• dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    2 days ago

    I can’t believe I need to state the obvious here, but this is over and above all of the other extremely valid objections already raised by others vis-a-vis turning the door you sit right next to into an ersatz Molotov cocktail that weighs an extra fifty pounds.

    How is this going to help gas stations become drive “thru?” (I see we still also haven’t learned how to spell “through.”) It’s going to allow the gas station to do what, exactly, stick a nozzle in the side of your car?

    That’s already how filling a modern car with fuel works.

    (Yes, I specified modern because otherwise at least one pedantic nerd is going to go “well acktshully” and mention any of the various cars from the '60s and '70s which had the filler hidden behind the license plate or brake light or an emblem on the trunk lid or whatever. We already know. Nobody cares.)

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      How is this going to help gas stations become drive “thru?” (I see we still also haven’t learned how to spell “through.”) It’s going to allow the gas station to do what, exactly, stick a nozzle in the side of your car?

      “We need to put mid air refueling rigs on gasoline tankers on the highway” -Elmo Muks.

      • Dejected Warp Core@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Ever see footage of what this looks like from the cockpit? Fuel. Everywhere. The highway would be a gas-stinking oil-slick 24/7.

        Also, Musk?! You’d think he’d jump at the chance to promote Tesla instead of spewing pulled-from-ass gas car concepts.

    • zovits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Also, a door that weighs that much more is going to be fun on any ground that’s not perfectly level.

    • ThunderComplex@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Ok this gave me a good chuckle. I then thought “ oh but you could make it so gas station attendants just stand/sit outside and fill up cars as they come “ but then I realized this would also be possible today, and I started laughing even harder. Besides ensuring that every little fender bender ends in painful death, there’s literally 0 purpose to this.

    • fireweed@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hate to break it to you, but both “drive-through” and “drive-thru” are considered correct.

      Wikipedia refers to “A drive-through or drive-thru (a sensational spelling of the word through)…”

      As explained on Erin Wright Writing, “According to our primary American-English dictionaries (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Webster’s New World College Dictionary, and The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language), drive-through is the preferred spelling, while drive-thru is an accepted informal variant. However, the use of drive-thru has become so common that using drive-through now feels incorrect.”

      Also keep in mind this is Xitter, where abbreviations are are a normalized (often necessary) part of the lingo.

      • 0x0@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        English: drive-through
        Murican: drive-thru

        Now about light…

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Thank you! Yeah, this is all downsides for no upside. It’s like saying if I want to stop having my legs show I can wear body paint instead of pants. Like, pants are already doing the proposed goal better than the paint will, and it’s all downhill from there.