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

Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

theatlanticwire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 262 posts

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#81

Post by smackfu »

adastra wrote: post #24

The "Norwich Charge" data point is all you need to understand what happened here. Notice how vague Broder is in his original account: "After making arrangements to recharge at the Norwich station, I located the proper adapter in the trunk, plugged in and walked to the only warm place nearby, Butch’s Luncheonette and Breakfast Club, an establishment (smoking allowed) where only members can buy a cup of coffee or a pla…

>Because the estimated range when he left that charging station was less than he needed to reach his destination and he knew damn well that that was the case.

But the Times article does say exactly that, right? "The displayed range never reached the number of miles remaining to Milford."

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#82

Post by RyanZAG »

arrrg wrote: post #26
stcredzero wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You and your weird wishes for replication. The fact that you find replication weird, is weird. It would give me pause if I were in any empirically based project.

There is nothing wrong with replication, it’s just that it’s wholly unable to clear anything up in this case. The main important points of contention aren’t even disagreed over here. Those you could figure out by replication. It’s the interpretation of those results that’s the sticking point here. Some details that cannot be replicated are also disagreed on (heat, circling in parking lot, …), but replication won’t he…

I don't really understand your point.

If someone takes the same car and follows the same route and gets the same results, then it's going to prove the reviewer correct. If repeating the trip by someone else who isn't trying to wreck the car gives different results, then that is very much a valid point here.

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#83

Post by arrrg »

stcredzero wrote: post #79
arrrg wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing wrong with replication, it’s just that it’s wholly unable to clear anything up in this case. The main important points of contention aren’t even disagreed over here. Those you could figure out by replication. It’s the interpretation of those results that’s the sticking point here. Some details that cannot be replicated are also disagreed on (heat, circling in parking lot, …), but replication won’t he…

> There is nothing wrong with replication, it’s just that it’s wholly unable to clear anything up in this case. Sorry, but not only John Broder's intentions are in question here. If a bunch of other journalists replicate the trip, but come out with results more in line with Tesla's view, then this calls into question Broder's accuracy, intent or no. You know, there's an empirical context underlying everything here.

Not really, no.

The main questions that could be replicated are not at all disputed. The rest cannot be. Simple as that.

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#84

Post by CamperBob2 »

grecy wrote: post #38
OGinparadise wrote: post #19

The problem I have with "he made it up": unless you have a computer keeping track of miles, speed and temperature, you are going to be "lying" about it. For example, I could easily say that I was riding at 67 mph but the computer point out that I actually went as high as 72, as low as 52 a lot of the time. Was I lying? Who the hell is going to remember or write about every speed change on a 500 mile trip? Was it a sc…

> 45 mph or 52mph, it's the same crap to me. In Australia, you'll get a $100 speeding ticket for going 7MPH over the limit. You need to drive more carefully. http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/usingroads/penalties/speeding.html

Next time the New York Times tests a car in Australia, I'm sure your tip will come in handy.

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#85

Post by smackfu »

gfodor wrote: post #21

I guess it's time to muddy the waters. The truth is in the middle! Of course, the entire debacle can be summed up with the following exchange: Q: "How many miles did you have left to drive on the final leg?" Broder: "61" Q: "And how many miles did your car tell you that you could travel before recharging?" Broder: "32" Of course, Broder claims that Tesla told him it was OK to leave. I think this is bullshit, but will…

> The fact is he basically was stupid enough to essentially leave a gas station with half a tank when he had a full tanks worth of distance to travel.

Part of the problem is that apparently the Tesla's displayed range can show one value after a cold night, then will increase when the battery warms up and is providing more energy. So you legitimately can start driving with too little range, and then it will come back. I assume that's why the Tesla rep cleared it too.

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#86

Post by nikcub »

This argument has nothing to do with facts, it is just one journalist attempting to defend another, and you can tell by the language used. For eg. in Argument 3 about cruise control and speeds, she says:

But the section before he broke down it does look like he chugged along at a pretty low speed.

"It does look like"? This is a graph, it has data points, its not about "looking like" - these points represent facts. At no point in the facts is there proof of cruise control being set at 55mph.

She is taking a graph with real data and attempting to re-interpret it to fit the NYTimes story. This is an emotional argument, as with 'oh no, this was actually about testing supercharge stations'.

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#87

Post by halviti »

danso wrote: post #72

This whole controversy has been a little depressing to read...not that the Tesla vs. NYT discussions here have been worse than on other forums, but just because it shows how technical minded people are as easily swayed by preconceptions and alliances as more ostensibly non-scientific minds. How many words have been expended in the other HN thread to allege that Broder -- after most have already established that he is…

I've read all the arguments on both sides, and while both have made good points, there is one that stands out.

This reporter clearly barely made any attempt at recharging his empty vehicle in Norwich, and then attempted a drive well beyond the car's capabilities, then made the "running out of fuel" his headline.

If he would have done this on gasoline, the result would have been the same, and I think that is getting lost in the clutter of all of the other points being made on this subject.

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#88

Post by sk5t »

ceejayoz wrote: post #46
DanBC wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Broder turned the heat up before turning the heat down. But he didn't mention turning the heat up; he only mentions having to suffer with a cold cabin.

Also, that's the heater setting, not the cabin temperature. I can set my car's internal heat setting to 50 degrees after getting it nice and toasty, and as long as I don't turn the A/C on it's going to stay warm for quite some time.

Quite a few newer cars don't draw a distinction between running the heater or A/C: you just set a desired temperature, and the climate control system figures out what to do based on internal and exterior conditions. (Whether this is a good approach for a car's climate control system is another question, however.)

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#89

Post by arrrg »

RyanZAG wrote: post #82
arrrg wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing wrong with replication, it’s just that it’s wholly unable to clear anything up in this case. The main important points of contention aren’t even disagreed over here. Those you could figure out by replication. It’s the interpretation of those results that’s the sticking point here. Some details that cannot be replicated are also disagreed on (heat, circling in parking lot, …), but replication won’t he…

I don't really understand your point. If someone takes the same car and follows the same route and gets the same results, then it's going to prove the reviewer correct. If repeating the trip by someone else who isn't trying to wreck the car gives different results, then that is very much a valid point here.

What? I don’t think you quite understand the structure of the controversy here, what is disputed and what is not.

Re: Elon Musk's Data Doesn't Back Up His Claims of New York Times Fakery

#90

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

adamnemecek wrote: post #52
Shivetya wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

did he think he added 32 more miles? I wonder if this is still a problem of UI and such... still its a 100k car and Musk is quibbling over temperature settings... really?

Tesla S is 50k.

That's the base model $52,400, smallest battery, one charger, no moon-roof, no scotchguard, no undercoating, no pinstriping, or roof-rack.
Post reply on HN