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

731–740 of 836 posts

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

#731

Post by breve »

modeless wrote: post #663
yibg wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess that's true if you stretch timelines to infinity. I'm still waiting on: - L5 autonomous driving - $35k Teslas - Hyperloop - Lunar trips to the moon on spacex - Humans on Mars But I guess if we just consider those delayed, then all good.

FSD 14.2 is available to the public and anyone who has tried it can tell you it is an incredibly impressive system that is leaps and bounds ahead of where it was just six months ago and by far the best available to purchase worldwide. FSD robotaxis with no people in them have been seen on the streets of Austin. I expect that this one is within two years of being done. As has been pointed out, the Model 3 has been bel…

> impressive system that is leaps and bounds ahead of where it was just six months

It isn't full autonomy. It isn't full self-driving.

In 2016 Tesla claimed that "as of today, all Tesla vehicles produced in our factory – including Model 3 – will have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver."

The blog entry is no longer on Tesla's website but the Internet Archive has it: https://web.archive.org/web/20240730071548/https://tesla.com...

There were supposed to be 1 million robotaxis on the road by 2020. That didn't happen either: https://www.thedrive.com/news/38129/elon-musk-promised-1-mil...

Tesla set their own benchmarks and timelines. Tesla failed to achieve them.

They find it easier to lie and have people make excuses for them than to actually execute.

Lying is part of the company culture at Tesla.

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

#732

Post by breve »

simondotau wrote: post #590
DangitBobby wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It never did become affordable.

It’s affordable relative to the definition of affordable given at the time. The entry level Model 3 currently sells for $38,630. That's $28,600 in 2016 dollars.

So Tesla is not a bunch of liars after all? Just misunderstood?

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

#733

Post by neogodless »

eichin wrote: post #661
thinkingtoilet wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What "new features" are we talking about? What else do you need in a car? Do you complain about "new features" in an expensive bottle of whiskey? Or a nice computer? No, you want the basics done really well and made with the highest of quality.

When I went from a 2006 mini to a 2021 polestar 2, there were a bunch of things that were either "up in class" or "15 years makes things better" - traction control, non-invasive lane-assist (with invasive options), per-driver (per-keyfob really) seat adjustment memory, charge-aware navigation, radar cruise-control, 360° camera fusion, headlight washers, kick-to-open trunk, interior pre-warm (including seats, as a sof…

And a few downgrades (if my 2023 Polestar 2 is an indication)

* Wait 60 seconds to start using the GPS / nav to become responsive

* Unreliable backup camera (even after several software "fixes")

* No buttons or knobs for climate control

* No way to disable intrusive line detection that makes car vibrate when you get close to yellow and white lines

* Overzealous auto-dim of high beams (our 2023 Mazda CX-5 is significantly better with almost no false positives)

It's not all bad, and once the infotainment warms up, it's plenty responsive. It's certainly a luxury car though (as an admitted Mazda fan) you can get a lot of nice from a $30k Mazda.

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

#734

Post by breve »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #237
iknowstuff wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TSLA investors: * don't believe the 67% will follow through with that after experiencing FSD * don't need 67% of Americans to purchase the car. Robotaxi use is plenty. * look beyond the American market and its pathetic 5% EV share.

FSD is going to wipe everything off. I’ve tried v13 few weeks ago, knowing it works so well. Still got shocked how good it is. They’ll have to drop the price of it tho, but even then 10M cars * $100 per month is $12b of revenue per year.

> FSD is going to wipe everything off.

Then why are Tesla's sales down globally?

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

#735

Post by Dylan16807 »

Loughla wrote: post #613
youarentrightjr wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> get ready to ramp up cyber cab production lines The word on the street is this is only 2 weeks out. Right after fulfilling the roadster orders. And right before the Dyson sphere that will power Grok AI is deployed.

If we build a Dyson sphere just to power chat bots, I'm turning into an eco-terrorist.

Is there something you'd prefer the shoddy beginnings of a Dyson sphere be doing?

I understand thinking it would be a terrible idea in many ways, but in this scenario I think the only thing an "eco-terrorist" accomplishes is getting more servers to stay on earth where they damage the ecosystem more.

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

#736

Post by tasty_freeze »

B1FF_PSUVM wrote: post #712
tasty_freeze wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

some sound good, but: > The SpaceX docking simulator ported as an in-vehicle game, playable on the infotainment screen Really? People want that? I know that Elon Musk would think that it would be great to play a video game about Elon Musk's companies, but are Tesla owners similarly afflicted?

Lunar Lander was all the rage back in the day ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Lander_(video_game_genre...

Yup, and I played it back when it was new. at an arcade, not in my car.

To me it is like someone saying, "Honey, I'll be on the garage watching Football in my Tesla all afternoon." Yeah, you can do it, but is a car really where you want to do that? The second aspect is it is a game glorifying Elon's "genius". What is next, a FPS for your Tesla where you have a chainsaw and you run through federal buildings trying to get the highest body count?

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

#737

Post by Dylan16807 »

simondotau wrote: post #595
NewLogic wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called fraud, the editor was a victim of fraud. At least he clued on late I guess..

Is it fraud if he paid $0 for non-existent roadsters? Referral credits are legal fictions, much like how Tesla Roadsters are physical fictions. Trading one fiction for another isn’t fraud, it’s cosplay.

> Leveraging an existing monetised readership for referral credits isn’t “work”.

> Is it fraud if he paid $0 for non-existent roadsters?

How do you think readership gets monetised in the first place? The biggest way is ads, which includes referrals.

Do you dismiss paid ad placement the same way you dismiss referrals? If not, what makes it different?

> Referral credits are legal fictions

A promise for $100 of stuff isn't exactly the same as a promise for $100, but it's close. Debt is a "legal fiction" but that doesn't mean it's not legitimate, or that you can pretend it doesn't exist.

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

#738

Post by donohoe »

terminalshort wrote: post #689
donohoe wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The one comment suggests a valid alternative. It doesn’t suggest that this was ‘wild’ reporting - which was your original point. The article still adds information, analysis, and not much speculation.

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

#739

Post by iknowstuff »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #295
iknowstuff wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember how everyone kept saying tesla is doomed because any minute now the old OEMs were going to storm in and kill their EV business? In actuality, those OEMs are getting killed by Tesla and Chinese startups. You are making the same argument for autonomy. Old OEMS cannot compete in this space at all. Waymo cannot compete on price with Tesla.

Sure, they're a bit ahead but Mercedes has level 3 self driving and they didnt celebrate killing a bunch of people (and not lowering the deficit) by prancing around with a chainsaw.[0] I feel like people will be willing to wait until next year for the Alphabet or Mercedes version, but maybe I'm overestimating the average person's attention span or underestimating how far behind the competition is. [0] https://www.new…

can you show me how to order a vehicle with this drive pilot?

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

#740

Post by dabraham1248 »

CyanLite2 wrote: post #624
audunw wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some other brands rely on Mobileye for driver assistance. It’s clear from demos that Mobileye is on the same level as Tesla, the difference is that the don’t use end users as beta testers. I suspect that when actual full self driving is possible, other car companies won’t be as far behind as you’d think based on the features Tesla has in their cars now.

They mostly only work on pre-mapped highways. They're also not commercially available. There's currently no other DA other than Tesla's FSD available in the US that will work on city streets and highways.

I'm going to assert that Tesla's FSD™ does not, in fact work on city streets and highways.

Or, if you want to loosely define "work", Ernst Dickmanns had self driving in the 80s, and put in on the autobahn in the 90s. I'd rather define it more tightly as "statistically at least as safe to be in _and_ to be near, as a human driver".

Tesla claims to have achieved that, but I don't believe them. That's because the data they report 1) omits a fair bit of critical info, and 2) frequently changes definitions. Both serve to make comparisons difficult. If it was clearly safe, I think they'd put effort into making the comparison transparent.

Bear in mind that Musk has been claiming "Full Self-Driving" since at least 2016, and people involved have asserted that he wasn't wrong, he was lying.

Post reply on HN