Hacker News Reader

Comment by chasd00 | Hacker News Reader

The ironic thing about the cybertruck being some prepper vehicle for the apocalypse is when the lights got out so does the cybertruck.

View on HN

Like a lot of products I think part of it's appeal is a feeling of security which doesn't necessarily equal practical security, in the same way a 4x4 might appeal to someone wanting to feel "rugged" even if it never leaves asphalt. I think to some extent Tesla employed a similar strategy with it's other models and green appeal.

This is exactly the key point that I think the author just missed entirely. People don't appreciate the Cybertruck being bulletproof because they think they're really getting shot at. They appreciate it because in their mind it makes the car cool and they want to drive a car that they think is cool. It's not about the real life need but the capability.

As you mentioned, the same goes for 4x4's, but also motorbikes, sports cars and almost any type of car but the cheapest or most reliable one. Car purchases are not driven by need or rationality. Like Dieter Rams puts it, cars are people's avatars.

Yeah, but _why_ having a bulletproof car is cool these days in America? I think in your cultural programming (nothing bad in it btw) you may not be realising that this is not universal cool and this sort of cool is definitely very specific to both mid-America and the current zeitgeist.

Eg, having lived in Europe, it’s _very_ hard to imagine for me having a bulletproof car being perceived as cool (actually, rather opposite). This is the authors’ point. Utility and fears as its projections are connected with the culture.

To take the point seriously: electrical generation, something that can be done at small scale with passive/reliable components and/or recreated from scratch using century-old methods, is vastly more likely to survive an "apocalypse" than a gasoline production economy.

You know how to frack your own well? Me neither.

During apocalypse, you’d be able to recharge a cybertruck through solar panels.. Batteries are also a thing..

I am not sure you’d be able to find working refineries, gasoline that hasn’t evaporated, or oil…

During an apocalypse, neither type of vehicle is likely to be particularly useful versus a horse or donkey.

Fuel everywhere, making new ones is easy, and a bonus emergency food source.

I concur, I am just saying in the context of the original comment, an EV is likely a better vehicle than an oil-chugging ice vehicle.

Maybe, I'm just saying that's a "what's the tastiest poop?" sort of question.

I ... don't disagree.. Thanks for the laugh :)

And where, pray tell, will you be procuring a horse or donkey suddenly once the apocalypse arrives? It seems like the best vehicle is actually a bicycle, or perhaps simply walking.

There's a horse barn about a mile from my house.

The horses and donkeys there can carry a lot more than your average bike, don't need stuff from halfway around the world like rubber to maintain, and can even be used to plow a field.

If you look at special forces in Afghanistan, they use donkeys, not bikes.

Most people in an apocalypse will not be in rural areas, as the majority live in cities. There are no horses or donkeys there. There, bicycles are better initially until their rubber wears out, then walking is the next best and most expeditious option.

Most people in an apocalypse will die, yes. Even with bikes and donkeys.

I would not want to be in NYC during the collapse of civilization.

If you have both a bike and a donkey available, grab the donkey.

Sure, I am talking about the average case, however, not rural preppers.

Maybe you can swap it for a course of antibiotics or something else of actual value.

> Apocalypse

> Solar panels

We have different ideas of apocalypse, my friend.

I hope you know how to manufacture solar panels.

I can steal those, there will be plenty around. Gas(oline) though evaporates.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com