8 ms·

1. Convenience of all electric (start every day w/ "full tank", no oil changes or other regular maintenance) 2a. Social mission of the company/product 2b. Car

1. Convenience of all electric (start every day w/ "full tank", no oil changes or other regular maintenance) 2a. Social mission of the company/product 2b. Carbon footprint per mile driven gets better with age of car, rather than worse like with an ICE. 3. Autopilot 4. FSD hardware ready (even if you don't believe this, it's an advertised feature and may motivate some buyers) 5. No dealing with car salespeople

TekMol 8y ago
So electric+autopilot+online. Are there no other electric cars available? Are they not online? Do they have no autopilot?
- freerobby 8y ago
  The Bolt fits the EV bill if you just need a commuter car. If you want to be able to take a road trip, Tesla is the only serious option. No manufacturer offers anything remotely competitive with Autopilot. Hopefully both of these things change very soon.
  - stephengillie 8y ago
    > No manufacturer offers anything remotely competitive with Autopilot. This is for the better, given the number of collisions occurring with Autopilot engaged or recently engaged. It's too bad the Adaptive Cruise and Autonomous Braking can't be enabled without the Lane Assist. Adaptive Cruise in a Camry Hybrid is a serious benefit and a life-changing amenity. I'm no longer willing to drive cars that don't have Adaptive Cruise.
    - freerobby 8y ago
      > This is for the better, given the number of collisions occurring with Autopilot engaged or recently engaged. I think this is very misguided. Tesla owners aren't suicidal or some big idiot collective. They understand Autopilot's practical intricacies (from experience) better than any other group. They continue to use it because they know it massively reduces driving fatigue. > It's too bad the Adaptive Cruise and Autonomous Braking can't be enabled without the Lane Assist. ACC and emergency braking work just fine without Lane Assist! One pull on the stalk for ACC; two for Autopilot.
      - danso 8y ago
        Do they? https://twitter.com/zedd/status/1002244316087992320 https://twitter.com/zedd/status/1002244316087992320 This person attributes AP to saving his life when he fell asleep at the wheel. But AP is not meant to be some kind of fail-safe for impaired driving. Had he crashed, wouldn't Tesla blame the driver, as they have in every other AP crash?
        freerobby 8y ago
        Look, people fall asleep driving cars every day. People text and drive, eat hamburgers and drive, wear headphones and drive all the time. For whatever reason, when they do this stuff in a Tesla, critics claim that Autopilot made them do it. I don't excuse this behavior from any driver, but all things equal, a driver who does this will fare better with Autopilot than without it. I don't see a contradiction in your questions. Yes, Autopilot appeared to save this person from injury or death. Yes, Tesla would blame him if it hadn't. And yes, they'd be justified in doing so, because it would be his own fault for falling asleep at the wheel. Autopilot, like emergency braking, can mitigate a bad situation. But should it fail, it doesn't relieve you of responsibility for getting yourself into that situation in the first place.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        danso 8y ago
        I agree, people fall asleep (or worse) at the wheel, every day. The vast majority of those people don't die or even crash. So what I take issue with is this: > but all things equal, a driver who does this will fare better with Autopilot than without it. There's no science or evidence for this yet. Tesla has had the opportunity to release data but has declined, to the point where the NHTSA had to disown a misleading stat that Tesla kept citing in the wake of recent crashes: https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-safety-statistics/ https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-safety-statistic... It's not that I have an inherent distrust of automation (being a computer engineer myself), so I don't have a problem with AutoPilot in theory, and I can accept that AP may be better than its current peers. But what Tesla has presented, in lieu of studies and statistics, is a non-falsifiable claim: that AutoPilot increases safety. We already have well-known examples of AP actively steering off the roads, because of ambiguous road paint. But besides those (perhaps relatively few) incidents in which AP arguably caused the crash, we have many instances where AP didn't prevent what seems like easily preventable crashes. Such as the Utah driver who drove 60mph into a parked fire truck. In those cases, I would agree that the driver was an idiot, but the question for overall safety is: does AP result in a net increase of accidents because drivers are too over-confident? In the tweet that I mentioned, that's a guy who clearly has the means to call an Uber. Would he have attempted to drive himself if he didn't have Autopilot? Did AP make it easier for him to doze off? I've had a few instances of highway sleepy driving -- thankfully, the feedback from rumble strips or the rough shoulder was enough to jolt adrenaline in me, and get me to pull off at the next rest stop. AP's advantage seems to be that it will just stay within the lane as you sleep. But there's really no evidence that results in a net increase in safety, if Autopilot emboldens drivers who would've otherwise not tried to drive. The main difference between AP and other safety measures is that, based on Tesla's defenses so far, there is literally no situation in which AP should be assigned blame, because it's ultimately the driver's responsibility. Whereas when an airbag fails to deploy, or just randomly blows up in a driver's face, there can be agreement that the airbag "failed".
  - bonestamp2 8y ago
    Systems from Volvo, BMW and Mercedes are pretty close. Cadillac's system is arguably better than autopilot on the freeway, but it only supports freeways. So, I'm not sure if "remotely" is the right word... there are a few that are pretty close.
asdsa5325 8y ago
> Social mission of the company/product What is your opinion on Elon's plan to "rate" journalists? (He was upset about "unfair" coverage of Tesla.)
- freerobby 8y ago
  Sloppy reporting and bad journalistic incentives are real problems, but Elon's solution is uncharacteristically dumb. Even outright falsehoods can be difficult to refute, let alone subtler varieties like "lies of omission." Few folks will see them for what they are. As for Tesla coverage, my observation is that Elon is usually correct on the merits of his frustrations, but he always responds in the most defensive and tonedeaf way possible. I think he forgets that the people he needs to convince aren't the ones attacking him, but the ones watching from the sidelines. I consider myself a huge fan of his, and the way he comports himself often makes me sad. My biggest pet peeve is that sometimes he'll cite a half-truth rather than a real truth, even when the real truth is on his side. His defense of Autopilot is a good example -- the data showing that Autopilot reduced crashes by 40% is very compelling, but he continues to cite the 1:340M miles stat which at best has a bunch of lurking variables. I understand why he does it -- it's easier to explain and it provides a baseline against the field rather than against Tesla's pre-AP vehicles. But it's dishonest, which is a bad look, especially when you're getting all pissy at the media for its dishonesty.
- throwaway5752 8y ago
  For better or worse, in a $50ish billion dollar company with the short position that TSLA has, there is a lot of working the refs, as far as the press goes. He's doing it embarassingly clumsily, but he's wise to be aggressive about it.

TekMol 8y ago

So electric+autopilot+online. Are there no other electric cars available? Are they not online? Do they have no autopilot?

freerobby 8y ago
The Bolt fits the EV bill if you just need a commuter car. If you want to be able to take a road trip, Tesla is the only serious option. No manufacturer offers anything remotely competitive with Autopilot. Hopefully both of these things change very soon.
- stephengillie 8y ago
  > No manufacturer offers anything remotely competitive with Autopilot. This is for the better, given the number of collisions occurring with Autopilot engaged or recently engaged. It's too bad the Adaptive Cruise and Autonomous Braking can't be enabled without the Lane Assist. Adaptive Cruise in a Camry Hybrid is a serious benefit and a life-changing amenity. I'm no longer willing to drive cars that don't have Adaptive Cruise.
  - freerobby 8y ago
    > This is for the better, given the number of collisions occurring with Autopilot engaged or recently engaged. I think this is very misguided. Tesla owners aren't suicidal or some big idiot collective. They understand Autopilot's practical intricacies (from experience) better than any other group. They continue to use it because they know it massively reduces driving fatigue. > It's too bad the Adaptive Cruise and Autonomous Braking can't be enabled without the Lane Assist. ACC and emergency braking work just fine without Lane Assist! One pull on the stalk for ACC; two for Autopilot.
    - danso 8y ago
      Do they? https://twitter.com/zedd/status/1002244316087992320 https://twitter.com/zedd/status/1002244316087992320 This person attributes AP to saving his life when he fell asleep at the wheel. But AP is not meant to be some kind of fail-safe for impaired driving. Had he crashed, wouldn't Tesla blame the driver, as they have in every other AP crash?
      - freerobby 8y ago
        Look, people fall asleep driving cars every day. People text and drive, eat hamburgers and drive, wear headphones and drive all the time. For whatever reason, when they do this stuff in a Tesla, critics claim that Autopilot made them do it. I don't excuse this behavior from any driver, but all things equal, a driver who does this will fare better with Autopilot than without it. I don't see a contradiction in your questions. Yes, Autopilot appeared to save this person from injury or death. Yes, Tesla would blame him if it hadn't. And yes, they'd be justified in doing so, because it would be his own fault for falling asleep at the wheel. Autopilot, like emergency braking, can mitigate a bad situation. But should it fail, it doesn't relieve you of responsibility for getting yourself into that situation in the first place.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
        danso 8y ago
        I agree, people fall asleep (or worse) at the wheel, every day. The vast majority of those people don't die or even crash. So what I take issue with is this: > but all things equal, a driver who does this will fare better with Autopilot than without it. There's no science or evidence for this yet. Tesla has had the opportunity to release data but has declined, to the point where the NHTSA had to disown a misleading stat that Tesla kept citing in the wake of recent crashes: https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-safety-statistics/ https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-safety-statistic... It's not that I have an inherent distrust of automation (being a computer engineer myself), so I don't have a problem with AutoPilot in theory, and I can accept that AP may be better than its current peers. But what Tesla has presented, in lieu of studies and statistics, is a non-falsifiable claim: that AutoPilot increases safety. We already have well-known examples of AP actively steering off the roads, because of ambiguous road paint. But besides those (perhaps relatively few) incidents in which AP arguably caused the crash, we have many instances where AP didn't prevent what seems like easily preventable crashes. Such as the Utah driver who drove 60mph into a parked fire truck. In those cases, I would agree that the driver was an idiot, but the question for overall safety is: does AP result in a net increase of accidents because drivers are too over-confident? In the tweet that I mentioned, that's a guy who clearly has the means to call an Uber. Would he have attempted to drive himself if he didn't have Autopilot? Did AP make it easier for him to doze off? I've had a few instances of highway sleepy driving -- thankfully, the feedback from rumble strips or the rough shoulder was enough to jolt adrenaline in me, and get me to pull off at the next rest stop. AP's advantage seems to be that it will just stay within the lane as you sleep. But there's really no evidence that results in a net increase in safety, if Autopilot emboldens drivers who would've otherwise not tried to drive. The main difference between AP and other safety measures is that, based on Tesla's defenses so far, there is literally no situation in which AP should be assigned blame, because it's ultimately the driver's responsibility. Whereas when an airbag fails to deploy, or just randomly blows up in a driver's face, there can be agreement that the airbag "failed".
- bonestamp2 8y ago
  Systems from Volvo, BMW and Mercedes are pretty close. Cadillac's system is arguably better than autopilot on the freeway, but it only supports freeways. So, I'm not sure if "remotely" is the right word... there are a few that are pretty close.

asdsa5325 8y ago

> Social mission of the company/product What is your opinion on Elon's plan to "rate" journalists? (He was upset about "unfair" coverage of Tesla.)

freerobby 8y ago
Sloppy reporting and bad journalistic incentives are real problems, but Elon's solution is uncharacteristically dumb. Even outright falsehoods can be difficult to refute, let alone subtler varieties like "lies of omission." Few folks will see them for what they are. As for Tesla coverage, my observation is that Elon is usually correct on the merits of his frustrations, but he always responds in the most defensive and tonedeaf way possible. I think he forgets that the people he needs to convince aren't the ones attacking him, but the ones watching from the sidelines. I consider myself a huge fan of his, and the way he comports himself often makes me sad. My biggest pet peeve is that sometimes he'll cite a half-truth rather than a real truth, even when the real truth is on his side. His defense of Autopilot is a good example -- the data showing that Autopilot reduced crashes by 40% is very compelling, but he continues to cite the 1:340M miles stat which at best has a bunch of lurking variables. I understand why he does it -- it's easier to explain and it provides a baseline against the field rather than against Tesla's pre-AP vehicles. But it's dishonest, which is a bad look, especially when you're getting all pissy at the media for its dishonesty.
throwaway5752 8y ago
For better or worse, in a $50ish billion dollar company with the short position that TSLA has, there is a lot of working the refs, as far as the press goes. He's doing it embarassingly clumsily, but he's wise to be aggressive about it.