Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Crime Transportation Government Software News Hardware Technology

Tesla Suspension Breakage: It's Not The Crime, It's The Coverup (dailykanban.com) 271

Posted by BeauHD from the safety-investigators dept.
schwit1 quotes a report from Daily Kanban: For several months now, reports have circulated in comment sections and forum threads about a possible defect in Tesla's vehicles that may cause suspension control arms to break. Many of those reports appeared to come from a single, highly-motivated and potentially unreliable source, a fact which led many to dismiss them as crankery. But as more reports of suspension failure in Teslas have come in, Daily Kanban has investigated the matter and can now report on this deeply troubling issue. Our investigation began in earnest upon reading a thread titled "Suspension Problem on Model S" in the Tesla Motors Club forum. The original poster (OP) in that thread described the suspension in his 2013 Model S (with 70,000 miles) failing at relatively low speed, saying the "left front hub assembly separated from the upper control arm." Images of the broken suspension components showed high levels of rust in the steel ball joint and the OP reported being told by Tesla service center employees that the "ball joint bolt was loose and caused the wear," which was "not normal." Because his Tesla was out of warranty, the repair was reportedly sent to Tesla management for consideration. According to a subsequent post by the OP, Tesla management refused to repair the broken suspension under warranty despite the "not normal" levels of wear reported by the service techs. Then, just days later, the OP reported that Tesla had offered to pay 50% of the $3,100 repair bill in exchange for his signature on a "Goodwill Agreement" which he subsequently posted here (a scan of the stock agreement can be found here). That agreement included the following passage:

"The Goodwill is being provided to you without any admission of liability or wrongdoing or acceptance of any facts by Tesla, and shall not be treated as or considered evidence of Tesla's liability with respect to any claim or incidents. You agree to keep confidential our provision of the Goodwill, the terms of this agreement and the incidents or claims leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. In accepting the Goodwill, you hereby release and discharge Tesla and related persons or entities from any and all claims or damages arising out of or in any way connected with any claims or incidents leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. You further agree that you will not commence, participate or voluntarily aid in any action at law or in equity or any legal proceeding against Tesla or related persons or entities based upon facts related to the claims or incidents leading to or related to this Goodwill." [Emphasis added]

This offer, to repair a defective part in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement, is unheard of in the auto industry. More troublingly, it represents a potential assault by Tesla Motors on the right of vehicle owners to report defects to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's complaint database, the auto safety regulators sole means of discovering defects independent of the automakers they regulate. Reuters also reports today that U.S. auto safety investigators are reviewing reports of suspension problems in Tesla Motors Inc's Model S cars.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tesla Suspension Breakage: It's Not The Crime, It's The Coverup More

Tesla Suspension Breakage: It's Not The Crime, It's The Coverup

Comments Filter:

  • Uh? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09, 2016 @07:58PM (#52285171)

    This "deeply troubling" issue is what? A control arm issue?

    1) I've had the control arms go out on cars, including an Audi A4. Is this some other kind of failure that is more hazardous?

    2) At least on normal sedans this doesn't doesn't generally result in death or major injury the way a car fire may, gas tank explosion etc.

    3) Where are the other reports from other users about this deeply troubling issue? They've got 100K+ cars on the road, and actually even though this random website is deeply troubled about this issue, these guys have one of the best safety records going.

    4) Any chance this is an astro-turfing campaign or something - the write-up is insanely long.

    • Re:Uh? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:23PM (#52285331)

      This "deeply troubling" issue is what? A control arm issue?

      No! Many cars have mechanical faults. The deeply troubling issue is the use of gag restrictions. This is something new to the automobile industry, the creeping-in of the kind of software-industry agreements we have seen from Microsoft and others.

      • Re:Uh? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 10, 2016 @01:39AM (#52286465)

        They weren't gagging him. They offered him money for fixing the issue in return for not then turning around and suing / generating bad PR for the company. He wasn't forced to take the money, he could have quite easily ignored the offer which he did. No one is being silenced.

      • Re:Uh? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Friday June 10, 2016 @02:21AM (#52286595)

        Is unheard of to gag someone in the industry because it's unheard of to offer out of warranty "good will" something which the car industry simply doesn't have. That's the only thing the gag order covers, and that is standard practice to stop word spreading and prevent vultures lining up.

        Also it's not unheard of. I've seen several reports of lemons over the years where car companies have agreed to do something in exchange for silence. To claim this is a first is just stupid.

        • I worked 9 years at a car fleet management company, and we got individual deals out of manufacturers where they would cover part or full cost of replacing failured parts out of warranty all the time - its not unheard of, its quite freaking normal, the problem is most people do not ask.

          We were never asked to sign a confidentiality agreement however - it was pretty much always an agreement made with a warranty services rep over the phone, followed by submitting the invoice to them with the reference number wr

    • Re:Uh? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Thursday June 09, 2016 @11:42PM (#52286189)

      I was just reading a related article on Tesla [vox.com] and the underlying claim is it may be a symptom of a bigger problem.

      The thrust of the argument is that cars in general are shockingly reliable, this isn't an easy thing to do which is why car companies have been working at it a very long time and still have trouble.

      Tesla is very new to making cars and their cars haven't been around a long time. The chances are really good that their cars will have huge reliability problems as they age.

      • Re:Uh? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Friday June 10, 2016 @04:29AM (#52286845) Homepage Journal

        The early cars have had some pretty severe issues. Replacement drive trains are not uncommon, as well as a long list of other quality issues like leaks, premature wear, seat leather stretching, all kinds of stuff. Tesla guarantees to buy cars back at a good price, so that has kept used prices high, but once beyond the end of warranty...

        Well, I asked for advice on buying a used one, and the advice from owners was "don't". Too many problems, not enough discount compared to new with warranty. Maybe get one referbed and warrantied by Tesla, but don't buy private. Kind of a stark warning.

        Then again this is all anecdotal, and despite the number of anecdotes they still don't add up to data. That data is a Tesla trade secret.

  • Look people (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:05PM (#52285211)

    No legal agreement can override the law. You might be able to sign away your rights, but you can't sign away the governments or ones guaranteed by government. I do not believe any contract provision that bared you from participating with a government inquiry would be legal and depending on whether the terms are severable could invalidate the entire agreement.

    This is why you can't sign a legal agreement to be someones slave. You can sign it, but it's not legal, it can't be enforced and any attempt to enforce it is likely to get someone in serious trouble. Just as in that case Tesla can't bar you from talking to NHTSA, the laws about vehicle safety would specifically preclude such a clause. Any attempt by Tesla to enforce such a clause would be dangerous beyond measure to the company. And as I mentioned previously the fact that such a clause exists could invalidate the rest of the agreement.

    The person that posted that agreement should have a long and frank talk with a lawyer experienced in vehicle and NHSTA law.

    • Re:Look people (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:19PM (#52285313)

      I should have Googled before posting. It seems NHTSA has already been to visit Tesla and remind that that such clauses that say you can't talk to NHTSA are not legal and if they don't remove them immediately Tesla is going to get a rectal exam from NHTSA.

      http://www.usatoday.com/story/... [usatoday.com]

      You might laugh, but that clause is what got NHTSA involved, a joint falling apart in a single car is not cause for them to get involved but that clause drew their involvement and it's going to result in a full investigation of this issue. It would have taken dozens of people having the same issue and some of them getting hurt of this type of issue to normally get in front of NHTSA but Tesla's illegal agreement put them right at the front of the pack. This will hurt Tesla, and their own lawyers did it to them.

      • Re:Look people (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Nethemas the Great ( 909900 ) on Thursday June 09, 2016 @09:44PM (#52285777)

        Maybe I'm missing something in that agreement, but I don't see where there's a prohibition on talking to NHTSA or anyone else about the problem. The gag is on telling people that Tesla offer remedy out of warranty and that in accepting that "goodwill" they could neither join party nor testify in any legal action taken by other parties against Tesla related to this. Further, that in offering this "goodwill" they are not admitting fault, nor acknowledging any inherent defect.

        Yes, its written in legalsleaze, but presumably they paid the lawyers to make sure being "nice" didn't have any blowback. The dealers of other car brands would simply tell you to "get bent," and make you pay for the out of warranty work since the factory won't compensate them. This is a benefit of NOT having independent dealers in the loop. It's a shame this legal CYB is being contorted to attack Tesla rather than acknowledging the unheard of in the industry kindness you'd never see elsewhere unless NHTSA forced them to fix.

        • Re:Look people (Score:4, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 10, 2016 @02:19AM (#52286589)

          You agree to keep confidential our provision of the Goodwill, the terms of this agreement _and the incidents or claims leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill_.

          Which would include the part failure...and includes everyone...

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          If you are prevented from telling people that Tesla paid 50% and testifying, you could be prevented from helping the NHTSA in an investigation or suit against Tesla.

          In most of Europe it's normal for car manufacturers to contribute to the repair of faults like this out of warranty. Exact legislation varies from country to country, but in the UK goods must last "a reasonable length of time" and be free from manufacturing defects. In this case it's clearly a manufacturing defect, so a court would calculate the

        • This is interesting to me and very enlightening to know the NHTSA would bend an auto maker over. I have a BMW E46 which had a subframe tear issue. There was a safety class action, but not recall. When my car exhibited the issue, BMW Corporate fought me on it. Eventually they agreed to pay a portion of it, but I had to sign one of these Goodwill docs too, saying I wouldn't share details (ooops....).

          These sorts of documents aren't nearly as rare as you might think. They are there to save public face for th

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by maugle ( 1369813 )
        I know SpaceX rockets are much more interesting, but Elon Musk really needs to pay more attention to Tesla. A disgusting NDA attempt like this never originates from engineers; it could only have come from corporate businessweasels that have infiltrated his engineering company.

    • Seems to me like the agreement was only for the exchange of money.

      Like a "We'll help pay for your out-of-warranty repair, if you don't take it to the media and imply we're accepting liability and admitting to a defect"

      • The agreement includes the sentence:

        " You further agree that you will not commence, participate or voluntarily aid in any action at law or in equity or any legal proceeding against Tesla...."

        This agreement on it's face bars any participation with or notice to NHTSA of anything related to the repair. That may not have been the intent, but that is what it says.

        • I'm not sure how reporting an issue to the NHTSA equates to participation in legal action against Tesla. Besides, contracts, are inferior to law so obviously it cannot mean that.

          • If talking with the NHTSA aids the NHTSA in an investigation that causes the government to take action against Tesla (a legal action) then the clause would have been an attempt to prohibit that. And just because contracts are inferior to law does not mean that lawyers aren't putting in provisions that violate the law hoping people follow the contract anyway.

            Saying that things don't happen because they are against the law is saying that there is no crime because crime is against the law.

        • I'm sure somewhere else it says if any clause of the agreement is not enforceable, the others stand.
          You can't enforce a contact clause that contradicts law.

        • Am I the only one who finds it strange Tesla mailed this agreement, pre-filled with the make and model of the car, to the customer, yet didn't pre-fill the customer's information? I'm not saying it's a forgery--they could have a stock document for each model, with just the "Model S" part changed (they have Model S, Model X, and Roadster, come on; the default is probably Model S and you just hit print)--just that there's a minor scuff on the armor of this bullet-proof case.

          I'd like to see if this plays ou

  • Ford had a problem in the early 2000's with their suspension springs. They scrimped on the rust protection and the springs (out of warranty) would snap and the car would drop down onto the tires.

    There was no "I'm sorry" or "My bad". They did do a quiet recall to replace the springs. But that was pretty much the extent of it.

    Tesla helped paid for this. Then they STILL end up being villified for fixing something out of warranty. And contrary to the hack-job write up, this wasn't a non-disclosure ag
  • Tesla is considered one of, if not the, best car makers going. Not because they are error free, but because they were backing their vehicles. That is also why we own a 2013 Tesla Model S.
    BUT, if Tesla is NOT backing these vehicles, and is trying to hide this like regular car makers, then, it will lead many, including us, to rethink ownership.

  • I had a POS 92 Sunbird with 60k miles that ran like crap. I sold it to a guy for about $500 telling him honestly there is something wrong and he drove it and said he could fix it. 2 weeks later he calls bitching because he blew up the engine. I told him sorry but it was sold as is. Threatened to sue me but never did.

    Old cars breaks. If you want something that lasts forever too bad.

    • Whenever I sell a car, a bog standard bill of sale comes with it. Don't want to sign? You're not getting it.

      It just basically states my name, their name, make/model/year/vin, AS-IS, no warranty, buyer beware, date, and signatures. Not to be a douche, but to protect my rear in case they don't register it and then do something bad (crash/tickets/etc).

      • Good idea. This was pre internet so we just wrote AS-IS on the Title near the sales price.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Lumpy ( 12016 )

        In most states a personal car sale is AS-IS and you have no recourse even if the car explodes the second you hand over the cash.

    • I had a POS 92 Sunbird with 60k miles that ran like crap. I sold it to a guy for about $500 telling him honestly there is something wrong and he drove it and said he could fix it. 2 weeks later he calls bitching because he blew up the engine. I told him sorry but it was sold as is. Threatened to sue me but never did.

      Old cars breaks. If you want something that lasts forever too bad.

      I don't know how shit cars are made in the USA but over here in the UK they're expected to do at least 100,000 miles without any major faults, every manufacturer has a body corrosion warranty of at least a decade and even Kia offer a 100,000 mile warranty.

      • Guy is talking about a rebadged Chevy Cavalier from 24 years ago. Cavalier was never a very good car... built as cheaply as possible using the cheapest materials and processes available. Back then, the big U.S. manufacturers believed the typical economy car should be trouble free for 3 years and have an average life expectancy of about 7 years. Hell, if you had the V-6 you had to unbolt the engine from the chassis and tilt it forward to change the rear spark plugs. Quality and fuel economy are what allo

      • I don't know how shit cars are made in the USA but over here in the UK they're expected to do at least 100,000 miles without any major faults, every manufacturer has a body corrosion warranty of at least a decade and even Kia offer a 100,000 mile warranty.

        1. Vehicles in the USA today are regularly expected to last 100k unless abused.
        2. Corrosion wise, how fond of salt are your road departments? Some states in the USA don't use salt, and cars last a lot longer in them than those that use the stuff heavily.

        I was kind of shocked at how short the Tesla warranty is, my only supposition is that as a new car company they couldn't afford to offer a longer one without the data to support it. The other companies have decades of experience that they can use to esti

  • Nornal Maintance (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fred911 ( 83970 ) on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:12PM (#52285267) Journal

    So the guy had a ball-joint failure at 70,000 miles. Ball-joints are replaceable maintenance items on suspensions of most cars. Vehicles with loose ball-joints have noisy front ends, unusual tire wear and steering anomalies.

      The real question one has to ask is when was the last time you had your vehicle inspected and had normal maintenance performed on it?

      If recently, you need to be looking at your technician and thanking the manufacturer for the good will repair.

    • Any one-off failure can be considered an anomaly, but you can't summarily dismiss ball joint failures at 70,000 miles as acceptable because that is unusual even for cheap cars. We can't conclude anything without knowledge of more failures if they are happening.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Lumpy ( 12016 )

        How about the fact that he has been driving it ignoring the "thunk Thunk" noises for 5,000-10,000 miles? If a ball joint is failing it thunks. They guy ignored it for months.

        • Re:Nornal Maintance (Score:4, Insightful)

          by NormalVisual ( 565491 ) on Friday June 10, 2016 @01:25AM (#52286441)
          How about the fact that he has been driving it ignoring the "thunk Thunk" noises for 5,000-10,000 miles? If a ball joint is failing it thunks. They guy ignored it for months.

          I'm wondering about this as well. Short of a truly random catastrophic failure, ball joints (and most suspension components in general) give plenty of warning when there are problems. I'm no Tesla fanboy by any means, but any marginally attentive driver should have noticed handling issues well in advance of the failure. Rusty ball joints would have been making all kinds of noise and grinding sensations long before then.

        • How about the fact that he has been driving it ignoring the "thunk Thunk" noises for 5,000-10,000 miles? If a ball joint is failing it thunks. They guy ignored it for months.

          Its still a failure once it gets to the thunk noise. Regardless of any neglect by the owner afterward, you would not expect it at under 70K miles.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by fred911 ( 83970 )

        without knowledge of more failures if they are happening.

        Case in point is GMs s10 Blazers of the 90's. Most failed state inspection minimal play spec, GM stated it was normal. They all made noise.

          This specific case is of a Western PA driver who specifically mentions driving on a marginal road. Salt, snow and shitty roads require significantly more maintenance than driving 405 every day. This guy was gifted the repair.

    • So the guy had a ball-joint failure at 70,000 miles.

      1996 Camry with 334,000 miles on it - and the original ball joints.

      Anyone defending such an early failure of a massively expensive car is either being an apologist or is stunningly clueless about modern automobiles.

  • Propaganda wars (Score:3, Insightful)

    by axewolf ( 4512747 ) on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:14PM (#52285281)

    Which rich asshole's agenda should I fall in line with?

  • Maybe Tesla a did a bad thing, but the post is way too long to read. Can we get an editor please?

  • I bet the cheap bastard... (Score:3)

    by AmazingRuss ( 555076 ) on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:36PM (#52285415)

    ... that only offered to pay half is cleaning out his desk right now.

    • Why? Because some crappy journalism with an agenda write an article that skirted the main issue which was that Tesla paid for an out of warranty maintenance related item?

  • substandard parts (Score:4, Interesting)

    by siamesevodka ( 1852446 ) on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:39PM (#52285441)
    The ball joints were probably sourced from china. I have collector cars and this has been going on in this area as well. If Tesla would use Moog ball joints instead of lowest bidder they might have better results. That is what we found to cure early failure. Ball joints should last 100,000 miles easily if they are quality and your not hitting every pot hole in town every day. Recent conversion to the chinese market for this item has magnified issues of ball joints not lasting as long. I have been told by the local big box appliance store not to expect anymore than 8 years out of any major appliance you buy. That way we can squeeze more buying into your life span. After all we are the carcass everybody else feeds on. On any major purchase source the forum for that particular item.It might cut down on the jackals feeding on your money for a few years. It will alert you to the issues with that particular item.

    • Re:substandard parts (Score:4, Informative)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Thursday June 09, 2016 @09:04PM (#52285585) Homepage Journal

      The ball joints were probably sourced from china. I have collector cars and this has been going on in this area as well. If Tesla would use Moog ball joints instead of lowest bidder they might have better results.

      Read the box next time you buy a Moog ball joint... MADE IN CHINA. Moog quality has reportedly gone into the toilet like everyone else. Sadly, it really is everyone. Super-expensive TRW and Lemfoerder suspension links are also shit now. It looks like literally the only non-shit option is to buy adjustable links with replaceable ball joints, where that is even possible. I think I can get two of my four links like that...

      • The Moog parts I've used have been pretty good, but I usually prefer Timken if they're available. I've had to work on machines in a few Timken factories, and they really do seem to give a damn about quality.

        • The Moog parts I've used have been pretty good, but I usually prefer Timken if they're available.

          I agree, especially their bearings. Most other bearings are garbage now. Timken or SKF all the way. I used to prefer Moog myself...

    • Plus one on the first part of that post.

  • People: Just because there are fewer parts to break doesn't mean there are no parts that need maintenance due to wear. A chassis lube should have been performed (to include suspension parts) at leas 5-7 times in that 70,000 miles, at any one of which the technician would have noted the rust. It was good of them to split the cost on repairs given that the owner of the car made the damage vastly worse because he failed to maintain it.

    But, I don't know that I've ever heard of any other car dealer or manufactur

    • A chassis lube should have been performed (to include suspension parts) at leas 5-7 times in that 70,000 miles,

      No. No modern vehicle ships with greaseable joints. They all have sealed "lifetime" joints which last roughly 50-150k.

      • Which is part of the reason I replaced the suspension arms with aftermarket parts when it came time to replace the ball joints in my truck. Now everything is greaseable. :-D

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by fnj ( 64210 )

      A chassis lube should have been performed (to include suspension parts) at leas 5-7 times in that 70,000 miles

      Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk. I am an old guy who remembers the advertising sign "Mobilubrication" at the gas stations in the 1950s, so you tickled my funny bone with your reference to antiquated, long-outdated requirements. "Chassis lube" hasn't been a thing for a LONG, LONG time now. Valve jobs and/or ring jobs are not an expected thing every 50,000 or so miles any more, either. Heck, there aren't even any se

  • Unheard of? (Score:3)

    by guruevi ( 827432 ) on Thursday June 09, 2016 @09:16PM (#52285643)

    - GM had 5 confidential settlements and engineers knowing about their ignition switch problems for 10 years before they even changed anything or did a recall.
    - Nissan had confidential settlements regarding airbags deploying too violently before issuing a recall

    There are law firms specializing in confidential settlements with car manufacturers after accidents. People died in car accidents and these manufacturers were allowed to settle with an NDA attached. This poor Tesla just had some suspension breaking, something that you see quite a bit if you live near a street with lots of potholes, a relatively high concentration of GM vehicles.

  • Tesla responded to this issue in a blog post (Score:5, Informative)

    by whh3 ( 450031 ) on Friday June 10, 2016 @03:02AM (#52286663) Homepage

    They just responded to this issue on their blog:

    https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/grain-of-salt [teslamotors.com]

    Interesting how they call out the author for his previous "death watch" on the company.

    As usual, there are three sides to every story: yours, mine and the truth.

    Will

    • "Recently, a Model S was in a very high speed accident in Germany that caused it to fly 82 feet through the air, an event that would likely be fatal in vehicles not designed to the level of safety of a Tesla."

      Where's the dashcam footage for that lol. Holy moly

    • As usual, there are three sides to every story: yours, mine and the truth.

      Tesla's story appears to be much closer to the truth. This guy's ball joint failed after years of driving down a very long dirt road. The dirt will be abrasive to any ball joint. I used to live down a very long gravel road (3.5 miles) for many years, and a few parts on my car had to be replaced due to the damage done by dirt grinding.

      That being said, Tesla's statement that they never mentioned NHTSA is disingenuous. They know full well how that contract reads when it says, "...and the incidents or claim

  • Tesla responded today:

      "It's worth noting that the blogger who fabricated this issue... is Edward Niedermayer. This is the same gentle soul who previously wrote a blog titled 'Tesla Death Watch,' which starting on May 19, 2008 was counting the days until Tesla's death."

  • Tesla has issued a statement (Score:5, Informative)

    by b0bby ( 201198 ) on Friday June 10, 2016 @09:33AM (#52287897)

    I noticed this article this morning:
    http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/10... [cnbc.com]

    Seems Tesla disagrees with the Daily Kanban's report:

    "With respect to the car that is discussed in the blog post that led to yesterday's newsthe suspension ball joint experienced very abnormal rust. We haven't seen this on any other car, suggesting a very unusual use case. The car had over 70,000 miles on it and its owner lives down such a long dirt road that it required two tow trucks to retrieve the car. (One to get the car to the highway and one to get it from the highway to the service center.) When we got the car, it was caked in dirt."

    Secondly, Tesla said that the NHTSA had not opened any investigation and hadn't even started a so-called "preliminary evaluation", which is the "lowest form of formal investigatory work it does". The car maker said on April 20 the regulator asked about its suspension as part of a "routine screening" and on April 30, Tesla complied.

    "NHTSA has since told us that we have cooperated fully and that no further information is needed. Neither before nor after this information was provided has NHTSA identified any safety issue with Tesla's suspensions. This can be confirmed with NHTSA," Tesla said.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." -- Albert Einstein

Close