaster. Sure, safety issues can be bad, but it is entirely different level of feasibility of physically recalling back all those vehicles. Why are people pretending it is not?

The whole issue is a spectrum of consequences. Right now it seems that the term used confusingly is always justified because the issue is binarily bad in the first place.

[ryandrake]

> Interesting to note that this thread seems to be full of a lot of people choosing to be pedantic over the word "recall" rather than taking a critical look at the Cybertruck and it's issues.

Being pedantic over a single word out of 100 is HN's bread and butter. How many times have you read a comment here that boiled down to "The author's entire article is invalid because in paragraph 3, word 65 he used the wrong word!"

Bonus points when the poster is himself also wrong about the meaning of the word, as is the case in this thread where people don't know what a "recall" is in the automotive world.

[0xEF]

I suppose that is probably true, but I hate to generalize...then again, I am guilty of generalizing and being pedantic, myself.

We do kind of exist in a strange space where the meaning and intention of words matter for the sake of clarity, but to ignore the dynamic nature of language results in less clarity. If that makes any sense?

[squigz]

I think the 'pedantry' is actually trying to push back against the politics and whatnot, in a way.

As others have noted, 'recall' brings to mind physically returning an item. I have, repeatedly, had to clarify to people that it was actually an OTA software update, which - to most people - is a lot less significant than the idea of having to return your car several times a year.