this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2026
530 points (96.5% liked)

Technology

85168 readers
3954 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] theskyisfalling@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Your analogies make no sense either.

I presume the headline is alluding to how eventually people accepted cars are better than horses but then your "better" analogies make no sense.

Auto vs manual, neither is "better", it depends more on situation and personal preference. I'd take a manual over auto any day personally.

Power steering vs not again depends on application. I'd rather have no power steering in a little sports car and get more positive feedback but would rather power steering on some heavy unwieldly vehicle.

A map vs sat nav bullshit. I'm guessing more people would argue the latter being "better" in this case but there are plenty of people who would rather read a map and know exactly where they are rather than blindly follow shit.

So yeh I really don't understand what you are driving at with your analogies and don't think they work for the context unless I'm misunderstanding :)

[–] cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

No, they make sense, and I thank you for being transparent with your biases. That’s not common online, but it’s a standard I strive for and respect.

The same kind of person who prefers manual transmission would prefer a gas engine. Let’s look at Mustang drivers. Nuff Said. (For those who don’t get it, Google “1969 Mustang Eleanor” and “Mustang EV”. One is a work of art. The other is a crime against automobile style or at least should never have been called Mustang — would have been a great opportunity to revive the Ford Galaxy brand.)

[–] dkppunk@piefed.social 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I agree with most of what you’ve been saying, but I’m going to gently push back on the Mustang EV. I think it’s one of the best looking EVs out there and it would be the one that I would choose (or the Subie EV because I love my Crosstrek). I do agree that it probably should not have been called a Mustang though because it doesn’t really look like one and there’s a whole culture thing behind the Mustang.

I would be thrilled if there was a manual shift EV. I know it doesn’t make sense and I don’t care if it doesn’t really do what combustion engines do, but I loved driving stick. I was sad to give up my old stick, but I went for the car with much higher safety ratings. It doesn’t even have to be real, just give me that feeling of driving manual would be great. And with a proper stick shifter too, not the silly paddle shifters.

[–] cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 hours ago

Nah, like I said, the Mustang EV is fine, but like you said, it shouldn't have been called a Mustang. I suggested the Galaxy name. I think with a different name I would have been fine with it. The Mustang has had a few identity crises over the years, from Pinto look in the 70s to the boxy look in the 90s, to this pseudo-retro look from 2005... but it has never been a mom-mobile for a soccer team. No, an SUV/crossover isn't a minivan, but it's close. And I liked Ford's minivan, the Aerostar. I can't speak to its mechanical capabilities, but I liked the look of it. The one whose front is a straight ramp from the top of the grille to the roof. A lot of people didn't like them. I thought they were neat (looking). Even wanted one, at one point. Figured I'd take out the seats and turn the back into a living/hangout area. Some people actually did that, mostly with full size vans. I only thought about it.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No one cares about the name behind a car. The original mustang was a high volume piece of shit car that only resonated with Boomers.

[–] cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 6 hours ago

You're not far off if you're implying I'm a Boomer. Gen X. But younger generations call us Boomers anyway (e.g. Boomer Shooter, in reference to games like Wolfenstein 3D, Duke Nukem 3D, and DOOM). So if you call 1979-1980 and back Boomers, then, guilty.

I will grant you that my love for the older Mustang is nostalgia for the way it looks. I do not actually want to own one.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

there are plenty of people who would rather read a map and know exactly where they are rather than blindly follow shit.

Ok Boomer. Following a sat nav is not blindly following. Does your map predict the future? Tell you where construction and traffic is?