I will never understand why people ask why those who bought a thing expected to get that thing

Isn't that the bare minimum requirement for how commerce is supposed to function?

A surprising chunk of HN commenters earnestly believe that "caveat emptor" should be some kind of horrible default way of life. Like businesses should be able to sell anything they want, without regulation, as long as they can convince people to buy those things. And if those things don't work--well it's 100% the customer's fault for being so gullible and not being responsible for the company's quality.

I don't understand why people would want to live that way and argue against those who fight for better.

But my guess is that it's a defense mechanism, essentially the Just World fallacy. "It would really suck to have that bad thing happen to me through no fault of my own. *spoink!* I'm careful (and smart) therefore bad things won't happen to me" (https://dilbert-viewer.herokuapp.com/1999-09-08)

Why did Tesla sell a 7,500 euro feature in Europe if they knew it’s never going to work?

My mistake was assuming this company had the slightest decency to sell things they could actually deliver.