Color me shocked that you're completely ignoring the merit of the post. Stay on target, Red 5. This is about Tesla selling dangerously flawed software and misnaming it. This doesn't fall under what lawsuits would refer to as "puffery" (world's greatest coffee!). Tesla is literally misleading customers in a way that can lead to death.
The idea of describing an opposing view as derangement is disingenuous because it implies you know the mental state of the person, and it also completely avoids having to discuss the merit of the argument by derailing it. It is also questionable because your post history is full of dozens of pro-Tesla/Elon posts which are mostly trolls or memes. That makes me wonder what you mean by "derangement" because I consider doing that on a discussion forum that seeks knowledge as antithetical to its existence. But since people aware of news coverage for the past decade, this is a term that was popularized in the US during the 2016 election cycle, it has been used to shut down any rational debate. It is effectively name calling. Which is the opposite of the purpose of HN and makes me wonder why you are even here. To troll or to learn or to help people learn. Again from your history, it seems to be the first option.
Whether or not someone took donations from an opposing industry, and using that to dismiss their argument is one of the classic fallacies of reasoning.
To me, naming a deadly product something it is not seems worthy of regulation, because it is lying. If you prima facie consider me deranged because of that, I do not understand your world view and would like to understand it better.
Mayra Flores says the "oil and gas industry is critical to the success of our State and Nation" and that she "will always work to help the oil and gas industry and stand firm against radical policies that would undermine it": https://www.mayrafloresforcongress.com/issues/
Being more charitable, I am not shocked by the following independent scenarios:
1. The law on self-driving was sponsored by a legislator on the Transportation committee
2. The Transportation Committee chair is heavily lobbied by - and received donations from - the oil and gas industry. The pil and gas industry is a major user of, and supplier to transportation as a whole.
Edit: I'm failing to corroborate oil and gas PAC spend on her - seems to be FUD. Her total clear-money campaign expenditure to date is under $500k, so the claim of a multi-million dollar PAC with no evidence seems suspect.
