511–520 of 533 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have a union pension plan, and I'd argue they should be backed by less volatile investments than "innovative" companies.
> less volatile investments A wise investor reduces volatility by diversification, rather than by concentrating on low-volatility assets.
Serious question. Been wondering it since the Hindenburg Research stuff last fall.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So the truck doesn't exist in any manner in which they claim, be it speed, hauling capacity, range or price. But what they claim also isn't "fake"? Where did all those come from? You just said range and price before, and range is easy to fix. And if a product costs more than expected to build, it still exists . > shareholders/astroturfers Shove off. > solar shingles They installed a couple dozen roofs, didn't they?…
> Where did all those come from? You just said range and price before Who cares "what I said before". These are claims they've made that have no basis in reality. Claiming "we have a truck that can do all this" and can't is not that far away from claiming "we have a working truck" when you don't. > They installed a couple dozen roofs, didn't they? So you don't even know , you're guessing. They literally installed fak…
Because it's really hard to talk about whether a product is fraudulent or not if the list of problems keeps changing.
> Claiming "we have a truck that can do all this" and can't is not that far away from claiming "we have a working truck" when you don't.
To an extent, yes. With the huge caveat that production cost is not something a truck 'does'.
> So you don't even know, you're guessing.
I'm going by the best news articles I could find on short notice. If you have better, link it. I don't think it's reasonable to demand I go do physical tours before I can talk about the subject.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-solar-insight/insid...
"In California, the nation’s leading solar market, there were twelve Tesla roof systems connected to the grid as of May 31"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFWKVraGI1E
"Tesla Solar Roof - 100 Days After Installation"
> They literally installed fake roofs that didn't function on a Hollywood neighbourhood set piece, then bought the company who claimed to be able to make these (a related party) within days. Is that much different than rolling a truck down a hill to raise money?
So with this I was able to find some info. It's true, there was a fake demo of a particular kind of tile.
But the product does exist now. Your claim that it still doesn't exist is just wrong.
It's also important to note that they had different-looking tiles that already worked, and by the time they took preorders it looks like things were working.
So that's bad, but it's not on the same level as nikola.
> Not sure about you, but slapping an inferior product together, years later at a higher price, that isn't what you demonstrated when you took the money, is fraudulent
If you charge more than you promised, yes. That's different from being unable to meet the originally planned production cost on something. If you let people cancel orders, which tesla appears to be doing, it's not fraud.
> the battery swap (earned millions in subsidies from California), which also was not a feasible technology with a faked demonstration
Wow, that's pretty bad! Thanks for the info, I'll bring it up to people in the future.
Still not on par with a fake product though.
> Boy, you were pretty quiet when people were accusing me of trolling and being a shortseller above, eh. Why is that?
I don't respond to every comment that is rude to a third party. Almost none of them, really.
> Interesting how your preconceived biases can lead you to conclusions that are in fact the opposite of reality. Fancy that.
You're making wild assumptions about what I believe and getting them wrong. Fancy that.
And you do/did come off a bit like a troll in some of your comments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, Musk had literally nothing to do with the name, just a continuation of his myth as anything more than a guy with a lot of money.
He started as a guy without money and got to briefly be the guy with the most money which is not so easy to do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure creating a multibillion dollar vaporware fraud shell company and being a dick on Twitter are comparable sins.
From my point of view as a peasant without any shares anywhere, multibillion dollar vaporware companies have very little impact. We could argue this investment could have gone into better companies who could have made the world a better place, but it's purely hypothetical (the money could have gone to a worse company, or political lobbying as well...). Basically, from afar, it's a "rich people lost some money" drama.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have a union pension plan, and I'd argue they should be backed by less volatile investments than "innovative" companies.
> less volatile investments A wise investor reduces volatility by diversification, rather than by concentrating on low-volatility assets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lets see some of the quotes and think if we could get away with it... Aug 7, 2018 "Am considering taking Tesla private at $420. Funding secured." Elon Musk Aug 7, 2018 "Shareholders could either to sell at 420 or hold shares & go private" After paying 20 million dollar fine referring to the Securities and Exchange Commission tweets: "Just want to that the Shortseller Enrichment Commission is doing incredible work," "…
What's wrong with the latest statement? Technically all cars have a proper GPU (Tesla's "GPU") and 360 cameras, the reliability is probably in the 90%-99% (which, yes, is pretty terrible to be considered fully autonomous, but impressive from a technical standpoint). Technically is correct to say that all they have to do is to "improve the software". That will be a lot of work, sweat and tears, but still correct.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI algorithms are split into training and inference. Training is the process of generating the parameters for the neural network, it usually takes significant resources to train and is a very hard process. Inference is the process of using a pre-trained neural network to perform predictions. Tesla's car have hardware to perform inference. From working on the field for several years, I do believe that they have hardwa…
Thanks? I'm a ML researcher. I thought the comment about ViTs would have been a dead giveaway. Is this nerd-splaining? Because it is really demeaning and you're missing the entire point. While you're right, inference is not training but accuracy and inference speed is still important and hardware dependent. YOLO still can be faster and more accurate. Everything I said still holds true. You want to do inference on lar…
From the outside I’ve wondered if the missed schedule targets around autonomous driving is because we’ve conflated “solving” the perception problem with solving self-driving. Just curious what your take is on that
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. The Battery-Solar-Car angle is such an obvious integration for Tesla. I guess on paper it is frustrating it was a family connection, but their alternative was for Tesla to start building their own Solar capability when they had a significant stake in one already. SEC is a joke - chasing Elon is like a weird hobby for them... meanwhile things like 2008 happen and they shrug and…
Sure, battery solar goes together, but why did they need to specifically buy his conflict of interest failing one instead of another solar company? Because he had leveraged investments in it and even mixed SpaceX into it having them use NASA money to buy SolarCity bonds. Crazy self-dealing and ultimately fraud with the fake shingle demo and claims.
Elon already owned basically 22% of both companies. After they did the stock deal he owned 22% or whatever of the combined company. He already knew the folks / board / management of both companies.
Can you name the company he "should" have purchased?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why this idiotic trend towards gender neutral pronouns is so... idiotic. 90% of the time when it's used, it's confusing and makes the information you're trying to convey harder to get. In this case the op wasn't even using gender neutral shenaningans, but since it's 2021 and it's becoming relatively ubiquitous, we get this kind of confusion.
It'll get easier the longer it persists. Just be patient. Heck, Japanese very rarely need a pronoun at all, yet they can somehow infer meaning just fine.