Toyota recall hearings

[grumbler]

I doubt you're referring to me because I haven't tried to dispute, or corroborate, what you say. I just don't know really. My main concern/issue is that these cars go out of control and in at least some or perhaps many of the instances, the drivers are unable to regain control even by taking what would seem correct actions.

DGullible's argument is that they cannot have taken the proper steps because the outcomes of those steps could not be different than what he would expect, based on his expertise with putting on lug nuts, or something.  He then argues that the failure to take these steps that he alleges demonstrates a lack of knowledge/training in the CHP and police in general.

The proof he offers is the fact that the news stories don't say if the CHP types tried to turn off the engine first, and that this means that they didn't.

I am with you; it is far likelier that the normal corrective steps simply didn't work in these case, for reasons that are unclear.  If I had to bet, I would bet that there is something wrong with the controllers in these cars, not the pedals and floor mats.  Luckily, though, I don't have to bet.

[Berkut]

It is entirely possible that the CHP officer was simply a dolt who panicked and did all the wrong things.

We really do not know. It seems spurious to simply make assumptions however, based on the "expert" testimony of someone who put a car together in college though, and avows an interest in cars and automobiles in general.

[DGuller]

I disagree. I just did a google search, and there were lots of articles about how to stop a car in this situation. They pretty much all agree that stomping on the brakes is going to stop the car. Car and Driver even did testing on this, and in every single case, no matter what the throttle was doing, and at speeds up to 120mph, stomping on the brakes stopped the car.

Sounds like useful info to me, and not at all hard to find.

Nice switch, but I was actually talking about knowing how brakes can stop working.  It was pertinent to the discussion about the CHP officer whose brakes eventually failed.  Can you find this information on Google now that you know what to look for?  Probably.  Would you have it on the tip of your tongue, and know to look for it?  Doubtful.

Since when is anyone goal to make languish a more informed place?

Mine, for one.  There are a lot of intelligent and knowledgeable people on Languish.  I come to Languish to learn from them, debate with them, and contribute on my own when it is me who knows something.  I can understand why your goal would be different, we all try to play to our strengths.

As far as useful information is concerned, the practical use of info for the average languish poster as it relates to this issue can be summed up with:

If your car experiences an out of control throttle, stomp on the brakes. It will stop.

Oh, God, where the hell is the :facepalm: smiley?  If you car experiences out of control throttle, for fuck's sake, SHIFT TO NEUTRAL.  SHIFT TO NEUTRAL, then brake.  Wow.  Only if for whatever reason you cannot do that should you try stomping on the brakes.  See, that's a perfect example of how Google alone will not prevent you from saying dangerously stupid things.

But, that's not all.  Let's for a moment assume that you can't find a neutral.  It's useful to know that you should stomp on the brakes.  It's also useful to know that it's dangerous to not follow this advice fully and immediately, because it can cost you the brakes.  See, even with Google, your lack of understanding is causing you to miss some key points, and to give dangerously incomplete information.

Now, you might say, who cares?  If you follow the advice to stomp on the brakes, you don't need to know what happens if you don't.  Well, you should care, because when you know why you're doing something, you're going to do it more effectively.  You're also going to be able to better deal with slightly different situations if you don't just remember the information by rote.  Understanding matters.  That's why people who just attack instead of helping other people understand annoy me.

[DGuller]

Yeah, but isn't that the risk of buying with the intention of reselling? That the price might not be what you expected? If i buy shares of a company and the shares go down (say for a company mistake, like a bad acquisition) i can't go around and sue the company i bought shares from.

Yes, that's the argument, although shareholders do sometimes sue for lost value when the company is horribly mismanaged.  I don't know how that works out in the end, though.

[Berkut]

I disagree. I just did a google search, and there were lots of articles about how to stop a car in this situation. They pretty much all agree that stomping on the brakes is going to stop the car. Car and Driver even did testing on this, and in every single case, no matter what the throttle was doing, and at speeds up to 120mph, stomping on the brakes stopped the car.

Sounds like useful info to me, and not at all hard to find.

Nice switch, but I was actually talking about knowing how brakes can stop working.  It was pertinent to the discussion about the CHP officer whose brakes eventually failed.

But not pertient to your claim that the officer could not ahve known as much as you because you are an expert due to your being in a car club in college.

  Can you find this information on Google now that you know what to look for?  Probably.  Would you have it on the tip of your tongue, and know to look for it?  Doubtful.

That isn't the point. Of course, I made my point rather clearly using your own supplied analogy of JR and legal matters, and you over so carefully cut it all out of your response. Interesting.

Since when is anyone goal to make languish a more informed place?

Mine, for one.

Nah, don't believe you.

  There are a lot of intelligent and knowledgeable people on Languish.  I come to Languish to learn from them, debate with them, and contribute on my own when it is me who knows something.

This is not the same thing at all, but you keep stanind gup there on your imaginary pedestal. We are all super impressed. Really.

  I can understand why your goal would be different, we all try to play to our strengths.

Ahh, the personal attack - another fine example of DG drive to inform Languish. Your nobility is impressive.

As far as useful information is concerned, the practical use of info for the average languish poster as it relates to this issue can be summed up with:

If your car experiences an out of control throttle, stomp on the brakes. It will stop.

Oh, God, where the hell is the :facepalm: smiley?  If you car experiences out of control throttle, for fuck's sake, SHIFT TO NEUTRAL.  SHIFT TO NEUTRAL, then brake. 

Nope, that is not the standard advice, because some cars ahve a gated shifter that cannot be shifted to neutral.

Wow.  Only if for whatever reason you cannot do that should you try stomping on the brakes.  See, that's a perfect example of how Google alone will not prevent you from saying dangerously stupid things.

Except that the advice to "stomp on the brakes" is not stupid, or dangerous. In fact, it is the standard and actual expert advice for what to do. It is simple, straightforward, and it works.

But, that's not all.  Let's for a moment assume that you can't find a neutral.  It's useful to know that you should stomp on the brakes.

No shit?

You can't have MY argument, get your own.

  It's also useful to know that it's dangerous to not follow this advice fully and immediately, because it can cost you the brakes.  See, even with Google, your lack of understanding is causing you to miss some key points, and to give dangerously incomplete information.

Nope, my information is compelte, and not remotely dangerous. The proper response is to stomp on the brakes. Period. understanding the properties of brake fluid under high heat is not at all necessary, which is a good thing, since in fact few people actually know what, or will ever know that.

Now, you might say, who cares?  If you follow the advice to stomp on the brakes, you don't need to know what happens if you don't.  Well, you should care, because when you know why you're doing something, you're going to do it more effectively.  You're also going to be able to better deal with slightly different situations if you don't just remember the information by rote.  Understanding matters.  That's why people who just attack instead of helping other people understand annoy me.

You can't know everything about everything though - at least us mortals cannot. So there is always a limit to peoples knowledge. Most people don't know how brakes operate under extreme conditions, and even if you tell them, they will likely just forget anyway. In fact, half assed knowledge that someone once told you is probably MORE dangerous, since it may cause you to do something other than just "STOMP ON THE DAMN BRAKES" because you once heard some blowhard on languish talk about how brakes stop working if they heat up too much, so maybe I should just hit them, then ease up to let them cool down a bit???

Anyway, for us simple mortals who lack your expertise on everything, we will just remember that in teh incredibly unlikely event that our cars throttle sticks, we will just hit the damn brakes.

Of coruse, if this happens to you, you once assembled a car in college, so you can probably just figure out what is wrong with the throttle and repair it anyway - in fact, with your perfect knowledge, you could probably tell it was going to fail ahead of time anyway and fix it before it even happens. Can't get that kind of safety from google!

[Berkut]

DGs hysteria over the danger involved in not knowing exactly how hydraulic brakes work, which will lead to your likely death if ever in a situation where

A)Your car experiences uncontrolled acceleration, and
B)You did not put together a car yourself in college

is kind of illustrative of the danger involved in having too much information.

I could easily imagine someone who knows as much as DG does about cars getting themselves killed because they ignore the simple and basic "rules" in favor of their perceived expertise.

Example: The guy who got ate by a bear. He was probably an expert on bears and their habits, and thought that made him safe, because he knew all this information about how bears operate. But he likely forgot the basic admonition that we all know about bears: they might eat you anyway.

I wonder if DG spends all his time (bit NOT using the internet, since that is "dangerous and incomplete") looking up how to react to every possible emergency, so he can be safe? I mean, sure, he is an automative expert far beyond the abilities of anyone who rights for car and driver and has actually conducted actual tests on stopping cars in emergencies, but what if he is in a thunderstorm, or there is a tornado around?

Absent being in a meteorological club in college, it is likely that his knowledge is "dangerous and incomplete", since it only has basic info, so will he actually stay away from a tree, or look for a depression?

[Razgovory]

I honestly don't think we should regard anyone's opinion as expert.

[Ed Anger]

I honestly don't think we should regard anyone's opinion as expert.

I'm an expert at being lazy.

[Razgovory]

I honestly don't think we should regard anyone's opinion as expert.

I'm an expert at being lazy.

But do you have relevant degree in being lazy?  Or are you just an amateur who was lazy in college?

[DGuller]

Since when is anyone goal to make languish a more informed place?

Mine, for one.

Nah, don't believe you.

Don't care.

Nope, that is not the standard advice, because some cars ahve a gated shifter that cannot be shifted to neutral.

The standard advice is to try to shift to neutral if you can, before all else.  Move on to more dangerous options only if you cannot do that for whatever reason.  Don't say dangerously stupid stuff just to contradict what I said.

Except that the advice to "stomp on the brakes" is not stupid, or dangerous. In fact, it is the standard and actual expert advice for what to do. It is simple, straightforward, and it works.

No, it's not.  If you think that this is what the actual experts recommend, then you either misunderstood the entirety of what they said, or you managed to find a stupid expert.  Stomping on the brakes is not stupid if you can't shift to neutral, but it is dangerous.  You don't have as much control of your car when you're heavily braking, and you may not be in the best place on the road to stop suddenly.

No shit?

You can't have MY argument, get your own.

That was one of my arguments before it was your own, so I'm not sure what you're yapping about.

Nope, my information is compelte, and not remotely dangerous. The proper response is to stomp on the brakes.

As established earlier, that's neither proper as a first action, complete, nor entirely safe.  Also, when people's instincts tell them to do something incorrect, just saying what the correct action is would be incomplete.  You have to also make them understand why they need to do it, to make them better counter-act the wrong instinct.  Maybe it's just a philosophical difference, but I do value understanding over rote.

[Berkut]

I honestly don't think we should regard anyone's opinion as expert.

I don't think that is the case - I accept some languish posters as being "expert" in their fields, which to me means that I will take their factual knowledge about their expertise at face value, and generally find them to be credible on those subjects.

That doesn't mean they are always right in their conclusions, of course. Being expert sometimes just means you know enough to know how to present your position in the most convincing manner possible. It doesn't mean you are at all objective - you see this with our legal experts all the time, in fact.

Hell, I even think DG wualifies as an expert in his particular field - I accept what he states as far as factual knowledge of statistics at face value, while knowing that he is perfectly capable and willing to leave out the complete picture if it suits his conclusions to do so.

But expertise based on his being in a car club in college? Yeah, not so much.

[DGuller]

DGs hysteria over the danger involved in not knowing exactly how hydraulic brakes work, which will lead to your likely death if ever in a situation where

A)Your car experiences uncontrolled acceleration, and
B)You did not put together a car yourself in college

is kind of illustrative of the danger involved in having too much information.

I could easily imagine someone who knows as much as DG does about cars getting themselves killed because they ignore the simple and basic "rules" in favor of their perceived expertise.

Example: The guy who got ate by a bear. He was probably an expert on bears and their habits, and thought that made him safe, because he knew all this information about how bears operate. But he likely forgot the basic admonition that we all know about bears: they might eat you anyway.

I wonder if DG spends all his time (bit NOT using the internet, since that is "dangerous and incomplete") looking up how to react to every possible emergency, so he can be safe? I mean, sure, he is an automative expert far beyond the abilities of anyone who rights for car and driver and has actually conducted actual tests on stopping cars in emergencies, but what if he is in a thunderstorm, or there is a tornado around?

Absent being in a meteorological club in college, it is likely that his knowledge is "dangerous and incomplete", since it only has basic info, so will he actually stay away from a tree, or look for a depression?

Wow, you really get ass-hurt when you're caught saying stupid things, aren't you?  For your information, a lot of my car information comes from actual car engineers, people who actually work as car designers or racing engineers.  The beauty of the Internet is that not only does it have Google, but it also has forums with people whose credentials are proven.  I've been a member of one such forum for ten years, for example, as part of my interest in knowing how cars work. 

That's why I can be confident that what I'm saying is correct, and that I'm not just have "a little knowledge" that is dangerous.  That's why I'm also confident that you're full of shit when you say that stomping on the brakes is the standard response to a stuck throttle.

[Berkut]

The standard advice is to try to shift to neutral if you can, before all else.  Move on to more dangerous options only if you cannot do that for whatever reason.  Don't say dangerously stupid stuff just to contradict what I said.

Uhh, you said that your special advice based on your knowledge obtained while building cars in college was NOT readily available on the internet? So how can it be the 'standard' advice, if in fact it IS readily attainable?

So which is it? Is the standard advice to shift into neutral (which the article I linked to mentioned as one thing to try)? Because if so, your claim that this knowledge is not readily available via google is wrong, and in fact college car club membership is not required in order to survive such a emergency. Reading car and driver magazine, in fact, is perfectly adequate.

Frankly, I don't care whether the standard advice is "Put the car in neutral - if that doesn't work, stomp on the brakes" or simply "Stomp on the brakes". In either case, your claim that your special knowledge about brake fluid compression under corner cases is not needed to react to the problem, and your argument that this is evidence of your 'expertise' that is not attainable via google fails.

Which is, after all, the point of your latest tantrum when people giggled at your self-proclaimed automotive expertise.

[DGuller]

Hell, I even think DG wualifies as an expert in his particular field - I accept what he states as far as factual knowledge of statistics at face value, while knowing that he is perfectly capable and willing to leave out the complete picture if it suits his conclusions to do so.

I can assure everyone that when I speak as an expert on Languish, I'm giving my full knowledge to the best of my abilities.  Berkut's casual implication that I'm intellectually dishonest is just his typical attempt to discredit people who have more to contribute than he does.

[Razgovory]

Well, I suppose I could just trust the opinions of people I like and completely disregard opinions that I happen to disagree with.  But really, what expert opinions does anyone on languish have?  You hear things like "I was in the army", "I'm a computer programmer", and "you aren't me.  You don't know what I'm thinking".  None of those give you any real ground to have an opinion on anything.  It's just as good as "I was in a car club in college".