top 95 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 169 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Before anyone starts to think there's a good guy in this story:

some have taken upon themselves to honor KitKat in distinctly Silicon Valley-style ways. Zeidan (part of cats family) has released a memecoin honoring KitKat’s legacy, and also said that he was disappointed to see others launch their own imitation tokens in an attempt to profit off KitKat’s death.

He says he's going to use the money to support local vets, but why don't you just share some links to spca to donate directly, you're providing nothing but a way for you to grift by taking the money through meme coins.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Or even better: Be the "good guy" by giving your cat a happy, healthy, secure, and longer life by keeping them indoors. People hate to be told what to do, and some cats love it outside, but guess what? My dog would love to eat 10lbs of chocolate. We have to look out for their best interests. This obviously doesn't mean don't ever take them outside leashed or supervised, but the fact remains: indoor cats have a better, less stressful life, and don't decimate local bird populations...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 91 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Seen a lot of half baked arguments.

    I've been in the area and met this cat. First off, this cat started as a stray, and found its way to the corner store that took it in and adopted it for all intents and purposes. Its lived in the same spot for many years, and had always been an exceptionally chill cat. Painting him as a typical outdoor cat is disingenuous and uninformed.

    KitKat has been safe and sound for so long without any issues. There's gotta be literally millions of cars that have driven past in his residency on 16th in the Mission district of SF. And the only time he gets hit is by a waymo? All these human drivers, so many of them absolute shit, and never an occurrence? This cat isn't sprinting the neighborhood, crossing streets, or hunting for prey; its docile, loves pets, and knows there's endless food at the liquor store that provides all his needs. He wasn't your typical outdoor cat that runs from everyone and twitches at unknown sounds; this was an urban dwelling cat that's been prospering for years.

    Waymo promotes and brags to riders how many cameras are inside and out of the car. But it so easily hit something that could fuck the car up if it wasn't soft squishy flesh. Were animals and small children not in any of its test scenarios? Is it infeasble to install cameras where a typical driver couldn't usually see?

    Not to mention the absolutely rude response waymo has had to this event. Instead of apologizing and pledging improvements and retribution to killing a valued community member; they victim-blamed the dead cat, said they didn't do anything wrong, and said nothing of mitigating future scenarios.

    There's more I can say about the company and its typical ownership, but I want to keep this to the slaughter at hand and their complete lack of consciousness. Waymo doesn't care about you or anything that it kills. Once again, its about the bottom line and whatever it can do to turn profit.

    Obviously accidents happen, but its the reaction that can truly matter in those cases. They've shown that causing great harm in a community means nothing to them. And this is in obvious and outspoken situations. What about the less obvious ways? Whether that be job loss, economic factors, environmental concerns, or blatant safety on our streets. If they're forced, they'll make a bullshit apology (aka recognition of events) and then focus on moving forward without addressing people's grief and anger.

    Fuck waymo, fuck their response especially, and fuck anyone saying this cat deserved it by being a lazy sidewalk-laying pillar of joy in the neighborhood.

    Rest in Peace KitKat. The community will always love you and remember you for always brightening our days in this endlessly threatening world. The only thing that killed you was the ruthless drive for profit. Your memory will live on in the hearts of many. And as a focal point that citizens must stop allowing corporations from plowing down their neighbors, their voice, and their sunshine in a day's walk to the store.

    3:

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    when the LA riots happened a few months ago and they were torching waymo cars i was confused why they would do that, now im ok with thoese cars being torched. fuck waymo, RIP kitkat

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    What I've learned working at a startup in stealth mode and having larger projects in the back lot behind the building, is that those cars also do not respect 'no trespassing' signs and waymo will wait until it gets to the litigious point to bother to fix their routing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I had a cat who went outside every day, never once got hit by a human driver until it happened.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 41 points 1 year ago
    [–] 14 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    “But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.” – Exodus 21:23-24

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    A cat for a cat, but it's an EV, so there is no catalytic converter to take

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Some of us are old enough to remember how cats and other creatures would get killed by old car engine designs with the large open fan driven by a belt. They would sleep on that fan housing and not realize the danger when the car was started. So there have been improvements that have helped, maybe not necessarily for that reason. For what it's worth, I'm on the side of minimizing cars for so many reasons, but it has been worse for animals in the past.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago
    [–] 10 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    There is probably an elevated risk of killing cats in any electric vehicle because there are fewer signs that the car is "on" and about to drive.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Idk, I find that at low speeds electric cars are louder than modern internal combustion. They have that SciFi drone sound.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Depending on the year model of the car, it might not make that sound. It wasn't required on some of the earlier EVs, which could be eerily quiet. I believe it's required by law on newer models. Pre-2016 Volts has a "pedestrian horn button"; 2016 and newer Volts play a noise continuously as lower speeds. (My Uncle says it sounds like the warp drive hum on the original Star Trek Enterprise.)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Not when parked. A cat would thi k it was a parked car.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    there are those newfangled ICE cars that turn off instead of idle. i don't quite know how i feel.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's not really all that newfangled. It was part of the eurozone's requirements for cars and was put in other places as well. I think that it's approaching a decade now. My neighbor's 2017 has it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    Let cats use them as litter boxes. Cats' revenge.

  • source
  • [–] 72 points 1 year ago (20 children)

    “While our vehicle was stopped to pick up passengers, a nearby cat darted under our vehicle as it was pulling away”

    I mean, it sucks, but it could've happened with a human driver as well... and likely has happened.

    I have rode in a Waymo and it shows you all the things it detects on a screen... which includes humans and small animals. It's not a perfect machine, but it probably is a better driver than a lot of people already and it's learning every day.

    I suppose this incident could get Waymo to put cameras/sensors beneath the car... something that regular car makers won't think about.

    But yeah, it should've detected the cat beforehand and waited for it to leave before driving off. Then again, the human passengers didn't see it either.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Yeah this is the kind of thing where you really need statistics. This sticks out because it's a prominent example of something new, an autonomous vehicle, doing something notable - killing an animal for the first time (or at least one of the very first well-publicized times on record).

    For people's reaction to this to be that this is because it's an autonomous vehicle is the same sort of cognitive bias that causes things like, " The first person to get a math problem wrong in class was a girl so it seems like girls are bad at math". When of course it could be that the probability of boys and girls getting problems wrong is equal, and that the girl was simply the first one to get a unlucky roll on the dice of the universe. It could even be that boys are more likely to get problems wrong, and the girl was especially unlucky. It could in fact be that girls are more likely to get problems wrong, too, but this single instance doesn't give us enough evidence for that. It could be that boys actually have gotten more problems wrong, but we only hear about the girl getting the problem wrong due to sociological biases, or vice versa. Etc.

    I get that we shouldn't trust corporations, and it's not fun to defend a corporation, but it is important to defend rational thinking. And the rational way to approach this is to employ statistical methods to judge whether a vehicle being autonomous truly makes it a bigger risk to animals in the road or not. Any other line of reasoning is not right for this kind of problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Not exactly the first time, given the incident a few years ago where a dog ran into the street and was struck by a Waymo. It got some publicity at the time but was forgotten relatively quickly, presumably since it was quite clear there wasn't much any driver could have done in that situation. I expect this case will go over similarly, although maybe it will generate a bit more discussion since there are at least some imaginable ways this could have been prevented.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Under- car sensors is a great idea and the kind of innovation required for this tech to reach universal adoption. Waymo is already safer than human drivers IMO but let's keep going until it's significantly safer with verifiable data and capabilities humans cannot have. And we have to address its connection to big tech for "safety under fascism" purposes.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    I mean, it sucks for the cat and the neighborhood, I'm glad that where I live there are a few very friendly outdoor cats and I've always seen people nail the brakes to avoid them the few times they cross the road.

    I also understand that autonomous cars kind of need more work, but real drivers also really suck at driving. I wonder if the ire here is more at "who do we blame if no driver"

    Also also, I wonder if electric cars are going to cause a lot more issues for outdoor animals who to some extend get trained to listen for a Hrududu which the electric motors don't make.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 23 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    Then again, the human passengers didn't see it either.

    The human passengers weren't responsible for driving the vehicle, their lack of awareness is a feature of getting a taxi ride?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    I meant that the Waymo didn't see it, neither did the passengers, so the cat could've been difficult to detect.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [+] [S] -24 points 1 year ago (12 children)
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    I lost a beloved cat a few months ago that ran into the road. My security camera caught the whole thing.

    "What if?" Is its own torment for us, but analytically, she simply wasn't visible and there was nothing the driver could/should have done to prevent the horrible outcome.

    There are in life no-win situations. It hurts, but it's an adult realization. Cats go under cars to hide - to avoid being seen - and can't grasp danger the same as humans.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago

    A small animal not being visible to a human or robotic driver is absolutely a viable excuse. It's sad that the cat died, but it's first an foremost the fault of the owners for letting their cat out.

    I don't like the tech bro world and I'm not a fan of driverless vehicles, but this didn't happen because it was driverless and the outcome would be the same if their were a person behind the wheel.

    You can definitely argue against cars being on the road in general, but I was on a bike ride with a buddy the other day, and he hit a squirrel that ran between us and then under his bike. Sometimes bad things happen especially when dealing with animals, and blaming a computer blindly is dumb AF.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 16 points 1 year ago (10 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    and let the birds, mice, etc... live without fear.

    LOL, that's not really how mice and small birds work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • i remember when i was out smoking pork butts with the stupid cat. i think she was inbred and had some issues. so i'm in a hammock and she was sitting there on the ground by me, almost loafing but her front paws out in front of her. a small rat ran right up on her paws, right below her mouth. she was all "wait, fuck!" and picked the rat up in her mouth, and she ran up to me so proud, but then she did not know what to do with it.

    only time she caught anything larger than a cold. the doofus.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    I feel for the cat but this would happen with a human driver too. No one is going to check under their car after picking up passengers. It'd add minutes to each stop and these people are paid by the mile and stop. Adding minutes or hours each day is money lost. So no one will do this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Regicide.

    A feline queen reigns over my apartment complex. It's a fair regime.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    TLDR: cat gets hit by AI car and dies

  • source
  • [+] 37 points 1 year ago (17 children)
  • [–] 38 points 1 year ago* (15 children)

    Mmmm. You're taking "company spokesperson" at face value there.

    Let's be real though, a meeting of highly paid, highly skilled people came up with that response then it was sanitised through three more filters before reaching our eyes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    Cripty is a classic bootlicker.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] -2 points 1 year ago (11 children)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Says the guy who is here to defend corporations again.

    The only league you are in is the bootlicker competition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (9 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    A bootlicking Anarchist!? You should be ashamed to be on that instance.

    Go defend some more corps simp.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    No one is forcing you to be a bootlicker, that is just who you are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    Please Cripty, you are like a child grasping at straws. You are on record defending multiple corporations now. I will gladly show up to call you out everytime you do it

    Oh cool, you're talking about me in your spare time? I guess everything you say is a projection and no I won't have sex with you. I am not into bootlickers who pretend to be Anarchists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Thanks, I will continue to call you out. If you think this is a popularity competition you are even more immature than I thought. Keep flailing bootlicker.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    Your stringing me along? I didn't even reply to you to begin with. I was just letting other users know what's up so they can understand why a supposed anarchist is licking corporate boots.

    I only have an issue with this one behavior, as I am pretty sure we agree on a lot of things outside your obsession with defending corporations.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    So glad I live far away from the tech bros. Must be so annoying living in the bay area.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Used to go to SF for work events.

    It felt like a town that once had culture that still wants to peek out, but it almost entirely covered with silicon valley monotony and misanthropic policies. It feels like a city where the people living there are the after thought, and the tablet where you order your coffee while you sit around a room where nobody makes eye contact or speaks to you is the product.

    I'm sure there's a part of the city where humanity still thrives, but it should be a cultural warning to those who are adopting silicon valley cures as anything other than snake oil.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I wish people were as outraged about people getting killed by human drivers. The safety record of these cars has been no less than stellar until now.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    reader beware.

    1000002269

    lots of muskrats and thielologists shitting in this post.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'm not sure I trust the kind of person who was perfectly fine with robotaxi's until an animal was killed. Seems they don't' really have a good grasp on the problems of a car-centric society of which road-kill is a very minor one.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I'm against robotaxis but in this particular case the taxi was stopped and the cat darted under it as it started to move. A human driver would have likely hit it too.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    cats don't dart under moving vehicles. i reckon the statement is partially bullshit

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›