Live data from Hacker News

Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

reuters.com

611–620 of 699 posts

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#611
post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is the car is not my butler. I shouldn't say to my car what I want the car to do, I should do it. Also, I listen to loud music when I drive. Imagine you are driving and the kids start activating car functions because it's fun. Thanks but no thanks.

You realize that with the drive-by-wire systems in (most) modern cars, when you press the accelerator, you are sending an electronic message that "asks" a computer to increase the speed of the car - there's no mechanical linkage from the pedal to a carburetor and/or fuel pump, right? Similarly in many cases with windshield wipers, headlights, windows, temperature controls, etc.

Ask yourself why Tesla didn't introduce drive by voice, but still relies on your foot to do the right thing...

Drive by wire systems are simply not completely mechanical anymore, but you don't have to ask them to do something for you, they translate a mechanical input into an electric signal and then in a mechanical output.

There is no understanding involved.

I hope you realize that.

Th gas pedal is still a moderately precise mechanical actuator that can be easily and accurately measured regardless of who uses it, you can also use a stick or a brick to accelerate, the car doesn't care as long as you move the pedal.

You can also be a mute and use it.

big difference uh?

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#612
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple is fundamentally now a company that can move immense amounts of capital into new industries with the underlying ethos of user experience. Also: insane supply-chain management chops, a skill that is more and more transferable - especially for electric cars.

Despite becoming more similar in recent years, the cell phone supply chain is still very different than the automotive supply chain. The number of parts/unit differs by an order of magnitude and so does the size and weight, not to mention manufacturing techniques and materials. These are capabilities, not so much skills, and they aren't as transferable as you may think. For instance, logistically things are very diff…

> The number of parts/unit differs by an order of magnitude

For reference, a single car has about 30,000 parts, built by dozens of suppliers.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tell everyone I view Tesla as a software company first and that their tech was a decade ahead of other car makers. I think it will still take another 5-8 years for a traditional automotive manfacturer to get close. Apple, they could do it.

How do most people respond to this? Politely changing the subject, or just laughing out loud?

That was cruel :)

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#614
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Having one display off to the side, without buttons, that does everything is an awful experience in a car. It also totally sounds like something Apple would do.

They did not make this choice with touch on Airpods Max, instead opting for the digital crown.

Still, Marco has been complaining[0] about the lack of a separate play/pause/skip button that's not integrated into the digital crown. The solution Apple chose is (a) a bit finnicky (b) makes you unintentionally change the volume while doing other actions.

[0] ATP 409 https://atp.fm/409

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#615
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The biggest lesson from Tesla is that cars are not cellphones. Having one display off to the side, without buttons, that does everything is an awful experience in a car. This is both the most functional and most beautiful design choice I've ever experienced. My favorite part of my Model 3. You quickly come to realize that voice control does everything and that you should never have to reach for a button or fiddle w…

And I view the voice command thing as a thing to be avoided in most or all cases. I simply don’t want to talk to electronics. The privacy implications alone scare me away. No thanks.

You sound like a grandpa, but kids that grow talking with Alexa and Siri will find buttons antiquated.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#616

If I was an Apple shareholder (I guess I am, indirectly through Berkshire), this would piss me off. Apple is in a very good business. Cars are a terrible business. Just compare Apple’s margins to any car company. Also, it’s really hard to move into a business that is widely outside your core competency. It can be done, but the effort is huge, and I suspect the median track record is poor.

is BRK share somewhat similar to a Mutual Fund unit ?

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite becoming more similar in recent years, the cell phone supply chain is still very different than the automotive supply chain. The number of parts/unit differs by an order of magnitude and so does the size and weight, not to mention manufacturing techniques and materials. These are capabilities, not so much skills, and they aren't as transferable as you may think. For instance, logistically things are very diff…

Are you sure an EV is still that much more complex in terms of part count from a phone ? An ICE I would agree.

You can't be serious. There are more components in an 8-way power seat than there are in a phone.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#618
I wrote this several years ago as a joke, but it seems more relevant now. Here's a preview of the upcoming iCar FAQ page.

iCar2 FAQs

In what colors are the iCar available? Space gray, silver, and gold

What kind of performance can I expect from my iCar? The iCar version 2 performs up to 30% faster than the original iCar and uses 25% less fuel.

Where can I refuel my iCar? iCar can be refueled at any station that has Universal Pump Type C connectors.

How do I select station presets on my radio? There is no need. iCar's built in stereo system automatically selects radio stations based on your facial expressions when you enter the car.

Does iCar need an air filter for the engine? No. iCar does not have problems with dirty air like conventional cars do. The iCar's engine cannot get dirty.

How can I open the hood of the iCar to service the fluids or engine components? The iCar is unibody and therefore the engine compartment cannot be accessed by the user. Send it to an authorized Apple service center for maintenance.

How do I put luggage into the trunk? The trunk is a slot loading mechanism. Simply hold the luggage near the trunk and it will automatically be pulled in. Keep in mind that the slot loader only accepts standard size suitcases. Dufflebags or briefcases may jam the mechanism.

How can I change to wiper blades on the iCar? The iCar contains no user serviceable parts. Please send it to an Apple authorized service center for all maintenance.

What kind of third-party accessories are available for the iCar? Accessories also known as Accs are available at the iCar Acc store. Only Acc which have been approved by Apple to be suitable for all ages are available at the Acc Store.

I am accustomed to driving a conventional car. How do I execute a right turn with the iCar? Easy. To make a right turn with your iCar simply press the Cruise control button (CRS) on your steering wheel while turning the wheel to the left.

Wait a minute! There is only one pedal in the iCar? Is it the brake or the accelerator? And how do I get the functionality of the other? The single pedal in your iCar is a multipurpose pedal. Press on it with one foot for gas, and step on it with two feet for brakes.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Practical safety is a car that slows down when I'm moving too fast toward an obstacle because I am distracted. Talking to electronics does not increase practical safety.

Safety is multi-faceted. Yes, a car that can slow down to avoid collisions is a form of safety. Seatbelts are another form. A car that does various things to avoid driver distraction is another form of safety. Just because you can think of a more immediate safety system does not make other increases to safety in some way "not practical" or "not real increases". There are many things, small and large, that go into pra…

Safety is engineered, it's not about throwing as many devices you can to a car hoping that something sticks and improve safety by chance.

Safety belts work even if I am unconscious, a car that slows down works even if I am unconscious, airbags work even if I am unconscious, so they are 100% safety devices, as in "they keep me safe when everything else failed and things are already out of my control".

Hands-free calls are a safety feature because they are designed to eliminate the distraction of operating a phone.

But they are a workaround, the real safety feature is "operating a phone while driving is prohibited by the law" because the simple act of talking is a distraction.

Voice commands are a workaround because the real safety feature is "touch screens are a distraction and you shouldn't use them while driving"

If we remove touch screens from cars, there is no need for voice commands.

Most of the sources of distraction in modern cars are caused by functions that do not belong to cars and are hard to operate.

I work for a large insurance company based in Europe whose primary business is car insurance (>10 million clients).

We launched a two-year program to monitor the distractions of our customers (we especially monitored the phone's activity, thinking it was a major issue) and the primary sources of distraction while driving are (in reverse order of importance)

- adjusting settings or operating car controls: less than 1%

- eating or drinking: 2-3%

- reaching for things: 2-3%

- talking: 4-5%

- multitasking: 5%

- looking at the GPS display: 10%

- texting and driving: 10%

- using a smartphone: 15%

- not looking at the road for too long: ~50%

there are subcategories for each one of the macro-categories above.

For example:

Adjusting car settings like mirrors, seats, the heater is basically risk-free, more than half of the distractions in this category are caused by adjusting the audio volume. It makes sense, muscle memory for settings helps us to not think too much when doing it. Regulating the audio volume usually follows some unexpected event that forces us to change it. Still only 1/200 distractions are caused by it.

Eating or drinking is mostly eating here, I guess in the USA it would be the opposite. Bringing hot beverages inside the car is quite common there, here is quite rare. People spill the coke on their shirts or choke on the water anyway. It is also very common to frequently stop at motorway restaurants here to eat, drink, use the toilets, rest a little bit and eventually refuel. It helps to keep this kind of distractions to a minimum.

Reaching for things is less dangerous when the driver picks up things from the driver's or the passenger's seat, opening the glove compartment is two times as dangerous, picking up something from the pedals area is the most dangerous of them all.

Talking is interesting because there's no difference between people talking with other occupants and people talking on the phone. What's less interesting and probably obvious is that 8/10 happen when people are arguing. But 2/10 are people talking normally like they would to a car to activate the wiper.

Multitasking is when people do other things unrelated to driving the car itself. For example, handling pets is more dangerous than applying makeup that is more dangerous than handling children. The good news is when people carry kids around they drive more carefully.

The GPS display is a major source of distraction, no matter what voice people chose to give them directions, the tendency to not trust other people's instructions makes people look at the screen to confirm what they heard. Also, there are times, not rare, when the instructions are not clear or haven't been updated to the actual road conditions (a roadblock for example.

Despite the technological improvements, texting and driving is still very popular, especially among younger generations. More importantly, we counted using chat apps in this category and it's not surprisingly the vast majority of the cases.

Using a smartphone is an interesting one: while the "phone" part of the smartphone has been standardized and is easy to remote nowadays, most of the time people use the "smart" part of the smartphone, which cannot be remoted. They scroll the Instagram feed, they take pictures, make videos, and, despite having the freehands at their disposal, people prefer to send voice messages. Which involves removing your hands from the wheel.

Did you notice how many times talking and/or hearing voices caused a distraction?

But the most important of them all is not looking at the road. It sounds obvious once you hear it, but it happens a lot more than people think, 100 times more than turning the volume up or down. It could be an external event like an accident, an emergency vehicle passing by, a fire, or something that attracted the driver's attention like a billboard or a beautiful person walking on the sidewalk - it happens more often than you can imagine -. These are the "good" ones, often they don't last enough to cause severe accidents and people just end up rear-ending each other at the traffic lights. The real killer is being lost in one's thoughts, zoning out, keep driving on autopilot while you are not there anymore, and don't realize you are still in a car moving at 50km/h.

That's how accidents happen most of the time.

That's why I think that cars that slow down automatically or correct your errors are a breakthrough, they already exist on the market, have no voice control but they can alert you with a warning sound if they detect that you are distracted behind the wheel.

A car that adjusts the temperature of the heather using voice commands is not equally useful, I would argue that is completely useless unless fixing the temperature in the car will become a dangerous activity in the future, but honestly, I don't see that happening very soon.

So yes, small things are important, but BIG things are even more important.

Let's fix those before thinking that cars need UI/UX designers more than safety engineers.

Before "disrupting" the car industry for the sake of changing things and adding the cool factor to something that doesn't really need it.

p.s.: My opinion is based on the experience gathered doing my job, I'm not against voice commands because I don't like them, but because they can be a source of distraction per sé.

p.p.s.: it took me time to put this together, so please if you don't like it don't downvote it without leaving a comment. Thanks.

Re: Apple targets car production by 2024, eyes ‘next level’ battery tech: sources

#620
post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That credits thing doesn't seem to add up. A quick google shows that 7% of Tesla's 2019 revenue was selling credits. While sure, that's of the same order as the profit, you can't make an argument that "all" of the profit was credits for basic fungibility reasons. "All" of the profit could be any 7% chunk of revenue. And 7% is like half a year of profits growth in this cases for a company that is still growing rapidly…

It's "literally all" of the profit because Tesla controls the timing and amount of credits sold each quarter, and adjusted the sales of credits so that it could make the "4 consecutive quarters" profitability threshold for making the S&P500 rather than selling them all in one quarter as they did in the past. Profits are not fungible. Companies can, and do, determine profit and loss separately for each line of busines…

What is the upside to being on S&P? What were they on before, Nasdaq? What is the material difference? Genuine question.
Post reply on HN