5 ms·

Tesla releases teaser for new Model Y

26 points by dmitri1981 9y ago

erikb 9y ago
The image is supposed to be a teaser?
- jameskilton 9y ago
  Yes. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/teaser https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/teaser
  - erikb 9y ago
    What I'm saying is: It does neither tease nor arouse interest. So neither definition is fulfilled.
LeifCarrotson 9y ago
We've got the model S, the model E/3, the model X, and now the model Y. It seems they've neglected a critical tenet of naming systems: Preserving expandability for future models. I mean, what model comes next?
- castis 9y ago
  100% shot in the dark; the line up is currently SEXY so whatever letters or words can be tacked onto that is probably what the next models will be.
  - rainbowmverse 9y ago
    Predictions: Model B Model I Model P Model A Model N
    - thebiglebrewski 9y ago
      SEXYBIPAN?
    - mason240 9y ago
      Model A is probably out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_A_(1927%E2%80%9331) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_A_(1927%E2%80%9331)
      - schwap 9y ago
        Also Model T, of course. But interestingly, there was also a Ford Model S as well (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_N https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_N)
  - frandroid 9y ago
    He's just going to start spelling out his ex's name.
- jshevek 9y ago
  Now that they have the adjective, they could start spelling any noun they wanted.
- wil421 9y ago
  Obviously they are trying for SEXY. They were not able to use Model E because Ford still owns the trademark. http://fortune.com/2014/05/07/tesla-drops-model-e-trademark-but-ford-hangs-on/ http://fortune.com/2014/05/07/tesla-drops-model-e-trademark-...
- ianai 9y ago
  Like other car manufacturers they might just go by model years.
babyrainbow 9y ago
Somebody called these companies as being some kind of fraud , in an earlier post, with some compelling arguments (for me ofcourse). But I think it was quickly downvoted and got disappeared... https://dissention.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/the-business-model-of-spacex-is-a-quintessentially-american-fraud/ https://dissention.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/the-business-mod...
- geon 9y ago
  That article has roughly one logical fallacy per sentence.
- dtparr 9y ago
  Perhaps you could discuss why you think their points are compelling? Looking through them, they seem to mostly be the author's opinions without any real research or evidence, and some seem to be counter-factual. As a couple examples - 1) it talks about how engine refurbishment is a pipe dream, but the only evidence is that 'rockets are hard' basically, and that the Russians didn't do it. But while the shuttle wasn't exactly a model of cheap refurbishment, the RS-25s that were the main engines flew an average of nearly 9 missions each, and some were more (not sure what the most was). That's in addition to all the test fires, of course. So, reasonable people can argue how reliable/cheap the refurbishment process will end up being, but the assertion that we can't go from the SSMEs to a reasonably cost-effective refurbishment of an engine that can fly 10-20 times after 30 years of progress and that they're a fraud requires a bit more evidence/analysis. 2) The assertion that 'almost nobody outside the USA' will use SpaceX seems odd given that their next launch is for a company from Bulgaria. And they've previously launched for customers in the UK, Thailand, Luxembourg, Japan, France, and Turkmenistan in just the past year. Maybe the author meant national payloads from other countries? If so, sure, SpaceX probably won't be launching Russian or Chinese Spy Satellites, but meh?
  - babyrainbow 9y ago
    > author's opinions without any real research or evidence... Not everything need to be a research or evidence to be compelling. It is just some new thought, some new possibilities, that I find interesting. >only evidence is that 'rockets are hard' basically, and that the Russians didn't do it.. Well, basically the idea is that if a company can do it without any technological breakthrough, then what is limiting others(Russians?) in the same field? Do these other competitors are not smart enough they couldn't see the possibility, but the average HN or reedit user can see? Just questions.. >30 years of progress This imply that there is a steady rate of progress. >The assertion that 'almost nobody outside the USA' will use SpaceX seems odd given that their next launch is for a company from Bulgaria. The assertion is that "almost"..May be the authors point is that It cannot expect a major income from outside...The next launch is from Bulgaria does not contradict it..I mean, if you are really impartial..

26 points by dmitri1981 9y ago

erikb 9y ago

The image is supposed to be a teaser?

jameskilton 9y ago
Yes. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/teaser https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/teaser
- erikb 9y ago
  What I'm saying is: It does neither tease nor arouse interest. So neither definition is fulfilled.

LeifCarrotson 9y ago

We've got the model S, the model E/3, the model X, and now the model Y. It seems they've neglected a critical tenet of naming systems: Preserving expandability for future models. I mean, what model comes next?

castis 9y ago
100% shot in the dark; the line up is currently SEXY so whatever letters or words can be tacked onto that is probably what the next models will be.
- rainbowmverse 9y ago
  Predictions: Model B Model I Model P Model A Model N
  - thebiglebrewski 9y ago
    SEXYBIPAN?
  - mason240 9y ago
    Model A is probably out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_A_(1927%E2%80%9331) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_A_(1927%E2%80%9331)
    - schwap 9y ago
      Also Model T, of course. But interestingly, there was also a Ford Model S as well (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_N https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_N)
- frandroid 9y ago
  He's just going to start spelling out his ex's name.
jshevek 9y ago
Now that they have the adjective, they could start spelling any noun they wanted.
wil421 9y ago
Obviously they are trying for SEXY. They were not able to use Model E because Ford still owns the trademark. http://fortune.com/2014/05/07/tesla-drops-model-e-trademark-but-ford-hangs-on/ http://fortune.com/2014/05/07/tesla-drops-model-e-trademark-...
ianai 9y ago
Like other car manufacturers they might just go by model years.

babyrainbow 9y ago

Somebody called these companies as being some kind of fraud , in an earlier post, with some compelling arguments (for me ofcourse). But I think it was quickly downvoted and got disappeared... https://dissention.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/the-business-model-of-spacex-is-a-quintessentially-american-fraud/ https://dissention.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/the-business-mod...

geon 9y ago
That article has roughly one logical fallacy per sentence.
dtparr 9y ago
Perhaps you could discuss why you think their points are compelling? Looking through them, they seem to mostly be the author's opinions without any real research or evidence, and some seem to be counter-factual. As a couple examples - 1) it talks about how engine refurbishment is a pipe dream, but the only evidence is that 'rockets are hard' basically, and that the Russians didn't do it. But while the shuttle wasn't exactly a model of cheap refurbishment, the RS-25s that were the main engines flew an average of nearly 9 missions each, and some were more (not sure what the most was). That's in addition to all the test fires, of course. So, reasonable people can argue how reliable/cheap the refurbishment process will end up being, but the assertion that we can't go from the SSMEs to a reasonably cost-effective refurbishment of an engine that can fly 10-20 times after 30 years of progress and that they're a fraud requires a bit more evidence/analysis. 2) The assertion that 'almost nobody outside the USA' will use SpaceX seems odd given that their next launch is for a company from Bulgaria. And they've previously launched for customers in the UK, Thailand, Luxembourg, Japan, France, and Turkmenistan in just the past year. Maybe the author meant national payloads from other countries? If so, sure, SpaceX probably won't be launching Russian or Chinese Spy Satellites, but meh?
- babyrainbow 9y ago
  > author's opinions without any real research or evidence... Not everything need to be a research or evidence to be compelling. It is just some new thought, some new possibilities, that I find interesting. >only evidence is that 'rockets are hard' basically, and that the Russians didn't do it.. Well, basically the idea is that if a company can do it without any technological breakthrough, then what is limiting others(Russians?) in the same field? Do these other competitors are not smart enough they couldn't see the possibility, but the average HN or reedit user can see? Just questions.. >30 years of progress This imply that there is a steady rate of progress. >The assertion that 'almost nobody outside the USA' will use SpaceX seems odd given that their next launch is for a company from Bulgaria. The assertion is that "almost"..May be the authors point is that It cannot expect a major income from outside...The next launch is from Bulgaria does not contradict it..I mean, if you are really impartial..