• Slatlun@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think the point is that there isn’t a good enough reason to put internet in a car that negates the risk of it.

    It is like adding lead to food. It’s a cheap sweetener with no calories. You can argue that cheap sweeteners aren’t important to you, but I don’t think you can argue that it isn’t a good reason. It just isn’t a good enough reason to negate the risk.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think the point is that there isn’t a good enough reason

      OK but that’s not what they said.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          “Not good enough” = not important to you

          “no good reason” = the benefits dont exist.

          These are not the same.

          • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            “Not good enough” = not important to you

            you have misunderstood something.

            not good enough means the downsides highly, severely outweigh the upsides. It’s not that “I wouldn’t use it and then you shouldn’t have it either”, it’s that there are very good reasons to not have these in my car, or anyone’s really, in a way where they cannot be removed!

            • helenslunch@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              it’s that there are very good reasons to not have these in my car

              There’s also very good reason TO have them, as I’ve already explained.