4 ms·
I'm not sure lack of wisdom is a fair characterization. It does not look like they have functionality regressions caused by new features in other sections of th
by mehrdada 11y ago
I'm not sure lack of wisdom is a fair characterization. It does not look like they have functionality regressions caused by new features in other sections of the car. Had the new features ruined some old ones, I would have agreed with you, but these issues are all centered around the new features themselves. With that in mind, your characterization of wisdom in this context will be a prescription of never changing anything radically. They took a risk and they'll likely make it work just fine in near-term updates despite the embarrassing v1 and then we'll look back and see they have made a great car which wouldn't have existed had they been wiser.
- drakenot 11y agoI didn't take blt's comment about lack of wisdom to mean that he felt that Tesla shouldn't make any radical changes. Just that Tesla was already making radical changes to the drivetrain and and software. It would be prudent to not add unnecessary complexity to a new design with frivoulous things like falcon wing doors. I have no idea how analogous the auto design industry is to the software, but if this was the first version of a new software product I was making, I wouldn't add high risk features at launch which could jeopardize my release when my product is already groundbreaking in its primary function. I'd iterate on next years model after I had a stable base. But, maybe the "wow" factor and the differentiation those high risk features gave Tesla was worth this risk?
- tmptmp 11y ago>>With that in mind, your characterization of wisdom in this context will be a prescription of never changing anything radically. Your parent has said they should not spend too much on "tangential mechanical features". Can you explain what was radical in such features?