51–60 of 76 posts
The article references a tweet and then fails to quote it or even link to it. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/550297471289552898
What device are you using? In Chrome/Mac there are two separate tweets that are embedded. Capped part of my screen: http://imgur.com/vErhZ5a
Says robots will kill us all, builds robot tentacles.
This seems way to complicated why not just have a device under your car that injects the power socket. Like for example park the front wheels on a platter that by the weight of the car injects the socket.
How is this less complicated? In your case you'd need to install something non-standard connected to high voltage power in the floor of your garage and then have to carefully park your car every time. It'd be expensive and tricky to install, and impose a mental burden every single time you park your car. Not to mention that it would have moving parts that are often put under strain (particularly in those instances wh…
Pretty neat to watch: http://youtu.be/_gU6TWGynkU?t=28s
Says robots will kill us all, builds robot tentacles.
This seems way to complicated why not just have a device under your car that injects the power socket. Like for example park the front wheels on a platter that by the weight of the car injects the socket.
...plus you'd have to dig up your garage floor or at least put some sort of bolts into it to hold the thing in place. No, a roving tentacle works much better, and I can't believe I wrote that either.
This is neat tech, of course. I am not criticizing when I ask: Isn't this a solution without a problem? How hard is it to get out of the car and plug in the charge cord? Then there's the question of simple alternatives to a highly complex and potentially dangerous robotic solution. Think children in the garage. Without thinking too hard the first thing that comes to mind is something like the contact rods that electr…
For the average person? Not very.
For the self-driving Teslas of the future? Pretty hard. Same thing for disabled folks who might appreciate not having an additional step in getting out of the car.
This is neat tech, of course. I am not criticizing when I ask: Isn't this a solution without a problem? How hard is it to get out of the car and plug in the charge cord? Then there's the question of simple alternatives to a highly complex and potentially dangerous robotic solution. Think children in the garage. Without thinking too hard the first thing that comes to mind is something like the contact rods that electr…
> How hard is it to get out of the car and plug in the charge cord? For the average person? Not very. For the self-driving Teslas of the future? Pretty hard. Same thing for disabled folks who might appreciate not having an additional step in getting out of the car.
Care to explain that? How does a self-driving car make getting out of the car and plugging in a cord "pretty hard".
This is neat tech, of course. I am not criticizing when I ask: Isn't this a solution without a problem? How hard is it to get out of the car and plug in the charge cord? Then there's the question of simple alternatives to a highly complex and potentially dangerous robotic solution. Think children in the garage. Without thinking too hard the first thing that comes to mind is something like the contact rods that electr…
This is a legitimate question. This robotic snake problem is solving a problem that does not exist.
And, please, don't invoke the handicapped card as someone already did. They manage just fine today. Anyone, handicapped or not, who qualifies to drive a car can handle plugging a cord into a socket. A 7 year old kid can do it.
So why throw a $30,000+ robot at a non-existing problem. I'll tell you why:
Musk understands marketing. With oil prices so low and nothing significant coming out of Tesla they all but evaporated from public view. There is/was no news to be had about Tesla. The SUV is tanking. That's a non-story. So, how do we get people talking about Tesla again. We put out outrageous-yet-brilliant-sounding futuristic ideas that are easy to consume by the average Joe and blog writers can parrot liberally. Musk/Tesla sound like geniuses and the general public doesn't even take a millisecond to apply critical thinking to what they just read.
The ONLY way a complex robotic auto-charge system might have a tenuous level of applicability is in the context of self driving cars AND "driven" by people so extremely handicapped that they would not be allowed to drive a car today. In other words, paraplegic, severe Parkinsons or other ailments.
That scenario is decades away. And, even then, a simple drive-on docking station would be far cheaper, reliable and easier to install than some kind of a robotic snake rig.
I love technology as much as anyone on HN and i have been involved in industrial and educational robotics my entire adult life. Yet, I have to be honest with myself and not treat everything like a nail just because I have a hammer.
So Tesla will sell you a $30,000 robotic snake for your $80,000 car while Toyota will probably sell you a $3,000 floor-mounted docking station for their $30,000 car. And so will all other manufacturers. Because it makes sense.
This is neat tech, of course. I am not criticizing when I ask: Isn't this a solution without a problem? How hard is it to get out of the car and plug in the charge cord? Then there's the question of simple alternatives to a highly complex and potentially dangerous robotic solution. Think children in the garage. Without thinking too hard the first thing that comes to mind is something like the contact rods that electr…
...and with almost absolute predictability anything that even remotely challenges Musk/Tesla is down-voted on HN. This is a legitimate question. This robotic snake problem is solving a problem that does not exist. And, please, don't invoke the handicapped card as someone already did. They manage just fine today. Anyone, handicapped or not, who qualifies to drive a car can handle plugging a cord into a socket. A 7 yea…