Tesla's 'Master Plan, Part Deux' Includes Trucks, Buses and Ride-Sharing (latimes.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tesla's 'Master Plan, Part Deux' Includes Trucks, Buses and Ride-Sharing (latimes.com)

Posted by BeauHD on Thursday July 21, 2016 @01:00AM from the ambitious-goals dept.

An anonymous reader writes from a report via Los Angeles Times: After teasing Part 2 of his "master product plan" for over a week, Elon Musk finally delivered. Los Angeles Times reports: "In a blog post published on the automaker's website, Musk introduced a multiyear, four-pronged strategy that includes new kinds of Tesla vehicles, expanded solar initiatives, updates on Tesla's 'autopilot' technology and a ride-sharing program. Commercial trucks, buses, a 'future compact SUV' and a 'new kind of pickup truck' will be added to Tesla's fleet of electric cars. A heavy-duty truck called the Tesla Semi and a shrunken bus that Musk called a 'high passenger density urban transport' vehicle are in early development stages 'and should be ready for unveiling next year,' he said. The smaller bus would be designed without a center aisle, with seats close to the entrances, and would be able to automatically pace themselves with traffic, the post said. The bus driver would become a 'fleet manager.' Musk also used the master plan to defend his bid for rooftop solar power provider SolarCity and said he aims to make Tesla's Autopilot robotic driver-assist system 10 times safer than cars that humans drive manually. Musk also plans to move Tesla into the popular ride-sharing business, not only with an Uber-like fleet but also with an app that lets Tesla owners rent out their vehicles when they're not using them, perhaps defraying a portion of their auto loans. This will happen, he said, 'when true self-driving is approved by regulators,' a turn of events that's at least several years away."

176 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Ride sharing? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:04 · Score: 0, Insightful

Do you mean they will have a service where I can ride along with people who go to the same place I'm going and reimburse them for fuel?
Oh, you mean they will drive me where I want to go for a fee instead? That's what we call a TAXI SERVICE you braindead morons.
1. Re:Ride sharing? by jellomizer · 2016-07-21 01:21 · Score: 2
  
  The problem with this "Sharing" Economy is that they had been abused to become a major income source.
  It was intended for commuters to find people going to the same place. However it morphed into an unregulated taxi service.
  The same thing with Air B&B Rent out your home while you go on vacation. Turned into a make shift hotel service.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
2. Re:Ride sharing? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:36 · Score: 0
  
  Funny how turning a profit will lead to abuse of something.
3. Re:Ride sharing? by pscottdv · 2016-07-21 01:42 · Score: 1
  
  Technically, it's an unregulated limousine service.
  
  --
  this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice
4. Re: Ride sharing? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:51 · Score: 0
  
  ride sharing takes advantage of drivers who don't understand operating costs.
5. Re:Ride sharing? by JaredOfEuropa · 2016-07-21 01:56 · Score: 2
  
  Depends... For example, many countries distinguish between licensed cabs and private hire car (limo) services: cabs need a license and meet minimums standards, and the fares are often fixed. They can do curbside pickups if you flag them down, while private hire cars have to work through a dispatcher. That's where the discussion starts: the cabbies (and some legislators) have argued that having an app that instantly routes the nearest car to your location amounts to flagging down a driver, if there are enough of these cars roaming the streets.
  
  --
  If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
6. Re:Ride sharing? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:05 · Score: 0
  
  AirB&B takes advantage of the fact that hotels have to pay bed taxes and be up to a level of regulations when it comes to being clean and safe. Someone renting out a tent with an extension cord so the guests can charge their iDevices in Austin during SXSW for 500 a night is unfair to the people following the rules.
7. Re:Ride sharing? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:00 · Score: 0
  
  Its not real profit. It is perceived profit by naive drivers who think revenue - gas cost = profit. Most drivers are not going to properly account for vehicle depreciation and maintenance costs. These costs take years to fully materialize, but when they do, they are massive costs for someone with the (lack of) income of an Uber driver.
8. Re:Ride sharing? by NatasRevol · 2016-07-21 03:02 · Score: 1
  
  Not sure how that's abuse, but that's none of my business.
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
9. Re:Ride sharing? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:04 · Score: 0
  
  So Caveat Emptor isn't a thing?
10. Re:Ride sharing? by eepok · 2016-07-21 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  Not 100% true. John Zimmer, founder of Lyft, actually have a real rideshare platform before selling it to Enterprise (car rental, vanpool, etc.) to focus on Lyft. Zimride, as it was called, was widely adopted by a number of cities and university campuses to facilitate carpool matching with the option of reimbursement. Lyft was founded to make money.
11. Re:Ride sharing? by Coren22 · 2016-07-27 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  The app sure sounds like a central dispatcher to me...
  
  --
  APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Re:Translation by jellomizer · 2016-07-21 01:07 · Score: 1, Insightful

Or wise up and use such safety features as safety features not as default state.
Just because you have Anti-Lock brakes and All wheel drive. It doesn't mean you can drive like you would normally in snowy/icy conditions. These features that kick in make sure you are safe when an problem occurs, not as your main state.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
So funny by m76 · 2016-07-21 01:08 · Score: 2

to see the Tesla hating Luddites flail.
1. Re: So funny by jellomizer · 2016-07-21 01:26 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Agree with him or not. However he is one of the few people who is using his money to inovate solutions to problems that are seeming to big for governments to handle.
  Found a way to sell Solar Panels as to not hinder the customers.
  Found a way to make an electric car cool and exciting vs a slow little box.
  Found a way to make rockets to go to space as a private institution.
  He has a vision of the future and is working to create it.
  Is he always right? No he isn't and he isn't some Magic man. But he has a vision and the vision includes trying to make the world a better place for everyone and not just him. So he deserves some credit. However if you disagree with his vision, you should feel free to work to create your future.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
2. Re: So funny by Luthair · 2016-07-21 01:31 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  None of those problems were too big to handle for governments if they were allowed to work on it, and realistically they do work on it because they funded all the basic science that has made these things possible.
3. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:34 · Score: 0
  
  Agree with him or not. However he is one of the few people who is using his money to inovate solutions to problems ....
  But he is using other people's money, not his. - a very old trick. Yes, a clever gentleman indeed.
4. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  He does all this with HUGE government loans and private loans. And has failed to turn a profit. (SpaceX might be profitable, not sure.)
  Just check out the earnings reports for both his solar and car company... And check out the debt to equity ratios....
  Sure he's "inovative", but he's not using his own money and he isn't making it work. The companies would be bankrupt if it wasn't for the government freebees.
5. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:46 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Here's the problem with Musk, and I don't think it's his fault, but people worship him and ridicule people who point out problems with what he does. Fact is Tesla is losing money. A lot of money. And the reason they're calling out on their earning statements is recalls. They don't make a quality product and the amount of money they're spending on recalls is literally putting them out of business. That also gets paired with that they continually miss manufacturing goals. Note that this isn't they're selling more than they can make, it's that they can't make as many as they claim they will. And despite these problems, if you speak ill of Tesla, people around here rush to defend and go on about how you must be an idiot because you haven't consumed the koolaid of Tesla. Fact is they may have done some innovative things, but their quality is shit and as a company there's a very real possibility they won't exist in 5 years if they don't get their shit sorted. And that doesn't even talk about the real problems of the model 3.
  They can't keep up with demand for the model X, how the hell are they going to do it for the model 3? What's going to happen when people who pre-ordered the model 3 thinking a $35,000 price tag realizes that Tesla has used up their government rebates and it'll be $42,500 and that assumes that they can actually hit their target price, a goal which historically they've never managed. Will they be willing to wait for the inevitable two years behind schedule that the model 3 will eventually be released because again, Tesla has never released a vehicle on schedule. And of course this all assumes that Tesla manages to stay in business. But of course the Tesla devout will call me a blasphemer (in much ruder terms) even though all of these claims are things that Tesla admits in their own earning reports.
6. Re: So funny by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 01:57 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure how anything Musk is doing will help me. On the other hand, the things he is doing seems to be making him a boatload of money.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
7. Re: So funny by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 01:59 · Score: 0
  
  So here is the thing I don't get about Elon Musk.. Why does he keep saying he can do it then? He seems very out of touch. This is why people worship him, because he has vision like a cult leader.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
8. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:09 · Score: 0
  
  Governments -could- work on it, but -would- they? It if were not for CEOs like Musk, oil prices would be in the triple digits, and car maker solutions would be unveiling smaller and slower cars.
9. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:10 · Score: 0
  
  Found a way to sell Solar Panels as to not hinder the customers
  He was not a first mover in leasing and other vehicles for panel installation. Many other companies were doing this.
  
  Found a way to make an electric car cool and exciting vs a slow little box.
  No, electric car technology already was in place, he just found a way to fund the production of high end EVs.
  
  Found a way to make rockets to go to space as a private institution.
  Others are doing it as well.
  What he has accomplished is getting a humongous amount of capital to fund these things.
10. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:10 · Score: 0
  
  The only thing Musk has done with any potential to benefit Humanity is SpaceX and that is only because we need to expand. Given the way he runs his businesses on Earth however I'm inclined to believe he just wants a slave camp and he can't make it happen on Earth.
11. Re: So funny by kaybee · 2016-07-21 02:29 · Score: 2
  
  He put all of his Zip2 money into PayPal, then all of his PayPal money into Tesla and SpaceX. Yes he is also using other peoples' money.
12. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:36 · Score: 0
  
  As you mention, they have addressed all these points in their earning reports (although I feel like you're exaggerating a couple of things). So the only real question is whether you trust them to improve or not. I guess you don't, but many investors do.
  It's not because Tesla doesn't have problems, they do. But it's because they've always had a very responsible and long-term attitude (including an extreme customer-first attitude, which lead to a bunch of recalls for improvements that other manufacturers would have dismissed out of hand), and even though they rarely deliver on time they do tend to deliver.
13. Re: So funny by Rei · 2016-07-21 02:36 · Score: 1
  
  Fact is Tesla is losing money.
  Fact is also that this is cited because they're pumping such vast amounts of money into scaleup. If they'd not done so previously they wouldn't have had the Model S and would have just been a tiny Roadster company. If they don't do so now then they'll be stuck at the S/X stage and never scale up to Model 3 numbers. Investors want them to be losing money in this manner now because they want to own part of a much larger company rather than get short-term profits.
  
  And the reason they're calling out on their earning statements is recalls.
  Citation needed.
  
  That also gets paired with that they continually miss manufacturing goals.
  They also set themselves absurdly ambitious manufacturing deadlines, and have outright stated that this is because with so many components dependent on outside suppliers it's almost statistically guaranteed that at least one will miss their deadline, and they need an earlier date - with consequences if it's not met - to not have production schedules drag out.
  
  it's that they can't make as many as they claim they will.
  The same story that people were saying before the Roadster.
  And the same story that people were saying before the Model S.
  Why is it that we see nothing odd with Honda being able to make a new factory to churn out huge numbers of cars, or Toyota, or GM, or Volkswagen, or anybody else... but not Tesla? It takes money for capital costs and people with experience in doing so. The latter you can buy with the former. And Tesla has the former. So? What's the problem?
  
  if you speak ill of Tesla, people around here rush to defend
  Are you surprised that people reply if they disagree with you about something? Your views are not some God-ordained truth and everyone who disagrees with you ignorant cultish fools. People come into a situation with different perspectives and views. Try to debate with people as equals, not from some high horse...
  
  and go on about how you must be an idiot because you haven't consumed the koolaid of Tesla
  Like that horse right there.
  
  Fact is they may have done some innovative things, but their quality is shit
  Which is why they consistently rank so high in consumer satisfaction surveys, right? I guess people really love "shit".
  
  They can't keep up with demand for the model X
  A problem most car companies dream of having.
  
  how the hell are they going to do it for the model 3?
  Capital investment, just like everything else.
  
  What's going to happen when people who pre-ordered the model 3 thinking a $35,000 price tag realizes that Tesla has used up their government rebates and it'll be $42,500
  If government rebates aren't available and people have to pay more than expected, then a portion of the tremendous demand that you were just seconds ago claiming that they couldn't possibly fill would go away. The issue?
  
  and that assumes that they can actually hit their target price, a goal which historically they've never managed.
  They failed initially on price targets for the Roadster, but that was because of Martin Eberhard's BS numbers that he used to sell the concept (it's what eventually got him fired) - and they eventually got prices under control.
  They did meet their price target for the baseline Model S (something that many people like you were calling ridiculous when they announced it) - more or less, depending on how you measure. The initial announcement in 2008 was for 225 miles range for $60k after tax credits. That was before how EV ranges were calculated was revised, back in 2008 EV ranges in the
  
  --
  Hourglass says she knows a kid in Iowa who grows up to be president.
14. Re: So funny by bill_mcgonigle · 2016-07-21 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  None of those problems were too big to handle for governments if they were allowed to work on it, and realistically they do work on it because they funded all the basic science that has made these things possible.
  You actually don't know how small a percentage of basic science is done by government funding, do you?
  Government sends Michelle Obama to tell all the kids, "let's get fit!".
  The private markets create Pokemon Go and actually get all the kids outdoors. Profit is how a money-based system sends information signals to tell the innovators they are doing a good job. That's real regulation.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
15. Re: So funny by kaiser423 · 2016-07-21 02:44 · Score: 2
  
  To be fair, Tesla is doing better and is further along than any automotive startup in the US in recent memory. So, something is going right, and yea, if you count the capital expeditures associated with building the factories for the Model 3 and the Gigafactory, they're losing money per car they sell -- but that's not how things are typically calculated. Those things are called "investments", and are expected to pay off it the future. If Tesla scrapped the Gigafactory, the massive build factory updates, and other capital expenditures to non-growth levels Tesla would be profitable right now -- not as profitable as planned due to the aforementioned quality issues, but still profitable. Instead, they're investing in themselves to grow as a company. Pretty typical and expected at this stage.
  
  They have a very, very tough road ahead and they're current performance isn't inspiring with the unrealistic Model 3 ramp up and issues with the Model X, but those are also solvable issues (and in many ways smaller issues than most other auto companies have).
16. Re: So funny by Rei · 2016-07-21 02:47 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Yeah, why does he keep saying he can do things and then actually doing them? What's wrong with the guy?
  "I'm going to start a company making electric supercars."
  "They'll never work and nobody will buy them. You'll go bankrupt soon."
  "So, I've got a big list of buyers for a very real electric supercar."
  "Your gearbox problem and price estimate issues will break you. You'll go bankrupt soon."
  "So, we've resolved the pricing and gearboxes, and the cars are being delivered to owners"
  "Yeah, you're making them at a tiny rate, you'll never scaleup You'll go bankrupt soon."
  "So, we scaled up production, and now we're going to make a super long range, even cheaper, luxury car"
  "Hahaha, no, that's never going to happen. You'll go bankrupt soon."
  "So, we're making the car with basically the specs and pricing we announced."
  "Yeah, in tiny numbers. You'll never scale up, and you'll go bankrupt soon."
  "So we've scaled up model S production and it's getting great owner satisfaction. We're going to make a crossover now, and then a $30k EV in huge numbers"
  "The crossover will be a failure, and those numbers are laughable. You'll never get interest nor raise capital for that. You'll go bankrupt soon."
  "So, the crossover is getting great reviews too, we've raised capital to start production of our factories...."
  Meanwhile, on the other side:
  "Hey, I'm going to start a company to launch payloads into orbit!"
  "Har har, this isn't going to last long, you're going to be the next Roton. You'll go bankrupt soon."
  "Hey, we've actually got a built and are starting to launch it."
  "Yeah, but it's unreliable as heck, and too small to compete for the high dollar contracts. You'll go bankrupt soon."
  "Hey, we got the bugs worked out of our rocket, and we're starting work on a vastly larger rocket."
  "Har har, like that's ever going to happen. It'll never work, and you'll go bankrupt soon."
  "Hey, so we built and are launching our vastly larger rocket..."
  "Nobody's going to trust that thing, you'll never be able to compete, you'll go bankrupt soon."
  "Hey, we're launching payload after payload, and we're going to start landing and recovering our rockets."
  "You're going to land first stages, something even NASA hasn't done? Hahaha, good luck, You'll go bankrupt soon!"
  "Hey, so we're pretty consistently landing and recovering rockets now..."
  -------
  If you want know why people tend to listen to Musk rather than his constant chorus of naysayers, it's because the naysayers have such an unbelievably bad track record with their naysaying. Come on, at least be like a stopped clock and be right once every so often.
  
  --
  Hourglass says she knows a kid in Iowa who grows up to be president.
17. Re: So funny by Rei · 2016-07-21 02:49 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  SolarCity isn't pretty revolutionary. But SpaceX and Tesla's work has been pretty revolutionary. No, it's not like SpaceX "invented rockets" or like Tesla "invented electric cars". But they did vastly change the paradigms in both regards and turn a bunch of new techniques / technologies from the kit / niche / hypothetical arena into mainstream production, as well as radically altering public perceptions..
  I'm not sure why people don't see that as commendable.
  
  --
  Hourglass says she knows a kid in Iowa who grows up to be president.
18. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:53 · Score: 1
  
  Just fuck off, asshole, OK? Please?? Musk turned commercial space travel on its head, and revolutionized the electric vehicle. Meanwhile, you're sitting there is your fucking basement picking the dead skin off your feet while you moan about what a loser Musk is. Idiots like you are like sand in society's engine.
19. Re: So funny by avandesande · 2016-07-21 02:58 · Score: 1
  
  I agree that Musk is very smart, but what motivates him? I've heard a lot of Tesla apologists claim that he doesn't care about money, but that is a bad thing for investors in my book. What if he gets tired of cars and decided to step away from Tesla to do something else?
  
  --
  love is just extroverted narcissism
20. Re: So funny by NatasRevol · 2016-07-21 03:07 · Score: 0
  
  True, but 'scary foreigners' gets more money than doing science for the greater good.
  And it will get much worse if Trump is president.
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
21. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:07 · Score: 1
  
  Both Tesla and Space X have enormous subsidies.
22. Re: So funny by NatasRevol · 2016-07-21 03:09 · Score: 1
  
  Way the fuck smarter than you.
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
23. Re: So funny by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 03:10 · Score: 0, Offtopic
  
  The Tesla model S is suffering from many defects and recalls, and, well, a lot of people expected more from Autopilot. While drivers need to 'stay attentive' and they have less quality than other $150K vehicles the car side is far from done.
  I'm pretty sure there are other private space companies. Has Tesla done anything practical with their rockets yet?
  They are on their way to going bankrupt.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
24. Re: So funny by NatasRevol · 2016-07-21 03:11 · Score: 1
  
  I too hate super smart & successful people who reach for the stars and don't always quite get there.
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
25. Re: So funny by EndlessNameless · 2016-07-21 03:14 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  But he is using other people's money, not his
  So does every startup company. Investors and loans are normal, even when the founder can invest significantly into the company.
  His competitors got pretty much the same tax incentives. If Chevy decided to make an ugly electric car and then not sell it, well, maybe that explains why Tesla is making headway.
  That is probably where the traditional manufacturers made a mistake. EVs are new tech in the public mind, which implies a degree of uncertainty and risk---exactly what your typical econobox buyer avoids whenever possible. Tesla went after buyers who are willing to buy something because it's new and shiny or because it makes a statement.
  Tesla still has a monopoly on performance/luxury EVs. And if you can deliver the goods in that market, you can probably economize your design down for the masses.
  Still, the late delivery of virtually every product and feature would make me shy away from preordering anything. I like what's happening, but the company is far from perfect.
  
  --
  
  ---
  According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
26. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:19 · Score: 0
  
  The problem I have is it is mostly NOT his money. All of his businesses rely massively, maybe more than any other business in the USA, on government payments and subsidies. Not a single one of his companies is economically viable without the support of US taxpayers contributions.
  I think he is a business genius for duping an entire nation into paying for his ideas. I would love to dupe people just like him. I do envy him, for now. I earn a living securing government subsidies, just like Elon, but I also recognize what he has done much more easily because of this.
  I would also debate that he is making the world a better place. It appears he is - because we can't see what the world would look like without him. His investors are getting duped. US taxpayers are subsidizing solar panels and cars for the upper class. Electric cars for the masses were coming without Tesla - I use this false dichotomy all the time to argue for subsidies all the time in my line of work. "Don't give us the subsidies and this won't happen" The truth is, it will happen. Not in the same form.
  We may have got an electric car for the masses earlier if a better capitalized company were to have been the poster child of electric. We will never know.
27. Re: So funny by brasselv · 2016-07-21 03:21 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, right?
  It's not like he has a history of, say, putting actual rockets in space, or building an EV from scratch, or anything like that.
  It's absurd that people are paying any attention at all, right?
  
  --
  "Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong." (Oscar Wilde)
28. Re: So funny by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 03:22 · Score: 1
  
  I'll keep waiting for some evidence that he is smart. I didn't think intelligence had anything to do with running a money loosing company largely running off of public grants. Also he is overestimating his customer base for cars and releasing a half baked solution that will kill them if they don't follow the instructions. So far I haven't seen anything smart there. Seems more like a boy playing with big toys at the public's expense to me.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
29. Re: So funny by NatasRevol · 2016-07-21 03:31 · Score: 2
  
  Then you're clearly not paying attention.
  
  Also he is overestimating his customer base for cars
  
  Well, except for the 325,000+, $14.5B+ in PREsales for the model 3. That those people KNOW won't come for 1.5 years.
  
  releasing a half baked solution that will kill them if they don't follow the instructions
  As opposed to the non-semi-automated car I now drive? Will it save my life if I swerve into a truck?
  
  So far I haven't seen anything smart there.
  I'm pretty sure that's not a commentary on Musk....
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
30. Re: So funny by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 03:39 · Score: 1
  
  Will it save my life if I swerve into a truck?
  Will you mistake a truck for a bridge? Will your manual car drive under it's own power into another vehicle while you are in a restaurant?
  I meant overestimating in terms of ability to use half-baked autonomy, not overestimating in terms of sales. Since you bring up the sales, it is known that a large number of these people will get their money back rather than buy the car. Furthermore, Tesla may not even be able to produce them all so the jury is still out on how smart that move was.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
31. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:42 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  A lot of people expected more from autopilot than being the most advanced cruise control available on a car? That's their problem, not Tesla's.
  Tesla's Model S ranges from $70,000-108,000, not $150,000.
  
  Has Tesla done anything practical with their rockets yet?
  Tesla has not, because Tesla is the car company. But if you meant to ask that about SpaceX:
  Anything practical other than the 16 satellites they put into orbit? There were the 8 resupply missions to ISS, the tests of their manned capsule, a dozen more customers launching by the end of the year and dozens more out to 2020, and the Falcon 9 Heavy first launch which will double their payload capacity.
32. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:51 · Score: 0
  
  I'll keep waiting for some evidence that he is smart. I didn't think intelligence had anything to do with running a money loosing company largely running off of public grants. Also he is overestimating his customer base for cars and releasing a half baked solution that will kill them if they don't follow the instructions. So far I haven't seen anything smart there. Seems more like a boy playing with big toys at the public's expense to me.
  You'll wait forever, since you seem to be willfully ignoring all the evidence that is available.
  You're talking about someone who has started 3 large, very successful technology companies. Someone who is doing literal rocket science. Someone who has succeeded in building two things no one else had managed before (electric cars people actually want and affordable commercial rocket launches). These are not the marks of an idiot.
  However, failing to grasp basic economics about capital investment and ranting about a company "loosing" money, stating that getting deposits for 325,000 cars before production starts is overestimating a customer base, and failing to understand that every single car ever sold will kill you if you don't follow the instructions, those are the marks.
33. Re: So funny by Maxwell · 2016-07-21 03:57 · Score: 1
  
  As does every industry. Space travel was very recently 100% subsidized, air travel, anything that burns gas really, farming are all heavily, heavily subsidized. Farming is just insane - sometimes paying farmers to not grow food. Do we pay Musk not to make Tesla's?
34. Re: So funny by NatasRevol · 2016-07-21 04:00 · Score: 1
  
  Will you mistake a truck for a bridge?
  Humans do that WAY more than computers do.
  "Known", huh?
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
35. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 04:12 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Has Tesla done anything practical with their rockets yet?
  Who told you about Tesla's plans for a rocket-powered car? Someone's leaking private documents, and I'm going to need to find out who....
36. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 04:17 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You disingenuously act as though he stole their money. He did not. I gladly invest in his companies, and have made a lot of money doing it.
  You're welcome to hate or ignore him, but stop being a fucking liar and manipulator. There is nothing wrong with running a business, investment, or making profit. If you disagree, move to a 3rd world shithole where you'll be comfortable.
37. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 04:19 · Score: 0
  
  So they invaded Iraq with your money, but you're not whining like a faggot about that. This is much better use of taxpayer dollars.
38. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 04:20 · Score: 0
  
  Look at the financials. Tesla will go bankrupt soon. They're losing money hand-over-fist.
  Not saying it's a bad idea, but that's the reality. At some point, you have to turn a profit, and Tesla never has, not even for a single quarter.
39. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 04:23 · Score: 0
  
  Fluffer, you honestly look like a total fucking moron at this point. Save yourself a modicum of face and shut the fuck up.
40. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 04:24 · Score: 0
  
  Well, no, there really isn't any breakthrough technology. What you have with the cars is a bigger battery compartment, not new battery technology.
  And SpaceX has had more failed rocket launches than North Korea in the past few years. If anything, it's proof positive that the government can, in fact, do some things better and more more cheaply than the private sector. Oh, and no new tech there, either, FYI.
41. Re: So funny by Maxwell · 2016-07-21 04:38 · Score: 1
  
  The opening of the new master plan, which you clearly didn't bother to read: The first master plan that I wrote 10 years ago is now in the final stages of completion. It wasn't all that complicated and basically consisted of:
  Create a low volume car, which would necessarily be expensive
  Use that money to develop a medium volume car at a lower price
  Use that money to create an affordable, high volume car
  And...
  Provide solar power. No kidding, this has literally been on our website for 10 years.
  The reason we had to start off with step 1 was that it was all I could afford to do with what I made from PayPal. I thought our chances of success were so low that I didn't want to risk anyone's funds in the beginning but my own. The list of successful car company startups is short. As of 2016, the number of American car companies that haven't gone bankrupt is a grand total of two: Ford and Tesla. Starting a car company is idiotic and an electric car company is idiocy squared....
42. Re: So funny by MobyDisk · 2016-07-21 04:42 · Score: 1
  
  It becomes Tesla's problem because it affects public perception of Tesla. They are at the next challenge, which is, can they manage the PR spin and survive it.
  
  has Tesla done anything practical with their rockets yet?
  Tesla has not, because Tesla is the car company. But if you meant to ask that about SpaceX...
  Have you seen how fast a Tesla goes? 0-60 in 2.8 seconds. I think that qualifies as a rocket. :-)
43. Re: So funny by Maxwell · 2016-07-21 04:47 · Score: 1
  
  OK fluffernutter. You've posted your junk all over this thread. You hate Elon, Tesla and SpaceX. A start up that loses money is somehow shocking to you.
  Please outline any recent accomplishments you've made, and let us compare to Musk. We are particularly interested in your fantastic success creating profitable startups with no outside investors in extremely difficult fields.
  Thanks
44. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 05:43 · Score: 1
  
  There is a difference between "earned" money 'invested" money and "government granted" money. Government Granted money is money that is taken away from one party by threat of consequence (usually prison), and given to someone else. Musk has used some government granted money, but most of the financing of his companies has been invested money and earned money.
  As a contrast, ULA (competitor to SpaceX) is almost entirely government grant money driven.
45. Re: So funny by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 05:54 · Score: 1
  
  Lets just say I can't answer this without divulging too much to the public.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
46. Re: So funny by randallman · 2016-07-21 06:03 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you! It's so easy to criticize and point out others' mistakes.
  It's much more difficult to implement solutions to problems yourself. We need more of the latter.
47. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 06:15 · Score: 0
  
  We may have got an electric car for the masses earlier if a better capitalized company were to have been the poster child of electric. We will never know.
  We do know, because we did get an electric car for the masses earlier from a better capitalized company. But cars for the masses don't make it onto posters, they never have.
  The better capitalized companies had every chance in the world to make an electric car for the masses, and decided not to for decades, until Nissan started selling the Leaf in 2010, two years before the Tesla Model S came out. Nissan has sold 213,000 Leafs at $29,000. Tesla has sold just over 100,000 of the Model S. So Nissan is a better capitalized company making an electric car for the masses right now, and has been for the last 6 years, but it's hard to get excited about a econobox. Tesla showed that it was possible to make an electric car that people would desire for more than the fact that it's electric. It's a much more interesting car, that's why it's the poster child for electrics.
48. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 06:27 · Score: 0
  
  Nah, let's just say you're full of crap, and haven't done anything worth mentioning, as that's far closer to the truth. The lack of basic knowledge of economics, technology, not knowing how to do a basic search for information, spelling and grammar errors, ignorance of the long list of accomplishments of those you say haven't done anything significant, and claiming someone isn't intelligent despite a mountain of proof that he is - these all add up to someone who's just dumb enough to think that anyone would believe such a farcical excuse as "I'm very accomplished, but it's all secret".
49. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 06:41 · Score: 0
  
  The problem with using money to determine who is doing a good job is that companies that make big piles of money could also be:
  1. selling a product that is built with cheap materials that will quickly break.
  3. Treating their employees like crap and underpaying them (unsafe working conditions, paying minimum wage)
  4. Working toward creating unfair practices in which they profit (monopolies)
  5. Avoiding regulations and rules that protect society to further the bottom line, (dumping toxic waste instead of having it disposed of)
  There are too many other reasons why your company is making tons of money, and doing a "good job" is only one of them.
50. Re:So funny by jcr · 2016-07-21 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  I don't hate Tesla, and in fact I expect to be quite grateful to them for making me a lot of money when I short their stock in the not-too-distant future. Apple's going to crush them like Blackberry.
  -jcr
  
  --
  The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
51. Re: So funny by jcr · 2016-07-21 07:23 · Score: 1
  
  Found a way to make rockets to go to space as a private institution.
  That's a bit of a stretch. SpaceX is a tax-dependent vendor.
  -jcr
  
  --
  The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
52. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 07:36 · Score: 0
  
  I'm sorry, but what company funded ARPANET? Which company was it that investigate the basic science behind fission? And remind me again, what C-level exec stated we had to go to the moon?
  Your example of fitness motivation is a poor one and betrays your political views.
53. Re: So funny by Rei · 2016-07-21 07:38 · Score: 1
  
  Look at the financials. Tesla will go bankrupt soon.
  
  You're of the strange view that there's something preventing Tesla from doing rounds of equity financing, the standard for a rapidly growing company (virtually all new companies go through repeat financing rounds, and continue to do so until their growth tapers off). Something Tesla has done many times in the past, and something that they've always gotten strong interest in the past, with much weaker demand lined up than that for the Model 3.
  At some point Tesla will fill its market niche, stop growing, and no longer be able to make use of equity financing. With several hundred thousand pre-orders on hand to fill, they're far, far from that point.
  
  --
  Hourglass says she knows a kid in Iowa who grows up to be president.
54. Re: So funny by EndoplasmicRidiculus · 2016-07-21 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  SpaceX has had one Falcon 9 launch failure in its entire history. A simple google search and you can avoid the embarrassment of looking daft.
55. Re: So funny by Rei · 2016-07-21 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  North Korea has lost a lot more than one rocket in the past few years.
  
  --
  Hourglass says she knows a kid in Iowa who grows up to be president.
56. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 08:21 · Score: 0
  
  You've divulged enough...
57. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 08:23 · Score: 0
  
  > I'm sorry, but what company funded ARPANET? Which company was it that investigate the basic science behind fission? And remind me again, what C-level exec stated we had to go to the moon?
  ARPANET was established 47 years ago. The last manned Moon landing was 44 years ago. And it's been decades since any majour progress has been made in the field in nuclear fission.
  And for all three of those examples government, politics, have been the primary hinderance to these things developing. Private companies do the research now. They're the ones innovating, and the government routinely tries to get in the way.
  > Your example of fitness motivation is a poor one and betrays your political views.
  It didn't appear they were trying to hide their views, and your assumption of what they are and attacking them tells more about you than the grandparent.
  Time will tell if Pokemon Go will remain successful, but even if they see a 75% drop in their user base they'll still have accomplished so much more than any recent government fitness program for children.
58. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 08:35 · Score: 0
  
  Full of shit
59. Re: So funny by randomlygeneratename · 2016-07-21 08:58 · Score: 1
  
  I agree. I think the more the merrier when it comes to working on the big problems.
60. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 09:08 · Score: 0
  
  He is a marketing guy selling the change the world idea. In the meantime, he is only down 4 billion on Tesla and 2 billion on solar city so more vapor ware equals more money coming in to pay previous debt. Nowhere is there a plan to turn a profit... See also pyramids.
61. Re: So funny by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 09:14 · Score: 0
  
  It's called a loan - they're still in debt but about to pay Musk back. Let that sink in please.
62. Re: So funny by catchblue22 · 2016-07-21 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  Both Tesla and Space X have enormous subsidies.
  That article is a hit piece likely paid for by oil and auto interests. The article claims for instance that Tesla will receive a $1.29 billion dollar subsidy from Nevada for building the Giga-Factory. What Tesla was actually promised was a 1.3% break on the state sales tax. To cap the discount, the state said that the maximum total tax break over TWENTY YEARS could not exceed $1.29 billion dollars. Tesla would have to spend $100 billion dollars over 20 years to reach that; the article makes it seem like Tesla received a cheque for $1.29 billion, which is false. Amongst other distortions, they included a DOE loan that Tesla had already paid in full. All in all, this article demonstrates much of what is wrong with the American economic system today, where corrupt billionaires use subterfuge and distortion to try to crush anyone who might begin to erode their monopolies. This is not free-market capitalism. It makes all of us less well off.
  
  --
  This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
63. Re: So funny by catchblue22 · 2016-07-21 09:33 · Score: 1
  
  He does all this with HUGE government loans and private loans.
  Maybe you might want to look at reality. You say they received HUGE government loans. I assume you mean the $465 million dollar loan Tesla received from the Department of Energy. Are you aware that Tesla paid that loan back with interest? The government made money on that loan. Were you aware that the DOE gave Ford a $5.9 billion dollar loan, and Nissan $1.4 billion under the same program?
  
  --
  This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
64. Re: So funny by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · 2016-07-21 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  They're arguably too big to handle well in most large democracies, since - while the money could certainly be made available - bureaucrats and politicians would interfere at many levels. See: corn-based ethanol as an example.
  
  Also, the government certainly didn't fund all the basic science that made these things possible. They funded a good chunk of it, but private industry does research too.
  
  --
  Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
65. Re: So funny by catchblue22 · 2016-07-21 09:40 · Score: 1
  
  They can't keep up with demand for the model X, how the hell are they going to do it for the model 3? What's going to happen when people who pre-ordered the model 3 thinking a $35,000 price tag realizes that Tesla has used up their government rebates and it'll be $42,500
  
  Oh for fuck sake stop bull-shitting! The base price of the Model 3 was $35,000 BEFORE the incentives.
  
  --
  This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
66. Re: So funny by imgod2u · 2016-07-21 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think it's so much "defend against factual claims" so much as "factual claims" usually aren't factual. For instance, in your post:
  1. Quality problems - I think you'll find this mainly and primarily applies to the Model X. The Model S did quite well even after the Consumer Reports downgrade, which was reported based on an early-production Model S of which most of the problems were already solved in later revisions. So like most of your post, there's *some* truth, but not the whole truth.
  2. Recalls and cost of recalls - Again, this is almost exclusively to do with the Model X. There have been a few voluntary recalls of the Model S but they were for items that *might* be a problem but really haven't shown up on the road. Not to mention very cheap to fix (replaced rear seat belt buckle, titanium underplate).
  3. Keeping up with demand - Again, a Model X problem (see a pattern here?). Model S production has ramped from 500 cars/week to ~1500 cars/week in ~3 years and order backfills are about ~6 weeks, hardly a long time.
  4. The Model 3 price is $35k *before* tax incentives. That's the base price stated. Elon tweeted something about the expected ASP being $42k because he expects a lot of consumers will shell out for higher trims.
  Not that I disagree with most of your narrative. They've always been late and I expect the Model 3 will be late, though not as much as "2 years" as you claim (that's historically not true of either the Model S nor the Model X). And there's a very real possibility they could run out of cash before they manage to hit mass volume sales on the Model 3.
  But you can see why "Tesla devouts" would see it fit to disagree with you; your facts aren't completely accurate and are at best exaggerated.
67. Re: So funny by Luthair · 2016-07-22 07:36 · Score: 1
  
  Reduced fuel consumption is specifically due to government regulation, over production of oil and has absolutely nothing to the trivial number of cars Tesla has shipped.
68. Re: So funny by torkus · 2016-08-04 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  Don't bother with silly little things like ... ugh ... facts.
  Haters gunna hate. They'll go on about how everyone is drinking the koolaid and they're the only ones with a real perspective and wah wah wah. Little things like facts that fly opposite their opinion are ignored. Other things that support their opinion but are minor get exaggerated. par for the course.
  Tesla is losing money...because they're building and expanding as fast as they can. If they cared to sit back and just make a botique car line they'd be plenty profitable. Kind of like how Amazon has (until just recently) barely been profitable despite huge sales numbers. They are dumping all that $ into growth...and it's working.
  I'm not saying there aren't some big issues that Tesla, SpaceX and Amazon need to work on...but they've already solved much larger issues. They've already done what no one else has...except perhaps outside of massively subsidized goverment programs (ahem, NASA).
  They built several functional, high-quality, durable, daily-usable electric cars. They've nearly completed the largest battery factory in the world. They're in a position to deploy massive amounts of solar with less subsidies than a lot of established industries (*cough*farming*cough*) get. They're launching freaking rockets...real ones with real payloads not dinky little test rockets to suborbital ... on the regular AND reclaiming the first stages with controlled landings. Amazon has built a network and distribution chain to rival even the giant walmart...and has changed online ordering from 'i need this for some time in the future' to 'i need this tomorrow/later today' and shortly 'i need this in an hour'. Amazon in the next few years will deliver faster than a trip to the store.
  Anyone who wants to point out how stupid all this is and how much of a failure ... can happily do so. I'll buy out any stock they 'mistakenly' purchased for a few bucks so they can be rid of it too... :)
  
  --
  You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
69. Re: So funny by torkus · 2016-08-04 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  Right.
  And I've also got $millions in the bank but I can't get to them just this minute, so can you buy luch?
  Oh, and my Bently is being waxed, the Ferrari is a roadster and it looked like rain this morning, and my porche only seats two and I didn't know who was coming to lunch...so can you drive?
  Oh, hey, I'm so fameous in this restaurant that they always stop everything and seranade me when I go in ... it's such a hassle...do you mind running in to grab the food too? I'm not banned for trying to skip my check last week. I swear.
  
  --
  You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
Sounds amazing, but... by monkeyxpress · 2016-07-21 01:14 · Score: 1

He hasn't finished the first master plan yet.
1. Re:Sounds amazing, but... by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2016-07-21 03:43 · Score: 1
  
  He hasn't finished the first master plan yet.
  Well, this was more a move to try reclaiming some positive PR ground than anything else. He didn't really state anything other than the obvious direction everyone already knows the autonomous vehicle space is heading.
  But he had to do something... unfair or not, Tesla's been receiving a lot of bad press lately.
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
He should try trains by Hognoxious · 2016-07-21 01:16 · Score: 4, Funny

He should try trains. It might be easier to get the autopilot working.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
1. Re: He should try trains by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:20 · Score: 0
  
  Careful now, all of the other posts critical of Tesla have quickly been censored to -1. The message is clear that criticism of Tesla or Elon Musk will not be tolerated. If you value your karma, you should change your position.
2. Re: He should try trains by F.Ultra · 2016-07-21 01:37 · Score: 2
  
  There's a world difference between being critical and posting direct lies.
3. Re: He should try trains by chill · 2016-07-21 02:18 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe you've heard of Hyperloop?
  
  --
  Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
4. Re: He should try trains by bravecanadian · 2016-07-21 02:27 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe you've heard of Hyperloop?
  I've heard of it but I can't seen it yet..
5. Re: He should try trains by Hognoxious · 2016-07-21 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  Is that like rloop but with more publicity?
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
6. Re:He should try trains by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 05:12 · Score: 0
  
  He should try trains. It might be easier to get the autopilot working.
  While I understand the comment may have been meant to be funny, there are some "AutoPilot" systems for trains. There are a few transit operations that use an automated train system and the freight industry is moving that direction, but at a much slower pace. There are automated freight trains in the northwest of Australia run by Rio Tinto that are running autonomously for certain portions of track now.
  http://www.itnews.com.au/news/rio-tinto-counts-down-to-launch-of-autonomous-trains-401481
  It isn't as easy as one might think and the vast majority of the cost goes into the safety of the system and not the part that gives the commands for operating the throttle/brake of the trains.
7. Re:He should try trains by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 07:42 · Score: 0
  
  If Elon fixed WMATA so it was automated (again), I'd be ecstatic.
8. Re:He should try trains by Hognoxious · 2016-07-21 08:29 · Score: 1
  
  Well duh. If you run on rails you have two variables - which track you're on, and where you are along it.
  Disclaimer: worked on this kind of shit before GPS was even a thing.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
9. Re:He should try trains by stephows · 2016-07-21 13:51 · Score: 1
  
  Many more variables. For a short list:
  - Has the track been washed away by a recent storm?
  - Is there a truck stalled on a crossing?
  - Is there another train on the same track?
  - Has one of the axle bearings seized and is generating huge amounts of heat?
  - Has livestock (or human) stepped onto the track?
  - Has one of the wagons derailed while going around a bend and is about to tip half the 7 km train over? (yes, Australian iron ore trains are that long)
  - Has a coupling broke and half the train is being let behind?
  - Has the lead loco lost comms with the other locos? (Australian iron ore trains have multiple sets at the front, middle and rear of the train)
  and so on...
New kind of pickup truck? by drinkypoo · 2016-07-21 01:18 · Score: 1

It's pretty much all been done, hasn't it? Even electric pickups have been done. They've been done with independent rear suspension, with or without unibody, cab-forward, cab-over, mid-engine, rear flat engine, etc etc etc. Granted, most of those were concepts, but some of them were production somewhere, somewhen, or even still are. What could possibly be new and still reasonably be called a pickup?

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
1. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Overzeetop · 2016-07-21 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  Show me a current model 1/2 ton pickup that has an electric drive factory option. It doesn't exist at any price. VIA converts Chevys, and puts the equivalent of a 4 cylinder NA gas engine (~300ft-lb peak torque, 150ft-lb continuous torque) in a vehicle which can only carry 2/3 the load of the equivalent truck (1000lb vs 1500+). Oh, and it's $80k for the equivalent of a $35k appointed gas truck.
  The 3 majors have fumbled the ball pretty completely on electric / hybrid trucks. Hell, they've fumbled the ball on electrics, period. I would love a hybrid or electric full-sized truck. I drive an F150 and am looking at replacing it, but the only thing out there are gas non-hybrids. Chevy made one 3-4 years ago, but priced it so high and sucked so badly with the implementation that they discontinued it. Trucks used for towing (like campers for long haul) will still need gas engines, but a truck with a battery pack like the Model X - which would likely translate into about a 175-200 mile range with the increased drag, and more like 100 mile range when towing, would still cover the vast majority of small contractors.
  
  --
  Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
2. Re: New kind of pickup truck? by Frankzy · 2016-07-21 01:51 · Score: 1
  
  Well it was the same story with electric cars too..
3. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:51 · Score: 0
  
  All I can say is that most pickup truck owners will not want an electric pickup because their identity is based on something that makes a lot of roaring engine noise - like Harley owners.
  I don't see those people settling for a recording on their electrics.
  And there are the jackasses who like the belching black smoke.
  I think an electric truck will only sell for corporate fleets.
4. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Rei · 2016-07-21 02:02 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Well, I was hopeful when I heard "a new type of pickup"... and then quickly disappointed. Here's what I was hoping to see.
  From an aerodynamics perspective, increasing a vehicle's height or width costs you energy, but increasing its length does not. Actually, just the opposite - a longer vehicle gives you more room for a more gradual taper and so can even decrease energy consumption.
  The biggest hauling need in a pickup in a work environment is generally for things that are significantly longer than they are wide. Not always, but that seems to be the most common (boards, steel, pipe, etc)
  While with a somewhat rough underside the most efficient design places a vehicle close to the ground, once you get to a highly smooth underside the optimal shape starts becoming to elevate it more. Which means ground clearance, exactly what you want in a pickup.
  In short.. a true "streamliner" pickup truck actually makes very good sense, with a long, somewhat narrowed bed and a highly vertically-tapered top cover for when not carrying oversized loads. I would love such a thing, and have often pondered making one at some point in the distant future because nothing like that ever comes on the market.
  Instead, here's what we get from Tesla - a half-streamlined half-attempt that puts style over function. What's the purpose of that big engine compartment, for example? No, seriously, it's not like they have to put some giant ICE there, what's the point of it? The point is to look like a conventional, inefficient pickup :P With an EV you want your batteries down low. In the case of a pickup, under the floor of the cab to offset the weight of the bed. You ideally want 4WD, which in an EV is probably best done by dual motors, front and back. Electric motors are small, they don't need some massive engine compartment. That engine compartment also leaves a sharp transition at the windscreen which messes up your airflow. They do a fair bit of work on the profile, mind you - the top tapers to get a better "rounding", they show very streamlined mirrors, etc. They put some pointless flourish streamlines" on the door and sides as well as the hood, though, but whatever... Then at the back they go to this conventional (except for being tiny) bed, which is just the opposite of what you want in both regards. All that space wasted on the front should have been in the back. The bottom should also be tapering up there. And no streamline top cover? Just your conventional pickup bed vortex? Uninspiring.
  (I'd personally like the rear and possibly front wheels shrouded, but there are practical downsides to that when it comes to a pickup and it might not be practical)
  Aero isn't just about "saving energy". It also means greater range and faster charge times and less charge cycles on the batteries. It's a very big deal. And with a pickup, all of those become even more important than with a sedan, since it's tasked with a tougher job.
  
  --
  Hourglass says she knows a kid in Iowa who grows up to be president.
5. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:16 · Score: 0
  
  They tried to put out a product that would fit in to the mass market price range, rather than, for example, the small slice of a the market that Telsa is presently serving. They also wanted to do something that could be profitable, something Tesla has yet to accomplish. Just because the first attempts did not yield success does not mean they are not capable of producing a good product when cost elements allow.
  If you are prepared to pay a Tesla price for you electric truck, then you might be able to get it sooner than the mass market versions.
6. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:29 · Score: 0
  
  an electric pickup truck that rivals performance of gas guzzlers? that would be a neat trick to pull off... and probably not impossible for Tesla (not a bad goal for their 5-year-plan :-)
7. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by EndoplasmicRidiculus · 2016-07-21 02:48 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  What a silly comment. That's not a concept from Tesla, but a mockup from a fan. That it's a Model X front photoshopped onto a truck should've clued you off.
8. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:56 · Score: 0
  
  you realize that's not from tesla, right? it's just some fanboy's photoshop mockup!
9. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by NatasRevol · 2016-07-21 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  Well, since their current electric cars way out-perform current gas cars (comparably priced ones), it wouldn't be a shocker at all.
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
10. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 04:14 · Score: 0
  
  that's not from tesla, are you blind?
11. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 06:16 · Score: 0
  
  They do the "engine compartment" to be an crumple zone. You know, little thing called safety
12. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by eepok · 2016-07-21 06:19 · Score: 2
  
  Very much this. I'm actually in the market for replacing a large number of small (Ford Ranger) and medium (Ford F-150) pickups with trucks using more sustainable fuel tech. I'll take a simple hybrid, but would prefer a plug-in hybrid or pure electric if possible. And you're right. They don't exist yet. Drinkypoo is talking out his arse. Similarly, I think Musk is talking out his arse and creating hype to bolster stock prices.
13. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 07:30 · Score: 0
  
  Ford actually did offer an electric Ranger from 1998 through 2002, when battery technology was still mostly lead acid. It didn't sell well because pickup truck drivers need the throbbing sound (and the throbbing) of a big testosterone-addled V8. Now that pickup drivers have gotten used to the artificial V8 noise coming through the radio speakers, maybe Ford can resurrect it!
14. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 07:31 · Score: 0
  
  ...a truck with a battery pack like the Model X - which would likely translate into about a 175-200 mile range with the increased drag, and more like 100 mile range when towing, would still cover the vast majority of small contractors.
  I would put down a deposit today if Tesla were to announce such an item. It would meet over 95% of my use cases.
15. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by q4Fry · 2016-07-21 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  I'm curious about your pickup truck concept. In my head, I'm imagining a somewhat-flattened cigar shape. I rather suspect that parking would be a bear, and that there'd be a serious possibility for rollovers.
16. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Rei · 2016-07-21 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  They do the "engine compartment" to be an crumple zone. You know, little thing called safety
  65 mph = 105 kph = 29 m/s
  Let's limit deceleration forces in an accident at those speeds to the human limit (around 100g).
  a = -100G = -100 * 9,81m/s^2 = -981 m/s^2
  v1 = v0 + at
  0 = 29 + -981 * t
  981t = 29
  t = 0.03
  Average velocity during deceleration = 29 / 2 = 14,5
  0.03 * 14,5 = 0,42m = 1,3 feet.
  No, you don't need vast distances to make highway-speed crashes into a brick wall survivable. Furthermore, that's not real-world crashes in the vast majority of cases. The other vehicle gives as well. And the more rounded the front end and the more the structure is designed to do so, the more the vehicle attempts to deflect
  The key aspect is that you need the passenger safety cell to not be penetrated and the combination of airbags and seatbelts to provide a steady, smooth deceleration that prevents harsh impacts. In terms of crumple zones and deceleration, the long front on a conventional car is hindered by its contents. A large amount of the volume inside is taken up by effectively uncollapsable or poorly collapsible hardware - e.g. an engine block isn't going to flatten into a pancake in an accident Do a google search for "fatal car crash" (if you can stomach it) and look at what percentage of the hoods are actually crumpled in on front-end collisions. It's often surprisingly little. The real killers are failed safety cells, not G-forces. It's hard to make the passenger compartments tolerate the forces survive for a number of reasons - for example, the A-pillars need to be narrow so as not to block one's view.
  To put it another way: You may have 10-20 centimeters between your body and the outermost point on a car in a collision, versus a couple meters on the front end. And the human body tolerates lateral G-forces worse than front-on. If a highway speed crash was likely to kill you due to G-forces, then even a tiny tap on the side of your car should kill you. (front-on collisions are more survivable, but not that much more!)
  
  --
  Hourglass says she knows a kid in Iowa who grows up to be president.
17. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Dare+nMc · 2016-07-21 12:56 · Score: 1
  
  >Well, since their current electric cars way out-perform current gas cars (comparably priced ones), it wouldn't be a shocker at all.
  That is a bit of a misnomer, they can out accelerate performance cars; all those cars out brake, handle, higher top speed, and have more range.
  Other than that, they can out range cars costing half as much.
  They beat everyone to the cruise system, but now need to play catchup to Ford and GM, in that their systems detect drowsy drivers, and force their customers to keep their hands on the wheel.
  They pushed the envelop of electric cars, but they are mostly just doing a better job of out hyping them at the moment.
18. Re:New kind of pickup truck? by Rei · 2016-07-21 16:06 · Score: 1
  
  If you wanted to take it to extremes, you'd get something along the lines of a larger, heavy duty Aptera. Although for a pickup that's probably going a bit far. ;) At the very least, you need some depth on the rear end, and some degree of rear wheel spacing for load stability.
  Re: rollovers, however, EVs are naturally resistant, because you keep the batteries on the underside of the vehicle.
  One of my more extreme concepts is to have all of the wheels as self-contained, independent azipods, each with their own motor and battery pack (battery pack in the taper behind the wheel). That way not only does the center of gravity stay absurdly low, but you get rid of all of the long linkages, shorten your wiring runs (less losses, among other benefits), and have the possibility to doubly-isolate the cabin from vibration and noise (once in the motor/wheel linkage, and once in the pod-cabin linkage, perhaps a cable-isolater for the latter). Better vibration isolation lets you run with harder, more efficient tires (potentially even non-pneumatic). Also, keeping the batteries in the pods would reduce the amount of power you'd need to run through the azimuth mount; mounts with power transmission are available, but they get pretty bulky, large, and heavy when you start talking about the peak power needs of an EV. Instead, you'd only transfer what you need to for charging and load balancing (the cabin would have its own small pack for accessory loads). There is a downside, mind you, which is that they submerge easier in deep water; however, you could run a flexible air tube through the core of the pod mount and basically have them "snorkeled". While there are waterproof motor mounts on the market (designed for boats and submarines and the like), I rather like the idea of having the cooling air exhausted through the (low clearance) rotor opening, maintaining constant positive pressure sufficient for a couple meters of depth. I'd love some of the compact pancake motors that you find on the market, like the EMRAX series. Four of those and the bloody thing could fly if one mounted props instead of wheels ;) .
  Some day I'll have the right combination of free time and budget to experiment. I usually have either one or the other but not both ;)
  
  --
  Hourglass says she knows a kid in Iowa who grows up to be president.
This is why Uber is toast by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:22 · Score: 0

Uber says they'll buy tons of self-driving Teslas.. but why would Tesla sell them, when they could run the operation themselves?
1. Re:This is why Uber is toast by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:29 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe they have no interest in moving in that direction?
  It's like saying that Sennheiser makes the best headphones in the world, why don't they just buy out all the record labels so they can run the media that's played through them too?
2. Re:This is why Uber is toast by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 02:02 · Score: 1
  
  That's a bit different. In the first case, Tesla is doing all the hard work and running the cars seems to be just going 5% extra. If you want to buy a record label that's a heavy investment.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
3. Re:This is why Uber is toast by danbob999 · 2016-07-21 02:25 · Score: 2
  
  Uber's only value is its network effect.
  Anyone can copy the Uber app and model and competes against it. Most will fail because the network effect is a big barrier to entry.
  Just like Facebook.
4. Re:This is why Uber is toast by Dare+nMc · 2016-07-21 13:47 · Score: 1
  
  > Tesla is doing all the hard work and running the cars seems to be just going 5% extra.
  I think your selling that short to say it is 5% extra. You need chargers, parking, inventory, insurance, maintenance, advertising.
  It did seam obvious Tesla is wanting to manage fleets of rentals, and include owners cars in them. But Uber has the app, the advertising, the eyeballs, the insurance all in the works.
Where is my Johnny Cab?! by fortfive · 2016-07-21 01:26 · Score: 2

I've been dreaming of it ever since I saw the movie.
1. Re:Where is my Johnny Cab?! by OzPeter · 2016-07-21 02:18 · Score: 1
  
  I've been dreaming of it ever since I saw the movie.
  They did exist, but the manufacturers did a total recall on them. However it seems that you've erased that fact from your memory.
  
  --
  I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
2. Re:Where is my Johnny Cab?! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:26 · Score: 0
  
  Christopher Walken was fantastic as Quaid in that movie!
  
  Unless this is Thursday, then you probably remember Arnold Schwarzenegger in that role.
If it's 10 times safer than manual drivers... by cmseagle · 2016-07-21 01:28 · Score: 4, Funny

...it'll be at least 20 times safer than people who drive automatic.
Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:30 · Score: 3, Insightful

Autopilot does exactly what Tesla claims it does. It doesn't do what some people seem to think it does, but that's hardly Tesla's fault.
Re:Apple bends over for feds..... Again by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:33 · Score: 0

Wow, they're worse than BlackBerry!
"Master Plan", sounds a bit ominous by Thud457 · 2016-07-21 01:36 · Score: 0

You know who else had a Master Plan?

HITLER!

I always said that Elon Musk character was a ridiculous caricature of a Bond villain and just plain bad writing.
But then we got a billionaire reality TV star, who was involved with Professional Wrestling, going to be President and the audience isn't howling for a purge of the writers' bullpen. Demand more sensible scripting of reality.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1. Re:"Master Plan", sounds a bit ominous by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:24 · Score: 0
  
  The audience is howling, but that's because the dialogue is kill off the non-whites. And they're happy about it.
2. Re:"Master Plan", sounds a bit ominous by Coisiche · 2016-07-21 04:02 · Score: 0
  
  You know who else had a Master Plan?
  Me. I've got it installed.
  We are talking about the World of Warcraft garrison add-on, right?
3. Re:"Master Plan", sounds a bit ominous by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 04:16 · Score: 0
  
  Nobody's saying that. I get that you want it to be that way because it lets you pretend you're an oppressed martyr instead of a bigoted loser. But it's not how it is.
Real problem with tesla -- no charging stations in by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:39 · Score: 0

I live in Phoenix.... I drive to Mexico 5-6 times a year. Tesla has no charging infrastructure down there. Buying a tesla is unworkable, for that reason.
No charging stations in the mid Atlantic! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 01:49 · Score: 0

I live in Phoenix.... I drive to Mexico 5-6 times a year. Tesla has no charging infrastructure down there. Buying a tesla is unworkable, for that reason.
Yeah, and I'm in Boston and I go to England a lot. No charging stations in the middle of the Atlantic ocean either.
Not every vehicle is optimal for every use.
1. Re: No charging stations in the mid Atlantic! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:23 · Score: 0
  
  There aren't any roads going to England from Boston. There are roads from Phoenix to Mexico. Why buy a vehicle that limits where you can go? I've driven my gasoline powered vehicle as far south as Puerto Vallarta. Can't do that in a Tesla....
Elon by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 01:55 · Score: 1

What is it with this guy? He announces all kind of grand plans before he can even demonstrate he has the basic things right.

--
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
1. Re:Elon by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:17 · Score: 1
  
  Basic things like what? Having the knowledge, skills, engineering teams, manufacturing equipment and locations, and employees to build them? Having experience and great success as an electric car manufacturer?
  He's announcing plans involving electric vehicles, he's more qualified to do this than anyone else in the world.
2. Re:Elon by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 02:21 · Score: 1
  
  He should make Autopilot work properly first and then bring it out of beta and then plan to put it in a truck.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
3. Re:Elon by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 02:23 · Score: 1
  
  Not to mention bringing his vehicle quality on par with other automakers at the same price level.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
4. Re:Elon by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:02 · Score: 0
  
  So, you want him to do exactly what his plan proposes.
5. Re:Elon by SpeedBump0619 · 2016-07-21 03:54 · Score: 1
  
  No, they want him to do what most businesses do: plan for only what you know you can already do. Also, focus only on short term profits...because if you can't explain how you'll make a profit it definitely isn't worth doing. Don't you know this is how innovation works?
6. Re:Elon by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 07:46 · Score: 0
  
  Not to mention bringing his vehicle quality on par with other automakers at the same price level.
  Why would he want to bring the quality down?
Re:Real problem with tesla -- no charging stations by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:01 · Score: 0

Rent a car or fly. I wouldn't want to drive a $70-$100k car in Mexico anyways.
And if you can find a plug, it can charge.
Re: Apple bends over for feds..... Again by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:14 · Score: 0

I'm certainly not surprised.
Re:Real problem with tesla -- no charging stations by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 02:15 · Score: 1

Most people who spend more then $15K on a car will want it for all purposes and won't want to artificially limit themselves into short trips.

--
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Could improve collision avoidance and other stuff by Bearhouse · 2016-07-21 02:16 · Score: 2

Where are the interconnected cars we were/are promised?
Where's the open standards that would allow - say - a Ford 20 miles ahead to warn an Audi or a Toyota of an icy patch, a crash or traffic slowdown?
Hell, GM has had OnStar for ages and it cannot do that even within its own brand.
Seems like the OEMs and the Googles, Apples etc. are too busy duking it out as to who will control the customer and her information to actually give two shits about what we actually want and need.
I'm guessing if a significant number (unlikely) of Tesla cars, bus and trucks get built than at least they'll be talking to each other.
Re: Real problem with tesla -- no charging station by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 02:20 · Score: 0

Why? It's safer than driving a car in most of the U.S. People drive slower and as a result, there are less accidents. Hotel, condominium, restaurant and upscale residential areas employ security guards, and usually have gated lots, so theft is less of an issue. I think you are off base with your thought process...
Re:Translation by kaybee · 2016-07-21 02:28 · Score: 2

It is a beta feature that requires driver attention. Looking at accident rate I'd say it is clearly safer than human drivers (3-4 accidents in 130 million miles).
Those pictures are not from Tesla. by Brannon · 2016-07-21 02:50 · Score: 2

Are you seriously unable to tell the difference between an official company sponsored concept and some fanboy renderings?
That's what a "grand plan" is. by Brannon · 2016-07-21 02:52 · Score: 3, Insightful

"grand" implies "ambitious" and "plan" implies "future". If you just want a quarterly update then google for that.
Re:Translation by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 03:03 · Score: 1

What are you comparing to? Is there a statistic on how many manual accidents would happen on open highway just following the vehicle in front with no passing?

--
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Re:Real problem with tesla -- no charging stations by danbob999 · 2016-07-21 03:16 · Score: 1

Most people with 2 cars would be perfectly fine even if one of them was a range-limited EV.
I would also say that most people wants clean air to breath.
Re:Real problem with tesla -- no charging stations by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 03:24 · Score: 1

How many families can afford to use a $150K car as their second vehicle? There was recently an article that most families can only afford $10K for their primary vehicle. If I buy a vehicle, then the one I bought before is no longer reliable enough for long trips so I need the new one to do it.

--
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Re:Apple bends over for feds..... Again by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 03:28 · Score: 0

Ironically, Apple makes them get court warrants.
Google just hands it over, no questions asked.
Re:Real problem with tesla -- no charging stations by danbob999 · 2016-07-21 03:32 · Score: 1

I meant a regular (non-Tesla) EV would be fine a second vehicle for most people. A Tesla is a fine first vehicle for most people. Don't forget many people spends as much on gas as on their car.
A lot of people have two cars and both are reliable enough for a long trip.
Re:Translation by KingMotley · 2016-07-21 03:37 · Score: 0

Yes. There is this new thing called google which will help you find it.
Re:Translation by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 03:43 · Score: 1

Ok I googled on "accident statistics for only the easy part of highway driving that Autopilot will work on" and didn't find that break down. The only stats are for highways in general, for much of which Autopilot will turn itself off and make the driver handle manually.

--
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Re:Translation by ventsyv · 2016-07-21 03:55 · Score: 1

Actually autopilot works on city streets as well. It reads speed limit signs, it follows the car in front of it, it stays in lane... The only thing I can think off that it does not do is to obey traffic lights and stop signs.
Re:Apple bends over for feds..... Again by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 04:12 · Score: 0

Ironically, Apple makes them get court warrants.
Google just hands it over, no questions asked.
Amazing, even BlackBerry requires a warrant. Android sure is evil.
No more terrorists needed by AchilleTalon · 2016-07-21 04:35 · Score: 1

With Tesla building trucks, terrorists will become optional with the self-driving mode.

--
Achille Talon
Hop!
1. Re:No more terrorists needed by danbob999 · 2016-07-21 05:49 · Score: 2
  
  The terrorist is already optional, at least on site. You only need to be able to install a cell-phone with a data plan as well as the hardware required to remote control the car. No need for self-driving and this can be done by modifying any current car/truck. The terrorist can sit comfortably in ISIS' headquarters while remote controlling the truck. It just happens to be cheaper to sacrifice a terrorist than to build that setup.
About time! by PetiePooo · 2016-07-21 08:43 · Score: 1

Buses are notorious for slurping fuel and stopping every few blocks. Every time I've seen the thick black cloud of smoke as they pull away from a stop, I'm reminded that they're a prime candidate for regenerative braking. I'm glad to see Tesla taking the effort to scale their technology to a platform that could greatly benefit from it. I hope they do well. Even if they're not plug-in hybrids with huge battery banks, just the ability to reuse the kinetic energy of braking would be huge.
1. Re:About time! by Shirley+Marquez · 2016-07-22 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  There are already hybrid buses on the road. They employ regenerative braking, engine shutoff at stops, and electric assist on acceleration so the engine doesn't have to work as hard and can avoid inefficient operating conditions. Reports on efficiency vary, but some have claimed fuel savings of 33% or more.
  Full electric buses are also available but not many are currently in use by transit systems. As costs come down and range improves they are likely to become more popular, especially on inner city bus routes where the bus stops and starts frequently and the distance traveled is small.
[citation given] by gman003 · 2016-07-21 09:02 · Score: 1

F9-001: Success
F9-002: Success
F9-003: Success
F9-004: Primary mission success, secondary mission scrubbed due to ISS safety rules
F9-005: Success
F9-006: Success (first v1.1 flight)
F9-007: Success
F9-008: Success
F9-009: Success (first flight with landing legs)
F9-010: Success
F9-011: Success
F9-013: Success
F9-012: Success
F9-014: Success
F9-015: Success
F9-016: Success
F9-017: Success
F9-018: Success
F9-020: Failure, RUD at T+150s
F9-021: Success, first v1.1 FT, first successful landing at Canaveral
F9-019: Success
F9-022: Success
F9-023: Success, first successful landing on droneship
F9-024: Success
F9-025: Success
F9-026: Success
F9-027: Success
One failure. Out of twenty-seven, for a success rate of 96%. Unless you want to count landings as necessary for success, in which case they have a 19% success rate - but by that metric, Soyuz, Proton, Atlas, Delta, Titan, Redstone, Saturn, Ariane, Athena, and Zenit all have 0% success rates, and only Energia-Buran and STS also have a non-zero success rate, with 50% and 98%, respectively.
Over that same period North Korea fired four missiles (claiming to have fired even more but not supported by evidence) and launched two orbital rockets. The missiles may or may not have failed - they fell vastly short of their design range but that may have been deliberate - and both rockets worked, although their payloads may have failed. At least, this is all the info I could find - there's no convenient list of every launch attempt they've made, and I suspect most failed launches are never revealed.
Re:Translation by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 13:36 · Score: 1

I'm not sure what you mean. You can't compare Autopilot's safety on sections of road that it won't even be able to be used on.

--
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Eh, looks pretty free-market to me. by cbhacking · 2016-07-21 13:40 · Score: 1

What's not free-market about it, aside from the fact that if they'd printed outright lies they could have been sued? I really doubt that that's the kind of government intervention in free markets you were referring to. One of the colossal problems with free-market ideals is that the consumer will *never* have all the information, nor will the very partial info the have be representative or properly weighted by importance, nor will the (partial, sensationalized, and unrepresentational) information be unencumbered by bias.
The vast majority of people do not, on an everyday basis, make rational decisions. This is true when deciding what to have for breakfast (see the absurdly sugar-rich and/or fatty things that pass for "breakfast" in most of America, at least), it is true when deciding on political candidates (I'm not even going to mention major candidates; in states where primaries select delegates instead of directly voting on candidates, Trump lost some delegates from regions that otherwise favored him because some of his potential delegates in those regions had foreign-sounding names), and when deciding what car to buy. Instead, we mostly rely on heuristics: I should eat this because it tastes good, I shouldn't vote for this delegate because their name doesn't sound like the names of people who think like me, I shouldn't buy a Tesla because somebody on Slashdot said they'll go out of business soon, etc. Often, it is rational to use heuristics; they're less mentally expensive than rational cost-benefit analyses. For major decisions (or ongoing behavior), though, it's really not... and yet we do anyhow.
What's more, people (most commonly salespeople, marketers, lobbyists, politicians, con artists, evangelists, and the rest of that ilk) are skilled at exploiting weaknesses in those heuristics. They appeal to emotion, exploit widespread ignorance, craft popular narratives that spread virally, present easy answers, use ad hominem attacks, try to get people to confuse them with trustworthy sources, and (when they can get away with it, which is pretty often) outright lie. You might think that all the bullshit would cancel out and the truth would win in the end, but not all positions are equally privileged in peoples' minds. Just as a comforting lie is much more believable than a painful truth for most people, it is much easier to tear down somebody else's reputation on distortions than to build up your own on truth.
We see that today, all the time. A lot of it's medical (anti-vaccine, homeopathy, "miracle" diets, etc.) but it happens in every other field too. One I see all the time, professionally, is products advertised as "secure" or "private" when they are the polar opposite of that. Even in pure science, it happens as people compete to be credited on publications and to horde the limelight for accomplishments they don't want to share, thus raising their status higher than it should be, to the detriment of us all.

--
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Re: Real problem with tesla -- no charging station by fluffernutter · 2016-07-21 13:47 · Score: 1

If people are not getting into accidents with Autopilot because it is going slower then it's not really preventing accidents, it is just facilitating a trade off. A human driver can also drive slower if they choose.

--
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · 2016-07-21 21:29 · Score: 0

I was very disappointed after driving off a cliff. With a name like autopilot, I was sure it could fly!
A logical move by Shirley+Marquez · 2016-07-22 04:24 · Score: 1

This makes sense. Tesla is building a battery factory that will be able to build a LOT of batteries. Developing additional uses for their batteries is a natural brand extension.
Re:Translation by Coren22 · 2016-07-27 02:08 · Score: 1

You can't compare Autopilot's safety on sections of road that it won't even be able to be used on.
Such as? What streets exactly does autopilot fail to work on? Autopilot won't stop for stop signs and street lights, but anywhere else it will work just fine.

--
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Re:Translation by fluffernutter · 2016-07-27 02:52 · Score: 1

It needs clear lane markings, and can only be used in clear weather for one thing. I'm assuming it won't take a risk of passing another vehicle in an oncoming lane which is something dangerous people usually do. If there weren't many situations where it couldn't be used then the driver wouldn't need to have hands on steering wheel at all times.

--
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.