Tesla Q1 2021 Results • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#491

Post by fundatus » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 1:50 PM UTC

jillesvangurp wrote: post #344

anonu wrote: post #50

> We believe that a vision-only system is ultimately all that is needed for full autonomy. Our AI-based software architecture has been increasingly reliant on cameras, to the point where radar is becoming unnecessary earlier than expected. As a result, our FSD team is fully focused on evolving to a vision-based autonomous system and we are nearly ready to switch the US market to Tesla Vision. This is a huge gamble IM…

Because that adds cost. The game here is producing a car that is cheap to manufacture that can drive itself without having to have a data center in the trunk and a large lidar bump on the roof. The gamble here is on the software, not the hardware. All the accidents that happen are not a failure of sensors not sensing but of software not detecting what the sensors captured. We're talking cars crashing into things on a…

Not sure if the cost and the "lidar bump" will still be arguments in the future. Heck, the latest iPhone has a lidar sensor integrated! Surely with a lot less capabilities than what you would need in a car - but it proves that it can be built small and cheap. And I would say that more data from sensors that sense different things will always result in better decisions by autonomous driving software.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#492

Post by simondotau » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 1:52 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #465

mcot2 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I follow the development of the stations pretty closely. It is much much much harder than you think it is. Some stations take well over a year from permitting to lighting them up. Tesla has also made deals with a lot of businesses and states to put them on highway rest stops. The other charging stations are spotty at best. I live one mile from the Electrify America HQ. Even the station at their HQ is iffy and I had i…

Tesla has made approximately 2000 deals. Years aren't decades, and the cost just isn't high enough that it will drag out. It's sort of neutral that there's more than one manufacturer of the other chargers, if the chargers work well with vehicles it doesn't matter if they come from 15 factories or 2. Tesla clearly has a lead. My point is that it is unlikely to be durable.

The lead remains durable in the medium term because Tesla can remain doggedly single-minded. Whereas established automakers have monumental scale investments in their present-day supply chains which can't easily be write off.

Long term? While I don't feel confident hazarding a guess when the ICE–EV inflection point will occur, I expect that inflection point to be marked by a series of corporate collapses as the transition (or indeed the failure to transition) ultimately bankrupts them.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#493

Post by jiofih » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 1:55 PM UTC

nimithryn wrote: post #230

moduspol wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When radar and vision disagree, which one do you believe? Vision has much more precision, so better to double down on vision than do sensor fusion. [1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1380796939151704071

As I’ve commented above, “conflicting sensors” doesn’t make much sense as an argument. If sensors A and B conflicted, you could just ignore sensor B and get performance at least as good as just having sensor A. Does sensor B have enough other benefits to outweigh the costs of adding it? I don’t know, but that’s the actual crux of this problem.

Sensor B “enhancing” sensor A is the exact same situation as a sensor conflict. How do you tell them apart? You’re oversimplifying the issue as if it was a matter of simple addition.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#494

Post by jiofih » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 1:55 PM UTC

tenpies wrote: post #430

yaa_minu wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon claims they sold the 10% only to prove the liquidity of bitcoin and he himself hasn't sold any of his personal holdings[1] 1. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1386821144037236737

Imagine buying $1.5 BB of something and not knowing if it's liquid. You're either grossly incompetent and should be kept away from all money, or an ARK investing analyst.

Hence you sell someone to prove to your observers that it is, indeed, liquid.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#495

Post by natch » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 1:57 PM UTC

volta83 wrote: post #403

stkdump wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think your number is accurate, at least not for western europe. Also you have to compare what you save in terms of purchase price (and electricity cost, because you drive a lighter car) with what it costs for renting over the lifetime of the car. The salary level doesn't really factor in directly. The real reason more people don't do it, is that a car is a status symbol and most people like wasting money on i…

You can buy a used VW Golf 4 years old with You can probably re-sell it 4 years later with 100k km for 6k EUR. There isn't an electric car that can compete with this today. You could buy a Tesla 3 for ~30k EUR, and then rent at 500 EUR every 3 months (being extremely cheap), and in those 4 years, just the renting almost matches the entire price of the VW Golf. For the numbers of the electric car to even make sense lo…

The rental part is unnecessary and can be removed from your calculations. That being said, yes a Golf is cheap, if not considering the incremental long term cost to the environment and the future. It’s the tragedy of the commons.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#496

Post by jiofih » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 1:57 PM UTC

xkjkls wrote: post #214

ajross wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who never really liked either one (though I did buy a Tesla), Musk is nearly a clone of Jobs in affect and attitude and reality distortion effect. All those people who are SO UPSET about the spin regarding FSD, for example, are just echoing what all us folks on Linux PCs were saying about Macs through the 90's and early 00's. Remember when the Altivec G4 was a Supercomputer on a Chip despite being slower t…

> Musk is nearly a clone of Jobs in affect and attitude and reality distortion effect. Eh, Musk has more negative tendencies than Jobs, especially related to his public behavior and honesty. Whatever you might think of Jobs, whenever he issued a firm statement it came true. iPhones were always released on schedule. Musk is years late and many miles short on almost every product he announces. Full Self Driving was sup…

I’d you’re going to turn this into a competition you need to mention the child that Jobs abandoned?

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#497

Post by nine_k » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 2:04 PM UTC

dagw wrote: post #347

nine_k wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the market expands faster than your market share shrinks, your business still grows. Examples: IBM with IBM PC, Apple with iPhone.

Examples: IBM with IBM PC And we all know how many IBM PCs IBM has sold over the past decade. I think that IBM might actually be the most apt analogy for Tesla. 20 years from now Tesla will be a niche player in the market they built basically from scratch.

IBM PC was released 40 years ago, in 1981. They sold their PC division in 2004, after 23 years of run, when PCs were on every desktop and every server rack.

If Tesla goes out of business and sells itself to an Asian automaker when EVs have completely conquered the transportation landscape, I'll be OK with that :)

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#498

Post by natch » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 2:06 PM UTC

vincnetas wrote: post #420

Corrado wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I believe most people don't care about the 0-100 speed. You say that, but almost every single person I've given a ride to in my Model Y has come away from the acceleration portion of the trip amazed and wanting more. Older men, young kids, soccer moms, teenage girls, all get that breathy expression when you effortlessly pass someone on the expressway. And this is a Model Y, one of the slowest Tesla's on the market.…

I don't like this direction of development. I would like to see cars in future used for transportation and not racing. There is no place for racing on public roads especially in cities. So acceleration should be irrelevant. It's like building bigger and bigger cars than other ones on the road to "be more safe" but at the end everyone is driving around in tanks (except other traffic participants like pedestrians and b…

It’s not for racing. It’s a safety feature that can get you out of a tight spot to avoid a collision. It’s also enjoyable.

Once we get rid of human drivers in all cars then the first part won’t be needed anymore. When that day comes, we will be safer but we will miss the fun acceleration of these days.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#499

Post by dagw » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 2:06 PM UTC

cs702 wrote: post #458

lumost wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to look it up but for reference in Q1 2021 the big auto makers delivered the following. Ford: 521,334 GM: 642,250 Toyota: 2.46 million VW: 2.5 million If Tesla holds up they'll be larger than Ford in 2 years and be the largest automaker in the world in 4 years.

Your global figures for Ford and GM look wrong to me... but otherwise, I agree: If Tesla continues to grow at these rates, yes, eventually they will catch up with leading car manufacturers, all the way up to VW, currently the world's largest. Tesla's online manufacturing capacity at quarter-end was ~1.05M EVs/year (~600K/year in California, ~450K/year in Shanghai), which works out to a run-rate of 262K/quarter, vs. 1…

It's possible for Tesla and Musk to overtake the likes of VW in volume -- if anyone can, it's them. But it's not certain that they'll be able to do it.

It's not certain they'll want to. Much better to stay a higher end brand and focus on "fun" and exciting high end cars people (and other car makers) aspire to, rather than trying to out compete Toyota and VW in making Corolas and Polos.

Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results

#500

Post by simondotau » Tue, Apr 27, 2021, 2:11 PM UTC

clouddrover wrote: post #453

concordDance wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we have a source here?

Here's a range test of a Tesla Model Y (EPA range 326 miles) versus a Ford Mustang Mach E (EPA range 270 miles). But in a real world drive the Mach E gets more range: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSmSiOo-v8s Tesla likes to maximize their EPA test cycle results to make the advertising look good, but it doesn't necessarily translate to real world results.

The difference, as other testers have noted, is that Tesla's notion of "0% battery" is a bit more conservative than other brands.

It's important to appreciate that the utility of energy efficiency metrics are different for ICE and EV. In an ICE car, fuel efficiency is pretty much just a stand-in for running costs and tailpipe pollution, so it makes sense for the test cycle to represent a plausible balance of city and highway driving.

But when it comes to vehicle range, you mostly care about range in the context of long distance driving. What matters is highway cruising efficiency, not some emissions-focused test cycle. So when judging the range of an EV, it should be as simple as highway efficiency multiplied by usable battery capacity.