I know what an equivalence class is, thank you. How does that make the map from (say) R^3 to itself that sends everything to 0 a "kind of equivalence"?

It gives rise to an equivalence relation on R^3 in a fairly natural way, as indeed any function gives rise to an equivalence relation on its domain: x~y iff f(x)=f(y). But that doesn't mean that it is a "kind of equivalence".

Now, obviously, "kind of" is vague enough that saying "an endomorphism of a vector space simply Is Not a 'kind of equivalence'" would be too strong. But I would like to know what, exactly, you mean by calling something a "kind of equivalence", because I'm unable to think of any meaning for that phrase that (1) seems sensible to me and (2) implies that endomorphisms of vector spaces are "kinds of equivalence".

(Looking back at what bonsaitree wrote, I see s/he said "of any kind of equivalence", which I unconsciously typo-corrected to "or any kind of equivalence". But perhaps I misunderstood and bonsaitree meant something else, though I can't think what it might be. bt, if you're reading this: my apologies if I misunderstood, and would you care to clarify if so?)

Yes, any function gives rise to equivalence classes. And linear functions give rise to equivalence classes that preserve structure in vector spaces.

(I guess our discourse has reached its end of usefulness here.)

Yes. Thanks for the correct re-wording as "or" and "equivalence class".