Slashdot Mirror


Elon Musk Will Usher In the Era of Electric Cars

pigrabbitbear writes "There's a reason why Elon Musk is being called the next Steve Jobs. Like Jobs, he's a visionary, a super successful serial entrepreneur, having made his initial fortune with a company he sold to Compaq before starting Paypal. Like Jobs, he saved his beloved baby Tesla Motors from the brink of oblivion. Like Jobs, [he has] a knack for paradigm-shifting industry disruption. Which means he's also demanding. 'Like Jobs, Elon does not tolerate C or D players,' SpaceX board member and early Tesla investor Steve Jurvetson told BusinessWeek. But while Jobs was slinging multi-colored music players and touchable smartphones, Musk is building rocket ships and electric-powered supercars. It's why his friends describe him as not just Steve Jobs but also John D. Rockefeller and Howard Hughes all wrapped in one. His friend Jon Favreau used Musk as the real-life inspiration for the big screen version of Tony Stark. Elon Musk is a badass."

68 of 336 comments (clear)

  1. If somebody compared me... by Type44Q · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If somebody compared me to that slimebag Rockefeller, I'd shoot them.

    1. Re:If somebody compared me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ditto for Jobs

    2. Re:If somebody compared me... by Mitreya · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If somebody compared me to that slimebag Rockefeller, I'd shoot them.

      You do realize that the comparison refers to things like "influence on the world"/success and not on personal qualities?
      From what I understand, Steve Jobs was also not the nicest person you ever met - but that's not really relevant, unless Elon Musk's personality is being compared.

    3. Re:If somebody compared me... by bigredradio · · Score: 4, Funny

      I guess if I had to pick the comparisons (Jobs Rockefeller, Hughes, or Stark)... I pick Stark.

      Hughes wouldn't be that bad if the guy didn't have that "saving my pee" habit.

    4. Re:If somebody compared me... by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      The more you read about the classic US families- "influence on the world"/success is very personal - and the cash follows in to pet projects, people, ideas, private and tax free foundations that span generations.
      From "Competition is a sin!" to nets catching workers as they drop .... personal qualities are all you have.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:If somebody compared me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I guess if I had to pick the comparisons (Jobs Rockefeller, Hughes, or Stark)... I pick Stark.

      So the first word used to describe your legacy would be "fictional", then?

    6. Re:If somebody compared me... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      If someone compared me to that dick Jobs, I'd punch them in the face. And then in the nads.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:If somebody compared me... by fm6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If somebody compared me to an egomaniacal, ethics-free, self-righteous jerk whose only real talent was as a pitchman, I'd be really offended. "Visionary" my ass.

    8. Re:If somebody compared me... by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2

      Can we, please, stop praising rich slimebags for their habit of throwing money into the crowd?

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    9. Re:If somebody compared me... by aurispector · · Score: 2

      It's sad how people confuse fantasy with reality, isn't it?

      I get tired of hearing people drool over how great guys like Jobs and Musk are supposed to be. The ones who make the world go around are the entrepreneurs who run the small businesses that comprise the bulk of the economy.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    10. Re:If somebody compared me... by westlake · · Score: 3, Informative

      If somebody compared me to that slimebag Rockefeller, I'd shoot them.

      The farmer bought the Standard product with the reasonable expectation that the oil lamp in his parlor would not explode when his wife when his wife put a match to the wick --- a very real possibility in the early wildcat days of the petroleum industry.

      He bought the Standard product because it was sold unadulterated in honest weights and measures.

      He bought the Standard product because it was cheap.

      The retail price of kerosene down 50% in less then ten years .

      When the Standard Oil trust was broken, customers remained loyal to the Standard's regional operating companies, each one very big, very strong and technically sophisticated competitors in their own right.

    11. Re:If somebody compared me... by RabidTimmy · · Score: 5, Funny

      That would just add validity to their comparison.

    12. Re:If somebody compared me... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The ones who make the world go around are the entrepreneurs who run the small businesses that comprise the bulk of the economy.

      That's true, those people do make the world go around. But people like Jobs, Musk, Gates, etc are the people who make the world move forward.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    13. Re:If somebody compared me... by greg1104 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Small businesses no longer make up the majority of the economy. In boom times, they do very well. But during periods when expansion capital is hard to come by and sales are weak, they are much less competitive against larger companies who have significant cash/resources to fall back on. We've been in such a bad growth situation for small businesses for several years now, and there's no sign of it improving in the near future either.

    14. Re:If somebody compared me... by Nerdfest · · Score: 2, Insightful

      With the iOS walled garden, proprietary connectors, etc, Jobs did at least as much to more the world backward.

    15. Re:If somebody compared me... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2

      Yes.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    16. Re:If somebody compared me... by Dr+Max · · Score: 2

      The same number of positive accomplishments as Steve jobs then.

      --
      Rocket Surgeon.
    17. Re:If somebody compared me... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      That's a very odd thing to say. The rich people are the ones who pay most of the taxes

      http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/income_tax/table2-4.pdf

      The top 25% pay 72.8% of total income tax. The top 10% pay 55.8%. The top 1% pay 24.8. You'd need a serious austerity program to compensate for even the top 1% leaving.

      They create most of the jobs too - a rich self employed person is another way of describing a small business. Jobs was a dick but it's not as if Apple would have been anywhere near as profitable or have employed as many people without him. Now you can say that some people are motivated by things other than money. Well no doubt, but what about the ones whose motivation is purely monetary. If they all left or had their property expropriated there's no real sign that the poor would get richer. In fact if you look at the USSR, Belarus, PRC etc the odds are that the poor would get poorer.

      Now if you look at Sweden for example - which is really an example of a low inequality society done well - you find that

      http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/03/income-distribution-in-us-and-sweden.html

      Up until around the 45th percentile, Sweden does better than the U.S. After this the U.S opens up a substantial advantage. It is clearly better to be poor in Sweden compared to the U.S, and obviously to be rich in America compared to Sweden.

      What matters most is that this graph illustrates that it is better to be middle class in America. The 60% in the middle earn 20% more in the U.S than they do in Sweden, even taking government purchases crudely into account. It is a myth that only a few at the top do better in the American system compared to even arguably the most successful of the European welfare states.

      I.e. the poorest 45% would be better off in a Swedish style system. Everyone else would be better off in the US. The problem is that the job creators are, by definition, in the top 55%. So you'll find that successful companies - Apple, Google, Microsoft etc - are much more likely to be started in the US than in Sweden. In the long run that means that the number of coins to go round will be more in a laissez faire society than in one where the government seeks to reduce inequality.

      If you look here at GDP per capita PPP the US does better than Sweden and has done since the 1960's

      http://www.bls.gov/fls/intl_gdp_capita_gdp_hour.pdf

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    18. Re:If somebody compared me... by Glock27 · · Score: 2

      There is more than one side to the "iOS walled garden"...Android has had far more security issues than iOS. There are things I don't like about Apple's policies, but they do seem to be slowly getting better.

      As to "proprietary connectors"...really? Apple has driven adoption of many of its connectors (some built in collaboration with others) - USB, DisplayPort, Thunderbolt for instance. I wouldn't be surprised to see Lightning become a standard.

      --
      Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
      Score: -1 100% Flamebait
    19. Re:If somebody compared me... by gman003 · · Score: 2

      And Mussolini made the trains run on time. Doing a few good things doesn't mean he didn't do a whole lot more bad ones.

    20. Re:If somebody compared me... by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      There is nothing wrong with an iOS Walled Garden, as long as there are other options out there which provide the ability to break out of the garden.

      Let's be honest, if the garden is well guarded, has a lot of apps, and is easy to use, it is plenty good enough for you if all you want to do is use your smartphone and use a few apps. That sort of concept is what pushes smartphones forward because you don't have to deal with any jagged edges while your general public becomes accustomed to your device and what it can do.

      Once the general public is accustomed to those things, many start realizing that other stuff is out there and then the Walled Garden is not enough for them. That is where a more open environment will shine.

      AOL had a walled garden that helped introduce millions to the possibilities of the internet. That walled garden was far from open, and it eventually bit the dust, but what we got was much, much better, because there were those millions who now knew why it was useful to have a wider Internet. Would we have gotten as far without the closed ecosystems? It's tempting to say it might have happened anyway, but I'm not so sure.

      The only problem I have with Steve Jobs is the fact that Apple liked to sue people for stupid shit. That's the real problem. If they try to keep everyone in the garden, they will only stunt the growth of the ecosystem. All I can say to that is that they will eventually lose that battle, one way or another. iOS probably has years, even decades ahead of it, but I think it's greatest triumphs are already behind it. And I think even Steve Jobs would realize that, even while he would be working to delay the inevitable to give him time to find something else to make.

    21. Re:If somebody compared me... by tnk1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Have no fear. History will moderate the story of Steve Jobs out. He was an interesting person who, in many ways, did promote the way our world works. Eventually, even the people who think he invented the wheel, will understand that he wasn't so much an inventor as a promoter and an integrator of other people's work.

      However, I think that if we underestimate the value of promoters and integrators, we miss the big picture of why some things become big, despite being flawed, and other things that are less flawed toil in obscurity. If you are an engineering type who believes that your device or app or whatever will change the world, you might be right about its potential, but you'd probably be wrong if you thought that the device could speak for itself. Every advance needs to overcome some sort of initial obstacle that can be described as simple inertia. Cars are faster than horses, but everyone had horses and the world was built around thousands of years of horse riding. If you think it was enough to simply build a car for it to be adopted, I'd say that you'd probably have waited much longer without a Henry Ford.

      People like Jobs and Edison deserve accolades, even if they didn't truly invent things. They just need to not receive more credit than they deserve, and I think that does moderate over time as historians go over the facts and present them.

  2. I don't tolerate CD players either by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 5, Funny

    I guess that's why Jobs came up with ipods.

  3. Next Steve jobs? by davydagger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So he's going to design really crappy electric cars for 10 years which will sell well with artists who are big on brand loyality and tollerate being abused.

    Next he's going to download various open source hardware car parts off the internet, put some faux wood and faux leather interior, and sell it to suave hipsters who he can ply on their on white/yuppie guilt to sell trendy fads and make them feel better about themselves, and then ignore any and all complaints for the next 10 years, esentiallly selling what should have been a $10k smart car for $20k.

    He'll then dictate what speakers, intake and exhaust you put on it, sue chevy for patent infringements on the volt, and get his crowd of loyal followers to cover up his mistakes.

    Then we'll start talking about how much of an innovater he was, but the people who did most of the real innovation will die quiet deaths, unnoticed by the technology he made popular.

    Or mabey we should stop using the term "The Next Steve Jobs" out of the context of meaning "the next George Pullman"

    1. Re:Next Steve jobs? by guruevi · · Score: 2

      Who says that's not what he's going to do? After all Steve started out as a hacker, hippie giving/selling blue boxes (to make FREE phone calls) into using free and open source software to make and launch his set of companies.

      Sound familiar?

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  4. Sponsored by by taucross · · Score: 3

    This Slashdot story sponsored by Kusm Nole Enterprises (TM)

    --
    "In the absence of the ability to establish the attribute of truth they tried to establish the noble attributes."
    1. Re:Sponsored by by WGFCrafty · · Score: 5, Funny

      While I concur completely, your at-at provides a delightful mental image. Instead of people on the train tracks you'd hear:

      "Suzy A., 16 was flattened today when she supposedly ignored the warnings and an A.B.C. Advanced Bipedals Car) stepped on her. This is the fourth flattening of a teenager this month, up from two over the last three months. Police believe this is linked to a social media meme where children attempt to use the A.B.C.s to smash walnuts with the word 'illiteracy' written on them, and upload the video. This is Sean Parsons with KDRT 42."

  5. Celebrity CEOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So he's just another celebrity businessman who treats his employees like shit while taking the credit for designs he didn't come up with himself? You'll be comparing him to Thomas Edison next.

    1. Re:Celebrity CEOs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Eberhard

      Musk basically ripped the company out from under him.

  6. Presumably he'll also cure cancer, by neminem · · Score: 3, Interesting

    send us to Mars, usher in a new era of world peace, and while he's at it, make us all sandwiches?

    How did this make it to the front page? It's not even a slashvertizement for a product; that might occasionally be useful. It's a slashvertizement for a person, that doesn't even have any useful information in it beyond "this person is awesome". It doesn't even make the slightest effort to argue the statement given in the title: I'd love to see an "era of electric cars" get ushered in.

  7. He's going to patent lots of obvious stuff by linatux · · Score: 5, Funny

    then sue the crap out of everyone who produces something with wheels?

    1. Re:He's going to patent lots of obvious stuff by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not everyone, only the ones that produce round wheels.

    2. Re:He's going to patent lots of obvious stuff by scottrocket · · Score: 4, Funny

      then sue the crap out of everyone who produces something with wheels?

      Only rounded wheels-be fair.

  8. Re:Electric cars... yawn by rjstanford · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ever seen a modern locomotive? Scaling power in an electric car is far, far easier than scaling it in a fossil-fuel equiv. vehicle.

    --
    You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
  9. Seriously?? by lkcl · · Score: 3, Interesting

    where's that slashdot article that came up a couple of days ago, about velomobiles being 80x more efficient than electric cars? didn't it have some quite obvious maths that showed that if all cars in the USA were converted to electric, it would require 7,000 GWh of electricity just to charge them every day? what that velomobiles article didn't also cover is that it's highly unlikely that the world has enough lithium and neodymium to go round to supply all those vehicles.

    i've *done* the analysis and the designs (http://lkcl.net/ev) and if EVs are to be the success that people really really WANT them to be, then they have to be ultra-efficient (350kg) ultra-streamlined (Cd 0.15) parallel diesel hybrids with a 5kW (7HP) diesel motor and a 10kW (13HP) electric motor running off of a CVT (quadbike) gearbox.

    perhaps this is some sort of spiritual test of my patience when people make these kinds of statements "elon musk will be the next steve jobs for recommending that the world's population use more of our planet's natural resources than its humans can actually get hold of", or am i missing something here?

    1. Re:Seriously?? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Insightful

      didn't it have some quite obvious maths that showed that if all cars in the USA were converted to electric, it would require 7,000 GWh of electricity just to charge them every day?

      I don't think anyone is suggesting that we immediately replace all gas-powered cars with electric cars overnight using our existing infrastructure and power grid. It's going to take a long time, and our energy sector is going to come with it. More solar energy is absorbed by the earth every hour than humans use in a year. It's completely feasible to have an all-solar energy grid that powers everything we need it to and then some, it will just take a lot of time and significant investment to get anywhere near that point. It's just the case right now that we have an infrastructure built on supporting gas-powered vehicles. That is what needs to change. It's also safe to say that we haven't found every source of natural resources that this planet has to offer, and we haven't even begun to look outside of our planet for additional resources. Not to mention manufacturing our own from available materials.

      In short, not only is it possible, but Elon Musk is right for doing his part to help push people in that direction. His direction isn't the only feasible one though, so feel free to compete with him.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  10. Re:Yeah except by MrEricSir · · Score: 2

    In that case you'll be happy to know that Musk didn't really start PayPal. He started another company called X.com that eventually took over PayPal.

    But Musk being Musk, he likes to take credit for things he didn't actually do.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
  11. Save the Elons by Megahard · · Score: 2

    The African Elon is an endangered species. Poachers are killing it for its valuable musk, used to power these electric vehicles.

    --
    I eat only the real part of complex carbohydrates.
  12. Re:Slashvertisement? by davydagger · · Score: 2

    slashdot has gotten pretty bad recently. need more metamods and more real geeks on the firehouse. Less FUD, Less brownshirts, and less corporate sponsored ego trips.

  13. Re:Slashvertisement? by realityimpaired · · Score: 5, Informative

    You've seriously never heard of Elon Musk? What rock have you been living under?

    He's the financier behind Tesla Motors, which has been talked about many times over the years on Slashdot. He also fincanced SpaceX, which got a lot of press during the X Prize coverage. He also founded PayPal, and got a lot of press through that. There've been documentaries about him, and about his companies, some of which are available on Netflix if you're so inclined (Revenge of the Electric Car has a *lot* of interview time with Musk, if you'd like to get an idea of what kind of person he really is). http://www.revengeoftheelectriccar.com/

    Come to it, having seen that movie, and his interviews in the movie, he doesn't come off as anywhere near the kind of jackass that Jobs was.

  14. Be ashamed, /.ers by meta-monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Reading through the comments on this story makes me sad. 90% of the posts are casting aspersions at Musk, or at the editors for publishing a positive story about a guy trying to build great things. Is he perfect? Of course not, but at least he's out there trying to do Great Things. And not just another platform for mining your personal data to better push ads at you (google, Facebook), but striving for actual advancements for humanity, like electric cars to maybe help save the planet, and then rocket ships to get off of it. Is every idea perfect or without drawbacks? Of course not. But good luck waiting for a perfect solution to replacing the internal combustion engine.

    I'm reminded of my favorite Teddy Roosevelt quote:

    "It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."

    Can your cynicism. If you don't like the way Musk is building electric cars or space ships, get off your couch and go build your own goddamn spaceship. Oh wait, that would require drive, vision, and effort, and making snide comments on the internet (like I'm doing) is much easier.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    1. Re:Be ashamed, /.ers by newcastlejon · · Score: 2

      Not just kissing ass, there was definitely some tongue involved there.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
  15. Re:don't for get the $200 oil change at there deal by Gordonjcp · · Score: 3, Funny

    Electric cars don't use oil because there are no moving parts

    ... and the gearboxes are lubricated with unicorn tears, while the hydraulic systems use dragon's blood because of the higher boiling point.

  16. Re:oh stop it by khallow · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If they can turn a profit on selling Falcon 9 launches anywhere near the price points they claim to be able to achieve, then it will change the universe.

  17. Not so much by Konster · · Score: 2

    The tax payers saved Tesla from the brink of oblivion, not Musk. Nearly half a billion dollars, at that.

    Not to mention, the number of cars that Tesla has to sell in order to become profitable is a tall order for any company, not just one selling expensive boutique electrics to a very small niche.

  18. Re:Slashvertisement? by Twinbee · · Score: 2

    Wow, a comment with a score above 2 which isn't a joke or a dig at Steve Jobs.

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
  19. Hope he's not the next Steve Jobs by humanrev · · Score: 2

    Unlike Jobs, Elon Musk seems like a nice guy. With any luck he can show how to be a pioneering leader in the technology sphere without having to be a dick at the same time.

    --
    Most people on Slashdot are fucking idiots.
  20. Re:You forgot: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Tesla depends heavily on government guarantees, not money. Much in the same way that the vast majority of Americans depended on government guarantees when they purchased their first home.

    As for SpaceX, do you seriously think Apple would exist today if it weren't for all the public schools which purchased their equipment?

    Admittedly, any business which makes it without some kind of public subsidy deserves accolades. But we don't live in some Ayn Rand, private, capitalist dystopia/utopia. The "public sector" is large, and it's hard to make it without doing business with it in one way or another. If it were smaller, it may be easier to get funding from private investors (although, in absolute terms funding might be more difficult all around).

  21. Re:don't for get the $200 oil change at there deal by norpy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hydraulic and transmission oil is changed far less frequently than engine oil.

    Also all-electric cars don't have the same complex tranmissions since electric engines don't have the same narrow power band

  22. Re:don't for get the $200 oil change at there deal by amorsen · · Score: 2

    ... and the gearboxes are lubricated with unicorn tears, while the hydraulic systems use dragon's blood because of the higher boiling point.

    Pure electric cars don't need gearboxes. Hydraulic brakes likely won't go away soon, but electric power steering is rather popular.

    --
    Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
  23. Re:Oh sure... by robot256 · · Score: 2

    39% of electric vehicles have solar panels on their home, so they generate their own power (at least on average). And it would take an extraordinarily sudden leap in EV use for off-peak EV charging to be more load than daytime peak usage--both are expected to climb over time, and more capacity is needed regardless of EV adoption. They will just make the load more constant, which is *better* from the power company's perspective.

  24. Re:Does anyone know... by robot256 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Volt battery pack is 40 miles because that's more than 75% of Americans drive on an average day, so GM sized it to keep costs down. I know that's true for me (I've been tracking my daily miles for almost a year now). Not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the battery volume is MUCH greater in the top-end Model S than it is in the Volt. The Volt has a 10kWh battery, while the Model S has an 80kWh battery, so the Model S get 250-300 miles on a charge instead of 35-50. The Model S is actually less efficient, possibly thanks to its weight, but has enough capacity to make up for it. Plus, weight isn't as much of an issue for electric cars as gas because regenerative braking recaptures some of that extra kinetic energy when you stop.

    But I'm with you on you decision to not buy a Volt--I don't want my EV to go anywhere near a gas station. That's why I'm waiting for the 2013 LEAF to come out this spring.

  25. Re:oh stop it by newcastlejon · · Score: 2

    The Universe won't be changed all that much; it's quite large.

    --
    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
  26. Can people be just people ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do they have to be compared to others?

    I mean, Elon Musk is Elon Musk, whatever Elon Musk does, or doesn't do, is his business - as long as it does not interfere with the life of others.

    Comparing Elon Musk to Jobs or Rockefeller or Hughes is just silly - and in fact, TFA is a totally meaningless article.

    I know Slashdot has fallen, but even I, a long time visitor, hadn't realized that Slashdot has fallen into such a deeeeep abyss that it had to carry useless article that does nothing but sing hosannas and heap praises to Mr. Elon Musk.
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Can people be just people ? by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 4, Funny

      iron man, iron man, does whatever an iron can

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    2. Re:Can people be just people ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Creases pants, jeans and shirts,
      Hold it right, else it hurts.
      Look out, here comes the iron man!

  27. Influence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    things like "influence on the world"

    Has it occurred to you that some people may not want to have influenced the world in the way Jobs did - I for one, would not like to be the individual responsible for the age of closed platforms and walled gardens we seem to be heading to.

    Regardless, surely Henry Ford would be a better comparison, at least for the "influence on the world".

  28. And unlike Steve Jobs... by spmkk · · Score: 2

    Like Jobs, he saved his beloved baby Tesla Motors from the brink of oblivion.

    And unlike Steve Jobs, he first put it there himself, and only "saved" it by pissing in his investors' and customers' pockets and telling them it was raining.

    ...Which might be forgivable, if he had put himself as far out on a limb as he put them. He didn't; through the process of milking his investors (big and small), he managed to hold on to almost every penny of his personal multi-billion-dollar fortune. And frankly, even THAT could have been forgivable, had he not also leveraged the Department of Energy for an additional $465 million of taxpayer funds.

    Ostensibly this was a loan; realistically, with an anticipated total market of 1 million electric cars by 2015 (the DOE invested in 2009), even if every one of those came from Tesla, it would have to pay almost $500 from the sale of *every car* to pay this "loan" back. Hell, they finally made the FIRST payment on this loan this month after more than 3 years. How? Not from being profitable. Not even from being frugal. From a $200-million influx of investor cash, which investors are only putting up because they know it's all but secured by the US government (having seen how Washington says, "How high?" when Detroit says, "Jump.") -- in other words, if (rather, when) they don't pay that money back, you and I will.

    Screw Elon Musk. I'll happily let the Brits get a head start on private-sector space travel if it means we don't have to reward the fetid values and practices on which Musk builds his vision.

  29. Re:You forgot: by pavon · · Score: 4, Informative

    I won't speak for Tesla, but SpaceX does not depend on government money. The Falcon 1 was created entirely with private funding, which includes capital investments to build their entire vertically integrated production facilities (they don't contract anything), some launch facilities, and design, construction, and multiple test flights of an entirely new design of rocket. The Falcon 9 was mostly NASA funding, but it built heavily on the Falcon 1 design, and was thus less expensive to design and test than the Falcon 1 (even without including the huge facilities investments mentioned before). Furthermore, SpaceX already had financing to develop Falcon 9 when they won the NASA contract. The contract allowed them to divert that money into the Dragon Capsule instead, the majority of which is thus privately funded.

    So without government funding, they would be about where they are with Falcon 1/9, but just getting started with Dragon. Government money sped them up a bit, but they aren't even close to being dependent on that funding.

  30. Re:Electric cars... yawn by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 2

    The one that's faster and corner's better.

  31. Re:Cars are old hat, and the wrong solution. by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The real solution is to build a proper high-speed rail network throughout North America. We aren't talking about mere 300 km/h trains like are commonly found in Europe. We need to be talking about trains going just under the speed of sound. 1200 km/h trains, if you will. A solid network connecting the major cities of America would render many cars useless.

    And this is a real solution to the wrong problem. Most cars aren't used to get from city to city; they're used to get from home to work. So you'd be constructing an ultra-expensive rail system to transport...well, practically nobody. We have something similar to that now. It's called Amtrak, and ridership is so pathetic it can only survive with hefty government subsidies fleeced from overburdened taxpayers. But I hear it makes a nice jobs program with great benefits.

    Then it is possible to address the next problems: suburban sprawl. Cities should be highly centralized, and built upwards. It is absolutely stupid to build suburbs. Those who want to live in a rural area should be doing so because they farm. Those who aren't farming should be living in dense cities, where public transit can be effectively used. Once that is achieved, cars will not be necessary for the vast majority of people.

    So, at a stroke, you simply think people shouldn't be allowed to live outside a city unless they are farming. Heaven forbid that they might just not want to live cheek-by-jowl with seething masses of humanity in studio apartments. What a pity we have these things called "liberty" and "choice" which allow us to live where we choose regardless of whether it meets your authoritarian approval or not. Wouldn't the world just be a much nicer place if people would just do as they're told instead of, you know, exercising free will and stuff?

    --
    In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  32. Re:Cars are old hat, and the wrong solution. by guruevi · · Score: 2

    Rail can be used for a lot of things besides people.

    In the us it (still) makes economic sense to put things cross-country on a tractor trailer while in Europe trucks don't make sense until the last 50 miles.

    Amtrak has it's problems because it's a weird hybrid between private sector for-profit exploitation and government funding of said profit. Amtrak is still in business even though gas and a rental car for the whole trip makes more economic sense than a one-way ticket with their once-a-day service.

    The problem in the us is that the electorate doesn't want to pay for anything but still expects similar services than countries with double and triple their (flat) tax rates.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  33. Re:Cars are old hat, and the wrong solution. by Dzimas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No. It looks like a wasteland of Walmart parking lots and awfully designed suburban tract housing. We should fix that.

  34. Re:Cars are old hat, and the wrong solution. by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 2

    Yes, let's use engineering to tackle social problems. That always works.

  35. Re:Cars are old hat, and the wrong solution. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    And this is a real solution to the wrong problem. Most cars aren't used to get from city to city; they're used to get from home to work.

    Right, but you are looking at it backwards. People don't travel from city to city because there is no easy way to do so. You could spend hours driving or go for a quick sexual assault at the airport, but nothing is as easy as a train.

    Rather than just trying to react to what is happening you need to start shaping it for the better.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  36. Re:You forgot: by shadov · · Score: 2

    A quick look through their launch manifest tells a very different story.

  37. Re:Slashvertisement? by tehcyder · · Score: 2

    huh. I mostly remember him for once being married to Talulah Riley. How he managed to catch but not hold on to such a hottie will forever taint the guy as a loser in my eyes regardless of how successful he is in other areas of life.

    However rich, attractive, clever or amusing you are, it takes two to make a relationship work. Unless you are a close friend you cannot possibly comment on the reasons either for their marriage or divorce.

    This is irrespective of the ridiculously sexist idea that a woman is some sort of prize that you win for being good at something.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  38. Re:don't for get the $200 oil change at there deal by Smidge204 · · Score: 2

    The Nissan Leaf needs its gearbox oil changed every service interval. Again, right there in the service manual.

    Really? What page? 'cause I got both the 2011 OEM manual and owner's service manual here and I can't find any reference to changing the gearbox oil as part of routine maintenance. Inspect, sure, but not change.

    Can't speak for the Tesla Roadster but I'm willing to bet it's the same story. Electric cars need their gearbox oil changed as often as any rear-wheel-drive car needs the oil in the rear differential changed... which is essentially "never" except in a case of catastrophic failure.
    =Smidge=