Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 836 posts

Re: Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

#681

Post by HDThoreaun »

bicepjai wrote: post #642
nate wrote: post #268

I know there’s a lot of Tesla/Elon hate here. I’m not denying any of it. I’m just sharing a genuinely strange experience I wasn’t expecting. We needed a car again. Sold ours a year ago and got by with Uber, rentals, taxis. Life changed a bit and we needed something more predictable. I was planning to buy something used and boring and didn’t really care what. My wife asked, “What about an EV?” We can’t charge in our r…

Tesla drivers, the road is for everyone and the road is not an experiment. Please drive carefully & responsibly as accidents can destroy families.

The sad reality is that tons of people are terrible drivers. I’d much rather have Tesla self driving over a significant portion of the population.

Re: Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

#682

Post by cwp »

This article is drivel. If a supplier writes down the value of a contract with Tesla, they're saying Tesla is buying fewer batteries, or will in the near future. That is, there is a lack of demand for the batteries. If you're determined to take this as bad news for Tesla, rather than bad news for L&F, you could maybe speculate about lack of demand for Cybertrucks, but spinning it as "supply chain collapse" is just silly.

Re: Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

#684

Post by mullingitover »

refurb wrote: post #523
mullingitover wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Lancet[1] forecasted Musk's 'bit of a jerk' elimination of USAID[1] will cause a death toll that puts him around 10x that of Pol Pot. > Projections suggest that ongoing deep funding cuts—combined with the potential dismantling of the agency—could result in more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030, including 4·5 million deaths among children younger than 5 years. [1] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet…

Lancet lost all credibility long ago. They had to retract several seminal papers on autism and vaccines as well as Covid. USAID isn’t an aid organization, it’s a front for CIA efforts internationally. It funded CORDS during the Vietnam War which was a paramilitary force. DOGE didn’t get rid of USAID, Rubio did day one (since it falls under the State Department).

> Lancet lost all credibility long ago.

Whether or not they're credible to you, they're still the #2 ranked general medicine journal in the world, second only to the NEJM.

> USAID isn’t an aid organization, it’s a front for CIA efforts internationally

This is a conspiracy theory that can be trivially refuted by simply following the money. You can do this because their budget is public, unlike the budget of the CIA. The stuff you're citing from a half century ago isn't relevant to the work they've been doing when Musk said "Time for it to die."

What USAID actually was was a vital tool of US soft power and influence globally, and if you believe that it's important to wipe out the last remaining vestiges of the United States' perception as 'the good guys' then by all means it was very important to stop their work immediately.

Re: Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

#685

Post by ggreer »

formerly_proven wrote: post #485
ggreer wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since this is a discussion about electric vehicles, I thought it could go without saying that I was talking about batteries in such vehicles, not batteries in consumer electronics that are 1,000 times smaller. To use an analogy: If someone stores a gallon of gasoline in a single-walled plastic container, that's probably OK. But storing 1,000 gallons of gasoline without certain safety measures is unsafe. So it goes wi…

Apart from Tesla very few EVs ever used cylindrical cells.

My point was about cylindrical cells with higher energy chemistries like NMC and NCA. Rivian uses cylindrical cells for their non-LFP batteries. Lucid uses 2170 cells. As far as I can tell, those three (Tesla, Rivian, Lucid) are the only US car manufacturers who have not had battery recalls due to fire risk.

GM, Hyundai, and Nissan all used pouch cells with higher energy density chemistries, and had recalls due to battery fire risks. Ford also recalled tens of thousands of their plug in hybrids due to battery fire risks, though they haven't found a solution yet beyond limiting the max charge of the battery. These batteries are also NMC pouch cells.

I'm sure it's physically possible to make safe, reliable pouch or prismatic cells using higher energy chemistries, but so far it has been risky for those who have tried.

Re: Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

#686

Post by lanstin »

majormajor wrote: post #87
andsoitis wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It has delivered a better ROI in the same way a ponzi scheme can deliver higher ROI. It sounds like you're arguing that high valuation compared to fundamentals means buyers expect gains from future buyers paying more sounds like a Ponzi, but it isn't, it is speculation. The comparison doesn't make sense. Some surface features of speculative markets can look Ponzi-like, but the underlying mechanics are very differen…

> In a Ponzi-scheme, there is no real product (or it is irrelevant) This part is the smell. "It's not a car company, it's a AI/Robot/whatever company." The valuation is supposedly justified by a future product that perpetually fails to materialize. It's obviously not a classical Ponzi scheme in the mechanical sense where payouts are controlled by a central party. It has major Ponzi vibes though, with new money contin…

It also has the characteristics that most of the dupes are not pleased that the fraud was discovered to be a fraud. People swindled by Madoff swore that it was all legit. It's not easy to give up a belief one has held fervently for years.

Re: Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

#687

Post by apexalpha »

brysonreece wrote: post #680
myvoiceismypass wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do cars need weekly software updates? Or - more specifically, what sorts of new software-enabled features (or bug fixes) besides FSD are rolling out weekly in Teslas? Genuinely curious! Is there downtime?

A couple of recent software additions to my ‘23 MY: * Dynamic speed profiles for Autopilot/FSD * The ability to specify individual drop-off locations for FSD arrivals (curbside, parking lot, driveway, etc) * Grok as a voice assistant for the infotainment system * iOS live activity viewer for the Dog Mode camera feed * Speed/steering/control statuses being overlaid on dashcam footage * “Santa Mode” which revamps the U…

Okay I was sceptical going in but those updates seem legit.

Re: Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

#688

Post by gs17 »

szszrk wrote: post #435
mr_mitm wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an entire Wikipedia article about Musk's (mostly) failed predictions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autono...

Neat. It's a bummer though that it's limited to Telsa. Would love to see a fuller one of his all bold statements about robotics, tunnel transportation, space travel, and AI.

https://elonmusk.today/ has a bunch more, although it's also likely very incomplete since most are >1000 days ago and some kind of did happen (it's been updated this year, but it seems to pretend the cybertruck and Tesla Semi never happened).

Re: Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

#689

Post by terminalshort »

donohoe wrote: post #566
terminalshort wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not journalism anymore when you take one fact and then use it as the basis for wild speculation.

I re-read it. Very little is speculative and nothing I’d label as “wild”.

Many other comments show that it is. One example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46423846

Re: Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

#690

Post by sidibe »

anthonybsd wrote: post #611
sidcool wrote: post #395

The picture of Tesla across internet is so polarizing. X and YouTube is full of Tesla is the future vibe. Electrek and HN is calling it a complete scam. I am sure it's in the middle, but I can't find a balanced opinion anywhere. But I have seen Electrek being too negative about Tesla always. And never reporting anything positive as such.

Elektrek was one of the biggest Tesla cheerleaders until 2023 or so. Founder promoting neonazi and fascist ideas kinda made them sour on the brand, can you blame them?

I think that's probably the main reason but also Fred Lambert "earned" a free roadster through referrals gassing up Elon and Tesla and as always with Elons promises it has not materialized.
Post reply on HN