131–136 of 136 posts
A solar energy product from Tesla was an odd fit with the CEO’s anti-environmentalist MAGA stance anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did want it. Would have looked great on my quite old house where it is highly impractical to have conventional solar panels, as there is essentially not enough space anywhere to have more than one or two panels in the same location, and I need new tiles soon anyway. I think it turns out it was announced too early and attempted to scale before it was ready (turns out it won't be ready at all in this iteration).
> not enough space anywhere to have more than one or two panels in the same location That isn't necessarily a downside though. By having panels on a variety of orientations on your roof, you can spread out the generation through the day and mitigate a bit of the duck curve.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is a "small majority"? Freudian slip?
Your reading too deep. A small majority is a group of individuals that attempt to speak for masses when in fact their statements or beliefs are non-reflective of the majority. Its like that experiment they do with a group of children where they tell 9 out of 10 children to say 2+2=5 and the 10th child just goes along with it by answer 5 too. Either because they want to fit in or they are just angry and want to belong…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your reading too deep. A small majority is a group of individuals that attempt to speak for masses when in fact their statements or beliefs are non-reflective of the majority. Its like that experiment they do with a group of children where they tell 9 out of 10 children to say 2+2=5 and the 10th child just goes along with it by answer 5 too. Either because they want to fit in or they are just angry and want to belong…
You're thinking of the phrase "vocal minority".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That may be true, but I feel that is a separate conversation (whether Elon Musk and his companies, taken whole, have had net good or net bad contributions to the world) from Lambert's coverage, which seems to pick any single _event_ and select the most heinous, corrupt, version full of malicious intent when often unwarranted, extremely bad faith and never adds informational value to that larger debate.
I can't speak for everything the author has written about Tesla, but I don't see any intent stated or implied in this particular article. Instead it seems to mostly be accurately describing an action taken by Tesla that doesn't cast the company in an especially good light. That's not bad journalism just because some people might like Tesla or Musk and want to give them the benefit of the doubt or downplay anything ne…
"That is the bind Tesla’s certified installers are in: dependent on a brand that just walked away from a product line they built a business around, while still needing to sell its remaining hardware."
there is _nothing_ unique about that situation. That could happen with any company.
It's the cost of doing business. training your workforce, etc. Clearly these companies are happy to sell other Tesla products to the point where they don't want to jeopardize those relationships.