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

Getting Back to Work

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 332 posts

Re: Getting Back to Work

#321

Post by travisporter »

badRNG wrote: post #174
travisporter wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saved up for a used Tesla this year and have decided to hold off. I asked on another HN thread whether musk believes in climate change and didn’t hear anything. But to me, the covid tweets going against science makes me think he doesn’t really care for a low carbon footprint. So I guess I don’t know now if it is really a net carbon benefit to owning a Tesla versus another sedan over the next five years.

I think I've always found myself a little skeptical that "voting with the pocketbook" can resolve climate change. It often seems to be a choice only available to those wealthy enough to spend time considering the carbon effect of the products they consume, and a way for wealthier people to flaunt their luxury green products without appearing entirely self important. For the majority of people who can't afford a $30k…

No I think it can. There’s so many green initiatives in companies and divesting from coal. I’m not deluding myself that someone is looking at carbon emissions of their supply chains meticulously but the sentiment is there, which means something.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#322

Post by digi59404 »

mdorazio wrote: post #200
marcinzm wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The estimated fatality rate with everything taken into account is around 0.5%. That's covering asymptomatic people, etc, etc. Assuming 200 million Americans get infected the result is 1 million additional deaths. That's a lot.

Among what age group, though? Using an average morbidity across the entire population is misleading. Everything I've read indicates that the morbidity scales very highly with age so that it would be something like (making this up here) 0.05% for people under 40, scaling up very quickly as you get to the elderly population. The question then becomes can we effectively quarantine at-risk groups instead of the entire po…

Yes, the death rates scale with age. However, the permanent damage persists even in younger folks. It’s not as cut and dry as “x number are asymptomatic, and that mean 1 million will die. But those are mainly older folks so we act accordingly.”

The problem is: 1. The virus causes permanent damage in people. Even if they live and survive they’ll be dealing with the damage for a long period of time. Some lung damage can take months to heal. 2. The virus immunity exists in the short term immunity of the body. Which means depending on the person in 6 months to a year - Surprise theyre reinfected. We haven’t seen reinfections yet, but we have proven immunity is short term and not life long. 3. This effectively means the risk of this virus becoming a yearly thing is exceptionally high. Not to mention herd immunity isn’t as useful. Due to the fact we’ll always have people losing immunity and becoming sick.

What this essentially means is that 0.5% number (which I think is wrong, but I digress) is a yearly number and will compound over time.

And yes - After a few cycles the percentage (should) drop due to our older folks dying off. However, we’re also going to see people with organ damage 6 months on being reinfected which could result in a higher mortality in itself.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#323

Post by downerending »

54351623 wrote: post #15

Bold move to extort public officials with threats to move a factory you're attempting to fully automate and a few hundred white collar positions to a state where your main bargaining chip is jobs when you possess less than 5% market share, a vertical monopoly and a luxury product in a crashing market. Excited to see how this one turns out.

There is no extortion here. The position might be unwise, but it's not illegal. It's a negotiation, and walking away is always an option.

Put another way, if it was real extortion, other states would certainly not be welcoming the company to come hither.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#324

Post by dang »

DanielleMolloy wrote: post #293
dang wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't take HN threads into ideological flamewar. Not what this site is for. There are plenty of critical comments (in the four threads HN has had about this topic) which have not been downvoted. Ranty flamebait, on the other hand, should certainly be downvoted and flagged. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I accept your decision, my apologies - but could you please let me know in some more detail why this was flagged so that I can get a chance to understand and correct my mistake(s)? Because I can only conclude „don’t try to discuss side effects of capitalism” right now. Is there a heated debate I’m unaware of, that my comment might have been attributed to? What is the flamewar bit? I did not read the other threads.

It has to do with the thread going in generic ideological directions [1]. Generic discussion is predictable [2] and, in the case of divisive topics like ideology, gets increasingly nasty as well, as the partisans of each side show up to fight each other in the same ways that they always fight each other. All this is the enemy of curious conversation, which is what this site is for [3], and which has to be unpredictable in order to be interesting. If it helps at all, we moderate the opposite side the same way (an example I've used sometimes is [4]).

If you look at the links below and still have a question that isn't answered there, I'd be interested to know what it is. I'm afraid it's a bit of a slog to scroll back to the interesting explanations, though, since there's a lot of routine moderation mixed in there as well—but then it can sometimes be helpful to see past cases also.

[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[4] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Re: Getting Back to Work

#325

Post by Taniwha »

Taniwha wrote: post #136
firasd wrote: post #17

I’d like to know what Tesla factory workers think. It’s seeming clear to me from various polls that at most 20% of Americans think ‘oh everything is fine let’s go back to work and school tomorrow.’ So opinions on social distancing are not as polarized as you would think from the media.

The problem of course is that Tesla is ardently anti-union - the workers have no one to speak on their behalf

Thinking about this more the next level up organisation elected to represent (most of) the workers at Tesla is in fact Alameda County ....

Re: Getting Back to Work

#326

Post by FriendlyNormie »

ydb wrote: post #155
dang wrote: post #44

Three threads on this already: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23126517 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23127552 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23129216 Not sure this one is going any better. Celebrity frenzy multiplied by pandemic rage is producing as wild a burn as we've seen on HN. If you're about to comment here, could you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html first and ma…

Thank you for being a diamond in the rough, Dan. Your tireless work keeping Hacker News a safe haven for free thinkers and polite politic is essential during times like these.

No post body was provided.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#327

Post by 54351623 »

koheripbal wrote: post #190
54351623 wrote: post #15

Bold move to extort public officials with threats to move a factory you're attempting to fully automate and a few hundred white collar positions to a state where your main bargaining chip is jobs when you possess less than 5% market share, a vertical monopoly and a luxury product in a crashing market. Excited to see how this one turns out.

These are high paying jobs and a rich tax paying business. I expect many cities would jump at the opportunity to have Tesla move there.

I'm not saying other cities, especially in Texas, wouldn't jump at the opportunity. I just think it's a bold move.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#328

Post by throwlaplace »

sokoloff wrote: post #315
throwlaplace wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>trying to optimize for intellectual curiosity Can you please define for us intellectual curiosity so that we can recognize it and its distinction from apathetic sophistry? Note that the oft-quoted rules aren't descriptive but prescriptive/normative. Also telling people that disagree with the ethos of the website to go away isn't very productive don't you think? For better or worse we dissenters are part of the tech…

This site is hosted at yc.com not commons.tech. While the pursuit of intellectual curiosity demands dang and crew work to be inclusive to a point, the final trump card remains “this isn’t actually a tech commons and they do properly ask some people to leave if the pain of their dissent is consistently and significantly greater than their contributions.” In that limited sense, telling people to leave who unproductivel…

it's a commons because they don't contribute any of the content, not because they own the space.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#329

Post by seppin »

ben_w wrote: post #319
seppin wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't call guessing with slightly better odds than a coin flip "extrapolating the future". Do continue ignoring all the massive failures and continuous capital / opportunity these supposed kingmakers have.

If two chess players of equal skill play a match, the result is a coin flip. That doesn’t mean they don’t know what they’re doing. With one exception that I know of, share prices are the average over all estimates of future earnings. The exception is: When investors just follow the leader instead of producing their own price estimates, you get bubbles.

> If two chess players of equal skill play a match, the result is a coin flip. That doesn’t mean they don’t know what they’re doing.

No, but it does mean they aren't any more skilled than anyone else on the same level. They surely cannot know what will happen next any better.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#330

Post by mushbino »

sokoloff wrote: post #316
mushbino wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any research or data showing that the lives of the elderly and immunocompromised are less valuable than those considered more safe?

I have shared this opinion before (in person) and it went poorly, but I’ll try again here. If one of my 75 year old parents (whom I love dearly) dies from COVID-19, that is less of a tragedy than if a random teenager in my city does. My parent would have lost fewer years or “years of quality life” than the teen. For the same reason, IMO, if there was only 1 kidney available, an 18 year old should get it before a 50 y…

Is age the only measure? What about the contribution or potential contributions to society? Is the life of an 18 year old unmotivated ne'er do well worth more than a 50 year old with children or a 6o yr old who has made great contributions to society and wants to enjoy their last 30-40 years?

There's just no way we can assume that age is the great qualifier.

Post reply on HN