Live data from Hacker News

Robots eat cars

telemetry.endeff.com

41–50 of 125 posts

Re: Robots eat cars

#41
post #2

> Steer-by-wire Thinking back to case-studies around the Therac-25 [0], I would like to pre-emptively highlight the differences between: 1. Technique X is unsafe. 2. Technique X is unsafe because too much can go wrong even with the best intentions. 3. Technique X is unsafe without strong QA and interlocking safety measures, and there's too much economic pressure for the manufacturer to cut corners. [0] https://en.wik…

Safety is a great reason to not do something. Utility and enhanced safety are great reasons to override that reflex. A lot has happened since the Therac 25 incident in the medical world with AI, machine learning, robotic neuro surgery, all sorts of computer aided diagnostics, etc. This stuff undeniably saves lives. The incident did inspire some level of scrutiny of course. But compared to modern medical equipment, that machine is from the stone age.

Steer by wire (which the article highlights) is common on all modern airbus planes for decades. The first ones flew shortly after the Therac incident. Boeing has also started implementing that on their newer models. And of course most of the vtol planes/drones currently starting to operate and progress through certification programs also commonly use steer by wire. Several of these flew without pilots before their first manned test flights. These are computer controlled, pilot directed pretty much by default with that part being optional by design.

Beyond Tesla, there are now several other manufacturers implementing steer by wire in the car industry. Nio, Lexus, Toyota, Mercedes, and a few others each either already have cars on the road for this or are working on new ones. And while Tesla has received quite a bit of criticism on their FSD system, I don't think there have been a lot of incidents implicating the steer by wire in Cybertrucks. It seems to work and drivers seem to mostly like it once they get used to it. The car is controversial of course. But there's a lot of cool tech inside that is being copied across the industry now.

The implied warning "we should be careful with this stuff because Therac-25" is a bit of a cliche at this point. Yes, we need lots of checks and balances when using automation in safety critical systems. And that has been common for decades.

Re: Robots eat cars

#43
post #14

This article is written with a little bit of a journalist’s misunderstanding of a topic. They seem to have done research but have strung together unrelated subjects due to their lack of expertise in the subjects. As a result it reads more like a summary or recap of vaguely related stories. For example, Tesla’s pivot to robots has nothing to do with their advanced nature of their wiring harnesses, but it’s spoken in t…

> Who in the buyer demographic for a Model S wouldn’t take a Porsche Taycan, AUD A6 Sportback, or Lucid Air over that vehicle?

> Who in the buyer demographic for the Model X won’t take a Kia EV9, Lucid Gravity, or Volvo EX-90?

The S and X are plenty competitive here for many buyers. Did any of those cars outsell the S in 2025 in the US? I would not trust a Kia or Volvo EV.

Re: Robots eat cars

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sorry, are all of those model 3 and Y vehicles robotaxis? Or are you saying that because they produced 1.5 million non-robotaxi cars in 2025 that the estimate of producing 1 million robotaxis in the following year is pretty reasonable, because making them autonomous taxis is a minor feature bump...?

No, I'm saying that the original content is low-effort shitposting, and that Tesla has the ability to scale industrial production to over 1mm 'things' per year, as evidenced by production last year. I did the OP the mild courtesy of asking him to open up a useful conversation. For instance, "Is there going to be demand for 1mm robots, and if so, when?" Or "How much actual retooling is necessary in Fremont for this?" Both seem like useful and interesting things to talk about.

Re: Robots eat cars

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Today's Spirit of Ecstasy, from the 2003 Phantom model onward, stands at 3 inches (7.6 cm) and, for the safety of any person being accidentally hit, is mounted on a spring-loaded mechanism designed to retract instantly into the radiator shell if struck from any direction.

I don't think that mentions it being motorized

The motor allows you to raise it after it has been retracted.

Re: Robots eat cars

#47
post #14

This article is written with a little bit of a journalist’s misunderstanding of a topic. They seem to have done research but have strung together unrelated subjects due to their lack of expertise in the subjects. As a result it reads more like a summary or recap of vaguely related stories. For example, Tesla’s pivot to robots has nothing to do with their advanced nature of their wiring harnesses, but it’s spoken in t…

> Who in the buyer demographic for a Model S wouldn’t take a Porsche Taycan, AUD A6 Sportback, or Lucid Air over that vehicle? > Who in the buyer demographic for the Model X won’t take a Kia EV9, Lucid Gravity, or Volvo EX-90? The S and X are plenty competitive here for many buyers. Did any of those cars outsell the S in 2025 in the US? I would not trust a Kia or Volvo EV.

From what I can see doing some quick searches the EV9 sold 22,017 in 2024 just in the US, while Tesla's global deliveries of "other models" (S, X, and Cybertruck combined, which includes over 10,000 Cybertrucks) totaled 85,133. This, critically for this comparison, includes China.

The X is not competitive with proper 3-row SUVs as the 3rd row is not usable enough, and it was cannibalized by the Y which is not an upmarket luxury SUV as luxurious as EV SUVs that are in the Model X's price range.

Similar story goes for the Model S: they're discontinuing their upper luxury full-size sedan and no longer compete in that market at all.

Since Tesla doesn't split the numbers out it's hard to say but I would say anecdotally, seeing a Model S on the road is most common with older model years as most of those buyers clearly switched over to the Model 3 or Y instead.

The type of buyer who is actually looking for a $90,000 luxury vehicle, that's the type of person I am saying the X and S are not competitive with, which is why they're being discontinued.

Someone spending that much in 2016 on an S or X was getting a vehicle that was bleeding edge technology you couldn't get anywhere else.

Someone spending that much in 2026 will choose the extra luxury features, build quality, and brand prestige of something like a Porsche, Audi, BMW, Mercedes, or Lucid.

Sources:

https://insideevs.com/news/746147/kia-ev-sales-record-2024-u...

https://ir.tesla.com/press-release/tesla-fourth-quarter-2024...

Re: Robots eat cars

#48
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moreover, Technique X does not actually provide any significant value. The whole steer-by-wire in CT happened because Musk wanted a yoke as the control system. And a yoke requires progressive steering which is impractical without steer-by-wire.

> does not actually provide any significant value If that were true, it would not explain why other manufacturers are headed the same direction. The CT is not the only steer-by-wire vehicle.

What other manufacturers? There's Mercedes EQS and Geely. Both are trialing it in one model each as luxury gimmicks.

Re: Robots eat cars

#49
post #24
post #14

This article is written with a little bit of a journalist’s misunderstanding of a topic. They seem to have done research but have strung together unrelated subjects due to their lack of expertise in the subjects. As a result it reads more like a summary or recap of vaguely related stories. For example, Tesla’s pivot to robots has nothing to do with their advanced nature of their wiring harnesses, but it’s spoken in t…

> Who in the buyer demographic for a Model S wouldn’t take a Porsche Taycan, AUD A6 Sportback, or Lucid Air over that vehicle? I guess me, though I’d probably opt for the Y instead. I have a friend who drives a Taycan, one of the sportier variants with 4 wheel steering and blistering acceleration, and it’s nice, but it’s clear that they’re still crap at computers and interfaces, and I just really don’t want to go bac…

> though I’d probably opt for the Y instead

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You are not actually in the market for the class of vehicle the Model S or X competed with in the first place.

I'm not actually saying they are bad cars. What I am saying is that they now lack a buyer persona, which is why they're being discontinued.

When the S and X first came out, $90,000 was the price of entry for any electric car of that caliber. Anyone who wanted an electric car with that kind of range and charging network had just those two options.

But the reality is, the vast majority of people who want Teslas will choose the 3 or Y because, duh, obviously! You have to squint real hard at the door handles to even visibly tell the difference between the X and Y.

What I'm really getting at here is that the majority of buyers in the luxury segment, the kind of people blowing $90,000 plus on a vehicle, those are the people for which the S and X are not competitive. They don't give a shit about how good the software is on the iPad that was slapped on the Tesla dashboard. They probably just want CarPlay and Android Auto anyway. They are looking for hand stitched everything, paint to sample and semi-custom interior colors, and either overstated or understated luxury: they want to look like they belong at the country club (Range Rover, Volvo) or they want to look like they belong at the club (BMW, Porsche, Mercedes, Audi, etc).

For the Model S, it existed in a struggling segment of full-size sedans where you either have to be sporty as in driving enthusiast sporty or luxurious as in massaging seats. The Model S was a Toyota Crown with the leather package that went fast in a straight line.

The Model X is even more lost on demographics. It's an SUV with a bad 3rd row and wonky doors. More critically, it fails to hit any of the demographics you might want to hit: families don't want it because it doesn't have the minivan-like utility of vehicles like the Lucid Gravity, Kia EV9, or any of the gas competitors like the Telluride - or minivans themselves! For people who want a luxury SUV, it doesn't satisfy either type of club folk. You'll get a more refined build and luxurious experience in something like a Volvo EX-90. You'll stand out more in a BMW iX. And finally, the most successful segment of luxury SUV right now is the performance offroader: The Model X can't scratch the itch that the Rivian R1S, Sequoia TRD Pro, Ford Bronco Raptor, Lexus GX, Mercedes G Wagon, and a laundry list of other options I can't even think of right now because there are so many.

As a sidenote, when you describe mobile service to fix a flat tire and roadside assistance, you are literally describing AAA. This is not something Tesla invented. Roadside assistance is included with my car insurance. People who buy Porsches definitely get themselves a similarly good experience. These are not dealerships that are generally unpleasant, they aren't exactly your local Hyundai franchise.

Re: Robots eat cars

#50
post #14

This article is written with a little bit of a journalist’s misunderstanding of a topic. They seem to have done research but have strung together unrelated subjects due to their lack of expertise in the subjects. As a result it reads more like a summary or recap of vaguely related stories. For example, Tesla’s pivot to robots has nothing to do with their advanced nature of their wiring harnesses, but it’s spoken in t…

> Tesla Cybertruck (which is a Model Y with paneling literally glued on top) Doesn't seem true?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/20/business/tesla-cybertruck...

Although I'm wrong about it being closely enough related to the Model Y's platform to really say "it's a Model Y," many of those stainless steel panels are absolutely secured with fasteners and glue.

Post reply on HN