Split Thread Musk, SpaceX and future of Tesla

[theprestige]

A lot of wildly successful projects end up taking longer and costing more than originally estimated.

In fact, I'm pretty sure it's commonplace to start a major project with just the time and cost estimates you can actually estimate, fully expecting to revise those upwards as the project goes forward and more unknowns are converted into knowns. The Apollo Project overran its initial budget estimate, so the Cybertruck is in noble company indeed.

 

[tyr_13]

Somebody can't read. I even provided links to the manufacturers' websites which you obviously didn't look at. That was a lot of work to just be ignored - not sure I can be bothered anymore.

You weren't bothered in the first place as illustrated by you trying to pass off how many models are offered on New Zealand pages as any indication of the models produced by manufacturers. Does it really need to be stated that this is a metric of zero use for the point under discussion? Really? Does this mean Toyota owned subsidiary Daihastu produces no distinct models because they aren't sold in New Zealand?

You're just wrong; Honda produces 42 models, Subaru 18, and all the way down the list. Plus posting what is on those pages for sale in New Zealand is wrong for the question of how many models each company produces.

Again, what do you think you're doing with this argument? Your objection to Tesla's model range being extraordinarily small for a major manufacturer is just baseless.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Tesla is to limit use of its Autopilot feature after a review of nearly 1,000 crashes in which it was engaged. The recall was disclosed in a letter to Tesla posted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Telsa has agreed to an over-the-air software update that will limit the use of the Autosteer feature if a driver repeatedly fails to demonstrate he or she is ready to resume control of the car while the feature is on.

 

[ZirconBlue]

You weren't bothered in the first place as illustrated by you trying to pass off how many models are offered on New Zealand pages as any indication of the models produced by manufacturers. Does it really need to be stated that this is a metric of zero use for the point under discussion? Really? Does this mean Toyota owned subsidiary Daihastu produces no distinct models because they aren't sold in New Zealand?

You're just wrong; Honda produces 42 models, Subaru 18, and all the way down the list. Plus posting what is on those pages for sale in New Zealand is wrong for the question of how many models each company produces.

Again, what do you think you're doing with this argument? Your objection to Tesla's model range being extraordinarily small for a major manufacturer is just baseless.

And Subaru does have an EV.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Tesla is to limit use of its Autopilot feature after a review of nearly 1,000 crashes in which it was engaged. The recall was disclosed in a letter to Tesla posted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Telsa has agreed to an over-the-air software update that will limit the use of the Autosteer feature if a driver repeatedly fails to demonstrate he or she is ready to resume control of the car while the feature is on.

They desperately need to come up with a better term than “recall” for this sort of OTA update.

Might I suggest something like “Mandatory System (or Software) Update”? Acronym: MSU?

 

[theprestige]

"Recall" seems cromulent enough to me. It wouldn't be the first time the meaning of a term or symbol expanded to include new variations on an established concept or process.

But if you simply must mudgeon this cur, why not "patch"? It's already the common term for exactly this kind of thing, outside the automotive industry. Even though no actual patching of fabric is involved.

 

[tyr_13]

Tesla is to limit use of its Autopilot feature after a review of nearly 1,000 crashes in which it was engaged. The recall was disclosed in a letter to Tesla posted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Telsa has agreed to an over-the-air software update that will limit the use of the Autosteer feature if a driver repeatedly fails to demonstrate he or she is ready to resume control of the car while the feature is on.

Related, Tesla is claiming California's false-advertising law violates the 1st Amendment (Ars article). Tesla's violations are in relation to ads not just claiming their system is 'auto-driving', which in true American fashion might be protected as just a proper noun for the feature and not a description, but also described what that might mean. And absolutely does not mean. Tesla claims that a disclaimer means the clear lies in their ads 'don't count', which, nope.

'The First Amendment means we can commit fraud' is a bold legal argument.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

"Recall" seems cromulent enough to me. It wouldn't be the first time the meaning of a term or symbol expanded to include new variations on an established concept or process.

But if you simply must mudgeon this cur, why not "patch"? It's already the common term for exactly this kind of thing, outside the automotive industry. Even though no actual patching of fabric is involved.

I think the problem is the prior meaning of recall. Beyond pointing out a safety defect, it entails contacting a dealer, verifying parts availability, scheduling an appointment, perhaps arranging alternative transportation if the repair takes more than an hour or so, etc. IOW, recall=hassle.

“Patch” is a nice, fairly neutral term, and I like it. For an owner - and I am one - the Tesla app just alerts a software update is available, with “Release Notes” advising of changes and a button to “Update Now”. You need a WiFi connection and most updates - or patches - take maybe 15 or 20 minutes and you’re done. A far cry from a classic recall, and I think deserving of a new nomenclature.

 

[theprestige]

I think the problem is the prior meaning of recall. Beyond pointing out a safety defect, it entails contacting a dealer, verifying parts availability, scheduling an appointment, perhaps arranging alternative transportation if the repair takes more than an hour or so, etc. IOW, recall=hassle.

I for one welcome our new hassle-free recall overlords.

 

[Aridas]

'The First Amendment means we can commit fraud' is a bold legal argument.

It's pretty well in line with the right-wing perversion of the First Amendment that they keep harping upon, though, in practice.

 

[Ziggurat]

It's pretty well in line with the right-wing perversion of the First Amendment that they keep harping upon, though, in practice.

There's nothing really right wing (or left wing) about it. Lawyers make the legal argument that best serves the interests of their clients, not the argument that has the strongest justification. That's what they're supposed to do. And when they make bad arguments because their client's position is wrong, those arguments generally get smacked down. That's not the lawyer's fault, it's just how the legal system operates.

And yeah, I agree that it's a bad argument. I just don't see it being ideological.

 

[Aridas]

There's nothing really right wing (or left wing) about it. Lawyers make the legal argument that best serves the interests of their clients, not the argument that has the strongest justification. That's what they're supposed to do. And when they make bad arguments because their client's position is wrong, those arguments generally get smacked down. That's not the lawyer's fault, it's just how the legal system operates.

And yeah, I agree that it's a bad argument. I just don't see it being ideological.

Fair enough. It doesn't have to be inherently right or left wing. In practice, though, the right wing has long been extremely responsive to the desires of the rich and unscrupulous. That has led to a long running effort to enable corruption and deceit on large scales at the behest of organizations like ALEC.

The usage of 1st Amendment by the rabid right, in particular, tends to be rather aggressive and well in line with the old observation that Conservatives seek rules that protect them and don't bind them, while the others are bound by rules that do not protect them, now that conservatives have largely gravitated to the right for a few reasons that don't need to be explored here. Over and over, the 1st Amendment has been twisted to suit them and abandoned the moment it doesn't suit them, much like they've done to the 2nd Amendment, so that they can claim that it's unconstitutional to disagree with them. This suppresses reasonable, healthy discussion and debate and serves as a go to protection in the court of public opinion as they push harmful things and work to change the underlying conditions to undermine both the 1st Amendment and the country as they seek some selfish gain. Consolidation of the media and the right wing radio monopoly are just a couple of the big changes that have been done with that effect. The deliberate use of tactics to undermine truth itself is another aspect of such.

 

[Ziggurat]

The usage of 1st Amendment by the rabid right, in particular, tends to be rather aggressive and well in line with the old observation that Conservatives seek rules that protect them and don't bind them, while the others are bound by rules that do not protect them

This is historically naive. "Late you come, yet you do come!" Every out-of-power unpopular fringe group always discovers the value of free speech, because it's always the unpopular speech that people try to suppress. In the 1950's, it was the communists. Now it's the far right. To the extent that the communists are not longer clamoring for free speech, it's only because they don't need it anymore since their views are now tolerated. And yeah, a lot of people will abandon principles when they no longer directly benefit from them, but again, that's not peculiar to the right, the left does it too. It's a human failure, and the left has been just as cynical in its application of free speech as the right.

 

[tyr_13]

Musk plans to start a university in Texas focusing on STEM.

"SpaceX and Tesla have noticed a meaningful degradation in the capability of US college graduates over the past several years," Musk wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Monday.

I'm sure he has seen fewer quality candidates. Both companies are infamous for burning out employees. Having so many facilities in Texas doesn't help. There are good universities there, but they're ranked like 25th in that, tech workers who moved there just a few years ago are fleeing now, and it's not a place friendly to women any longer.

More to the point, it used to be both money and clout that attracted the best new talent. The money isn't as good as it used to be with Tesla stock less and less attractive for many reasons, not least of which is how much of it Musk has tied to bad ventures. The clout is, to put it mildly, diminished by Musk being a raving ******* who gladly hosts 'intellectual discussions' with at least two rapists, a traitor, and a man so vile Musk himself claimed he had no mercy for him.

 

[a_unique_person]

Related, Tesla is claiming California's false-advertising law violates the 1st Amendment (Ars article). Tesla's violations are in relation to ads not just claiming their system is 'auto-driving', which in true American fashion might be protected as just a proper noun for the feature and not a description, but also described what that might mean. And absolutely does not mean. Tesla claims that a disclaimer means the clear lies in their ads 'don't count', which, nope.

'The First Amendment means we can commit fraud' is a bold legal argument.

The Worthless Clause. I know someone else who uses them.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

And Subaru does have an EV.

PRE-ORDER YOUR SOLTERRA

The best performances are never rushed. So, we’ve taken our time to develop an electric SUV worthy of wearing the Subaru badge. And now, the wait is almost over...

Pre-orders have been filling fast, so reserve yours today or pre-order for 2024 below. Your Authorised Subaru Centre will be in touch to talk through all the details.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

They desperately need to come up with a better term than “recall” for this sort of OTA update.

Might I suggest something like “Mandatory System (or Software) Update”? Acronym: MSU?

Nah, NTSHA just need to be given the powers to allow them to force Tesla to actually recall all unsafe defective vehicles they've sold.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

Musk plans to start a university in Texas focusing on STEM.



I'm sure he has seen fewer quality candidates. Both companies are infamous for burning out employees. Having so many facilities in Texas doesn't help. There are good universities there, but they're ranked like 25th in that, tech workers who moved there just a few years ago are fleeing now, and it's not a place friendly to women any longer.

More to the point, it used to be both money and clout that attracted the best new talent. The money isn't as good as it used to be with Tesla stock less and less attractive for many reasons, not least of which is how much of it Musk has tied to bad ventures. The clout is, to put it mildly, diminished by Musk being a raving ******* who gladly hosts 'intellectual discussions' with at least two rapists, a traitor, and a man so vile Musk himself claimed he had no mercy for him.

Oh, so that's why Ken Ham is cutting back on his responsibilities at AiG.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Nah, NTSHA just need to be given the powers to allow them to force Tesla to actually recall all unsafe defective vehicles they've sold.

Do you mean mandate the unnecessary physical recall of about 2,000,000 vehicles, when the update can be done in your driveway on about 20 minutes? That makes no sense, since Tesla can easily track which vehicles are in compliance.

As far as the “unsafe” moniker, Tesla vehicles under Autopilot or Full Self Driving are actually involved in fewer accidents than other cars. Not that there’s not room for improvement.

 

[tyr_13]

It's pretty well in line with the right-wing perversion of the First Amendment that they keep harping upon, though, in practice.

The more typical, and unique, right wing formulation of it is trying to weaponize Constitutional protections to oppress. You know, freedom of speech means I can say what I want and you can't use yours to be critical of it, freedom of religion means I can make you not have an abortion or deny your gay marriage or ban non-cishet people existing in public/books, etc.