4 ms·

You read this story and think it boils down to "hating on Musk"? Which of the story's numbers or claims about SolarCity finances and production do you believe a

by danso 7y ago

You read this story and think it boils down to "hating on Musk"? Which of the story's numbers or claims about SolarCity finances and production do you believe are distorted or misleading?

hi5eyes 7y ago
its difficult to critique tesla/elons decisions without running into the cult of teslemmings making it their personality of defending musk of any wrongdoing
jsharf 7y ago
Perfectly true facts can still create bias, by selectively focusing attention. None of this needs to be wrong or distorted.
- mannykannot 7y ago
  > None of this needs to be wrong or distorted. The perfect defense against truth in any form.
martythemaniak 7y ago
It's more of a meta comment on which stories surface up on Hacker News and other media. The selection of content you get exposed to can matter more than the exact content you consume. I went for dinner to my in-laws a few months ago and my mother-in-law asked if I had heard about the Tesla that caught fire in Shanghai. I said, yeah but did you hear about all the combustion cars that had combusted that day. She had not of course. Didn't even know "normal" cars catch fire. Nothing against her in particular (she had seen it on a mainstream TV news program), I've had similar conversations with coworkers, aquiantances, on social media, etc.
- danso 7y ago
  Genuinely curious: how did you identify this story as being low value? The Shanghai anecdote to me seems self-evidently low value (since the incidence of car fires is still rare, and individual incidents have low impact). But this story's headline (on the article page) alleges serious misconduct, as well as financial problems/shortfalls that unavoidably impact Tesla.
  - olau 7y ago
    Red flags for me were language and sources. The writer didn't try to test her assumptions, as far as I can tell. I think it's true that Musk went in and tried to save SolarCity by assuming control and changing the course. That was news at the time where it happened. He did the same to Tesla, actually. It's also true that he's always talking about visions.
    - danso 7y ago
      What do you have in mind in terms of the writer needing to test her assumptions? I don't know what that means, both in terms of the assumptions that she's obligated to test, or what that "test" would look like in the article.
      - kjksf 7y ago
        Here's an example of an assumption she could have tested (as opposed to re-printing as a quote). The headline of this article starts with: "He (Musk) is full of shit". Why? Because that's a quote from a single person she interviewed, who is a disgruntled ex-employee of Tesla with a history of ranging against Tesla and Musk (to quote the article "Since then, he had taken to sending Elon Musk emails and point-blank tweets, describing the pain the layoffs were causing."). (as a total aside, if you've heard about a laid off low-level employee angrily tweeting and e-mailing a CEO of Fortune 500 company (116 to be exact) you would probably think "an unstable person" not "a good subject expert to interview"). Instead of treating "Musk is full of shit" as a fact, she should could ask herself "is Musk really full of shit"? Should could do it by asking more people what they think about Musk, more Tesla employees, including those that are still happily employed. This article is clearly sourced from the most vocal, the most virulent Tesla haters (the self-proclaimed members of $TSLAQ on Twitter). You can easily find even more people very happy with Tesla's products and I'm sure there are plenty of employees who think highly of Musk. But it's clearly a hit piece, not interested in presenting a balanced account. The part about Walmart lawsuit doesn't mention Tesla's response (which paints Walmart in a very bad light) or subsequent joint statement from Walmart and Tesla where they make nice.
  - 7y ago
- cma 7y ago
  After the Shanghai fire Tesla did an over the air update to lower the cars’ capacity by charging to a lower voltage. Your uninformed mother-in-law may have actually had a better handle on things by not being a major fan and not internalizing the Tesla PR response.

by danso 7y ago

You read this story and think it boils down to "hating on Musk"? Which of the story's numbers or claims about SolarCity finances and production do you believe are distorted or misleading?

hi5eyes 7y ago

its difficult to critique tesla/elons decisions without running into the cult of teslemmings making it their personality of defending musk of any wrongdoing

jsharf 7y ago

Perfectly true facts can still create bias, by selectively focusing attention. None of this needs to be wrong or distorted.

mannykannot 7y ago
> None of this needs to be wrong or distorted. The perfect defense against truth in any form.

martythemaniak 7y ago

It's more of a meta comment on which stories surface up on Hacker News and other media. The selection of content you get exposed to can matter more than the exact content you consume. I went for dinner to my in-laws a few months ago and my mother-in-law asked if I had heard about the Tesla that caught fire in Shanghai. I said, yeah but did you hear about all the combustion cars that had combusted that day. She had not of course. Didn't even know "normal" cars catch fire. Nothing against her in particular (she had seen it on a mainstream TV news program), I've had similar conversations with coworkers, aquiantances, on social media, etc.

danso 7y ago
Genuinely curious: how did you identify this story as being low value? The Shanghai anecdote to me seems self-evidently low value (since the incidence of car fires is still rare, and individual incidents have low impact). But this story's headline (on the article page) alleges serious misconduct, as well as financial problems/shortfalls that unavoidably impact Tesla.
- olau 7y ago
  Red flags for me were language and sources. The writer didn't try to test her assumptions, as far as I can tell. I think it's true that Musk went in and tried to save SolarCity by assuming control and changing the course. That was news at the time where it happened. He did the same to Tesla, actually. It's also true that he's always talking about visions.
  - danso 7y ago
    What do you have in mind in terms of the writer needing to test her assumptions? I don't know what that means, both in terms of the assumptions that she's obligated to test, or what that "test" would look like in the article.
    - kjksf 7y ago
      Here's an example of an assumption she could have tested (as opposed to re-printing as a quote). The headline of this article starts with: "He (Musk) is full of shit". Why? Because that's a quote from a single person she interviewed, who is a disgruntled ex-employee of Tesla with a history of ranging against Tesla and Musk (to quote the article "Since then, he had taken to sending Elon Musk emails and point-blank tweets, describing the pain the layoffs were causing."). (as a total aside, if you've heard about a laid off low-level employee angrily tweeting and e-mailing a CEO of Fortune 500 company (116 to be exact) you would probably think "an unstable person" not "a good subject expert to interview"). Instead of treating "Musk is full of shit" as a fact, she should could ask herself "is Musk really full of shit"? Should could do it by asking more people what they think about Musk, more Tesla employees, including those that are still happily employed. This article is clearly sourced from the most vocal, the most virulent Tesla haters (the self-proclaimed members of $TSLAQ on Twitter). You can easily find even more people very happy with Tesla's products and I'm sure there are plenty of employees who think highly of Musk. But it's clearly a hit piece, not interested in presenting a balanced account. The part about Walmart lawsuit doesn't mention Tesla's response (which paints Walmart in a very bad light) or subsequent joint statement from Walmart and Tesla where they make nice.
- 7y ago
cma 7y ago
After the Shanghai fire Tesla did an over the air update to lower the cars’ capacity by charging to a lower voltage. Your uninformed mother-in-law may have actually had a better handle on things by not being a major fan and not internalizing the Tesla PR response.