Is there anything you can cite that's actually tracking things like this? Just wondering if you're making a statement based on data or... nothing. Anecdotally, the small business I left last year has to stay open right now as they're a medical manufacturer, they're having no problems with their underfunded aging in-house infrastructure. Meanwhile, a friend of mine works for a much larger company where he's having a hard time getting half as much work done in a day as their "cloud-based" infrastructure (I don't know what particular services, sorry) has been failing them and he can't even stay logged in for more than a few minutes at a time. Seems to me like it's going to vary from business to business, just like the advantages of moving to "the cloud" have always varied depending on your needs. And unless businesses are reporting to some central authority on their experiences right now, I think it's a little early to make sweeping statements either way.

Had the miscommunication been the fault of anyone else involved, Tesla could've easily addressed that and avoided any confusion. My assumption is based on the fact that the two other parties involved appear to be open and willing to communicate with others regarding the problem, while Tesla has been tight-lipped even after fixing the problem. Also, as stated in the original article, Tesla did not perform the repairs they specifically stated they performed. They're the only party who, assumptions aside, definitely screwed up. There's no reason to think it was anyone's fault but Tesla's. They appear to have made a mistake, then they admitted as much and fixed the problem. That alone does not make them a bad company, and you can admit they made a mistake while still being a fan of the company and wanting one of their cars. Now, if Tesla wants to come out and show that they told the dealer the features would be removed prior to selling the vehicle to them, they'd be off the hook. Hell, they could show they sent an email regarding it and it bounced back because of a typo and it would at least show they tried. I'd be fine admitting I was wrong to think it was their fault, but Tesla hasn't even tried to suggest it's not their fault. I don't know why you all think they can't defend themselves, they can and would if they felt it were appropriate and clearly they did not.

In addition to all of this with the features being disabled, they also specifically stated they performed repairs that they did not. Does that help?

Which would still be their mistake, which is the whole point I was making. Tesla made the mistake, and Tesla had to fix it. Not the dealer, not the final purchaser, Tesla. They could've even informed folks at the auction that the features would be removed and that would've been fine. Damn near anything aside from what they actually did would have been fine. Considering they also never performed the repairs they claimed they did, I think this is just the result of a very poorly run process internally at Tesla, sloppiness more than malice, but they also should've handled their response better to begin with. This ordeal has been going on for three months, now.

Where does it say that? I read through all of these, and nowhere does the dealer suggest they knew those features were going to be removed. I've only seen commenters say they should've expected it for whatever reason because apparently Tesla can do no wrong in the minds of their fans. Can you point me to what you're reading that says the dealer knew? Because re-reading the articles I still don't see it. It does say the features were removed by the time the new owner got the car, and the dealer claims they thought it was a mistake since they bought it with those features. It also says Tesla specifically stated repairs were performed on the vehicle that were not, which resulted in the new owner needing to immediately service his vehicle and doesn't exactly make Tesla look totally honest in this transaction. Seems like if Tesla had told the dealer what was going on with the feature removal, they could've just as easily told any of the reporters that and avoided any potential PR problems. But they didn't do that, they didn't comment on the story then told the current car owner the features were removed due to a miscommunication and are now restored. Why would they say that if they hadn't made the mistake themselves? Why wouldn't they come out and say "We're sorry you got screwed by your dealer, sir, we'd like to restore these features just to be good people" and turn this negative into a positive for themselves? They don't need a bunch of people defending them in comments, they can defend themselves. They opted not to try and instead admitted their mistake and fixed it, which was the right thing to do. This story is about Tesla fixing their mistake, I don't know why anyone is trying to twist it to seem like Tesla never made a mistake.

Except Tesla admits they removed it due to a miscommunication... Some of you Tesla defenders are a little out of your minds, eh? Once the company admits they messed up, after refusing to comment on the story the whole time, I think it's pretty well settled. At best, Tesla failed to communicate to the dealer that the car they were buying was going to have features removed from it that were listed on the sticker. And don't give me the "they can remove rims, too!" argument because those rims would've been removed prior to the dealer buying the car, these features were not. From the original story, which you claim to have read:

Pretty cut and dry. Dealer bought a car with features, Tesla removed those features after the sale was completed with no prior notice.

Everyone that isn't a self-centered asshole knows it's good etiquette to remove their headphones when interacting with another person. While they could be off and not distracting you, they don't know that, and you're expecting their attention while they're left wondering if you're giving yours. I can sort of understand why an etiquette columnist and a tech junkie may not see eye to eye on this, but the etiquette columnist isn't telling you what's appealing to other tech junkies, you already know that. You wanted to know what the average person will think, and she told you. That you disagree and decided to rant on the internet about disagreeing with her only reinforces the answer: Yes, you are the asshole. On the AT&T comment, you always have a right to act as the barista did and ask them to remove the headphone or choose not to deal with them. And yes, they'd be the asshole for refusing and demanding you deal with them anyway.

This is the real moral of the story. If you're choosing to buy something without seeing the finished product first, you're risking your money on something that could potentially not be what you're expecting. This isn't really specific to pre-orders, any online purchase you make is based on the images the seller chooses to show you. Reviewers will have opinions but they are just people, too, and they might love things you do not. Even when purchasing in brick and mortar stores, your ability to test anything ahead of time is severely limited even if there is a display model of the exact item you want. You can't always return that stuff, either. People need to check on these things! If you don't want to get stuck unable to return something, pay attention to the return policies. It is your money, you need to be responsible with it. Where did this idea that we're all entitled to a re-do after our own bad decision come from? Seems like it's just people trying to avoid being held responsible for their own actions.

It probably has less to do with the mods (they barely bother to take down riskier illegal content, and there are multiple threads discussing it so I'm not sure why you can't find them) and more to do with even 4chan idiots aren't even dumb enough to believe this leak is real, someone even posted an image of the exact same leak from weeks ago. Now there's a new 4chan post trying to explain away all the information that was provably false, such as Sony attending E3 this year (they are not), couldn't be more obvious that it's just an internet shitposter. Might even actually be BeauHD, ultimate shitposter.

This is clearly fake, is posting crap like this under the "too good to be true" dept you trolling us? Isn't this your job? #FireBeauHD

The headline here makes it sound as if Sony announced they're developing some meaningful number of their games for cross-platform releases. They didn't, it's just one game, and considering it's their MLB licensed game and the announcement came alongside them renewing their deal with the MLB, odds are it's not Sony pushing for this. As this article states, Sony has actually developed games for other platforms in the past, just under a different name. While the situation could one day change, this announcement does not mean what the headline suggests.

I'm not sure what the story is here, phones with removable batteries are still for sale. Everyone complaining you can't get them? Just too dumb to look for them. The truth is, they're just unpopular, that's why they don't make more of them. This is just one more budget phone option that won't make a big difference. If you're interested in this, you could've gotten something more powerful used on Craigslist for less, since you can replace the battery it doesn't matter if that doesn't hold much of a charge anymore. But let's all act like this is some revolution the world is in dire need of.

The article only links two sources, both Reddit posts, and one is just a crosspost of the first post linked, so effectively the source for this is a single Reddit post. That post only has 387 upvotes and 121 comments. How many Huawei phones are out there? Millions? Is there actually a story here?

This data MIGHT be accurate, it might even represent much more than just tech workers. But, the source of this data is a voluntary survey conducted within an app whose sole purpose is to allow you to chat with coworkers behind your employers back and anonymously review the place you work. Usage is probably skewed a bit toward those that aren't happy with their workplace. Personally, I'm more surprised that 43% of respondents from an app like that didn't claim to be burned out.

I know, I got excited, too.