571–580 of 634 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My xiaomi vacuum has LIDAR. I don't. Yet, somehow I operate vehicles with little to no "phantom braking or unintended acceleration."
Teslas don't have these things called "eyes" that have a few millenia of "neural network training"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The flashy tech bells and whistles are there to compensate for the inherent problems with electric cars. They lag in range compared to gas cars, and get absolutely trounced when it comes to putting energy back in the car. Concrete example: this week I had to drive some people between San Jose and Hollywood. Google maps says that's 5:40 hours over 340 miles. I looked at renting a model 3 for the trip but it simply cou…
That’s a fun niche use case but most people just drive to work and school and back every weekday. Having to stop for 20-40 minutes on the odd occasion that you need to drive 340 miles in a day is worth never having to stop for gas for your daily commute.
They aren't, as a matter of fact you buy yourself a whole lot of ICE interior opulence with the price you'd pay for a spartan EV.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla is down to 54% of US EV sales (it’s much worse globally) and it’s been falling very quickly. So, their battery moat is basically gone, and the need for the recent price drop amid such rapidly expanding EV sales is a really bad sign. A significant part of that is they lack of a truck option considering how popular the Ford Lightning, Rivian, etc are. Alongside that is the general perception of stagnation among c…
This is such a silly criticism, of course Tesla's share of the "EV Car" market is going to shrink as more companies sell EV cars. DUH! But that is a silly way to view things, Toyota was never compared on their share of the "Hybrid Car Market", because that is not a real thing, just as the "EV Car" market isn't really a thing, people buy cars and to the extent they cross shop they generally do so across drive trains.…
The perception of the plaid being unsafe unconditionally extends to people viewing all their cars as unsafe irrespective of actual crash statistics etc. The same thing happened with self diving car fatalities it’s a trivial number of accidents but still impacted people’s perception of the brand.
> Tesla's share of the overall Automotive market is growing and that is what matters.
The company’s stock price is based on the assumption they can ride the wave of exponentially increasing EV sales and take a large share of the global car market. Having largely squandered that opportunity the company’s prospects are far less favorable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or if the R&D phase kills so many people the public loses faith in the whole idea ... then you get to wait a generation for people to forget
R&D would have to be killing 30,000*%oftheirvehicles per year.
Feels to me like amateurs (backed by a small army) confidently building bridges and daring the community to try and stop them. (Except Tesla's army are fan boys, lobbyists, and lawyers.) So basically speed running a millennium of civil engineering, except ignoring the more expensive safety controls; like LIDAR.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FSD is a very small component of Tesla' current stock price. Some dumbasses are certainly buying Tesla because they think FSD is right around the corner, but dumbasses tend to not have a lot of money. For any Tesla price estimate, you've got to pick a number, how many million vehicles the company will ship in say 2025. Then pick an Average Selling Price, profit margin, and P/E multiple. Divide by 3 billion to get the…
> Considering Tesla is on track to deliver 1.8M vehicles this year and the delivery growth trajectory it's been on, 4M is a good target goal for 2025, $45k ASP, 10% profit margin, 30 P/E . . . from that I get $180, so today's price is fair as a base case for 2025. That's a lot of assumptions. Why not wait 3 years till all those projections materialize, and buy it then for $180 (if the price is still there)? Currently…
IMO Tesla would be better if they focused solely on making good EVs, rather than also trying to become the leader in self-driving. I get that they're trying to create a wider moat against their competitors, but if their self-driving software are found to have systematic failure modes in them as these internal docs seem to suggest, then that could very well do more harm to their reputation in the long run.
I don’t think they are trying to become the leader in self-driving. I think that, too, is smoke and mirrors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SpaceX has been quite successful, though it also came really close to failing. Solar city actually failed as an independent company. Boring company is floundering. Twitter is having massive issues. I think he’s done more harm to Tesla after taking it over from the original founders than been a benefit. It’s unclear but he definitely took massive risks which were unnecessary and has many serious failures such as how l…
The boring company was always hype… we’ve known how to use TBMs to drill tunnels for years
TBMs are just slightly too expensive right now. At 1/2 the price per mile a huge number of projects suddenly become very attractive. Which then opens the door for more economies of scale, further efficiencies, and in theory a very valuable company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since Tesla works really hard to hide who is responsible in case of an Autopilot crash, witholds and deletes information as well as deny any responsibility anyways, being just as good as a human driver isn't nearly enough. Additionally, there's no data because Tesla releases nothing except heavily doctored numbers meant to make them look good. (To Tesla, a crash means airbag deployed. Sorry, random person that got ra…
I'm not talking about Autopilot specifically because it may be difficult to judge. But surely there is some statistics based solely on the car model?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't ebikes generate tire dust as well? By "public transport" you mean shared ebikes? I don't think this can be a mainstream public transport solution if we want to move forward. Ebikes are unsafe, for starters. I expect a lot worse security issues than what's being reported with Teslas...
The question is not "doesn't the alternative have the same problem in kind "? It's "does the alternative have the same problem to the same degree ?" Certainly, bikes have tires too, but bikes weigh a tiny fraction of an automobile, have half the number of tires, and generate a tiny fraction of the dust, per unit distance. We can't let perfect be the enemy of significantly better. > I don't think this can be a mainstr…
Bike have half the number of tires but remember that they carry 1/5 the number of people. For one person, fine, but families? Good luck selling it... They're also problematic when it rains or snows. Or when the sun is hot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't ebikes generate tire dust as well? By "public transport" you mean shared ebikes? I don't think this can be a mainstream public transport solution if we want to move forward. Ebikes are unsafe, for starters. I expect a lot worse security issues than what's being reported with Teslas...
It's going to be significantly less tire dust, they weigh a 100th the weight. Ebikes won't be mainstream in a typical American city though, the distances between home, goods and services and work are usually too great and cars are basically baked into the culture. Better mass transit and bikes for those living in denser cities, is likely America's only good option. I don't think e-bikes are unsafe though, their lack…