3 ms·

People want EV transportation because the world population is at risk. So they cut some slack to Tesla. Tesla makes compelling vehicles even if flawed. It's ok

People want EV transportation because the world population is at risk. So they cut some slack to Tesla. Tesla makes compelling vehicles even if flawed. It's ok because it's a step in the right direction. Nothing wrong with that, or is it wrong to have ideals?

pclmulqdq 4y ago
People want point of care testing, and everyone is at risk of dying of cancer. Theranos makes compelling equipment even if it is a little rough around the edges. It's ok because it's a step in the right direction. Nothing wrong with that, or is it wrong to have ideals? Oh wait...
- oxplot 4y ago
  What a disingenuous analogy to make, between Tesla that has delivered time and time again and surpassed expectations, led the market for the past 10 years and continues to outsell all of its century old competitors, with Theranos which burnt investor money and never produced a working machine, ever.
  - Planktonne 4y ago
    > Tesla that has delivered time and time again and surpassed expectations Tesla has consistently failed to meet the expectations set by its own management.
    - oxplot 4y ago
      It's called aiming high!
      - dmitriid 4y ago
        "We want FSD some day and are working on it" is aiming high. Calling it's driver assist Autopilot, calling its software FSD, repeatedly saying "FSD is coming next year" is overpromising, misleading marketing and lying
      - oxplot 4y ago
        > Calling it's driver assist Autopilot, calling its software FSD, repeatedly saying "FSD is coming next year" is overpromising, misleading marketing and lying OK, finally an actual example and the one I expected. TL;DR is that if Tesla was in fact doing anything the regulators found to be hurting the customers, they would be forcing Tesla to make changes (and they have re FSD in some minor ways). It's fun to make a big deal about nothing but no one is buying FSD and thinking, Tesla robbed me $10K. They get it, play with it, it doesn't do what they promised, they can get a refund for the FSD package, and even a full refund for the entire car. People tend to keep their Teslas, so that's a non issue. Majority of people don't buy Teslas for promise of FSD (in fact, most don't even believe it). They buy it because right now, it's a great car. As far as delivering great cars is concerned (which is the vast majority of cases), Tesla has delivered time and again. Also, Tesla has never lied about FSD, only missing deadlines. If anything, their progress has shown anything but any attempt to lie to customers. They are moving as fast as they can and no one in the industry comes close. I'll be happy to see, for once, someone talk about misleading marketing about anything but FSD. You can take FSD away any day and it won't make a blip of difference to Tesla's sales or margins.
        pclmulqdq 4y ago
        I'll do it. The ranges of the cars are exaggerated, in a way that makes them look more attractive in the market compared to other EVs: https://auto.hindustantimes.com/auto/cars/tesla-revises-exaggerated-claims-of-model-3-range-in-this-country-41645164299137.html https://auto.hindustantimes.com/auto/cars/tesla-revises-exag... https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a33824052/adjustment-factor-tesla-uses-for-big-epa-range-numbers/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a33824052/adjustment-f... Also, regulators are catching up to "FSD" in many places, but they work slowly. They are also catching up on the promised ranges - unlike "mpg," there is no standard by which the range of an EV is required to be evaluated. All of these rules take a LONG time to put in place. As far as a refund on the package is concerned, I'm not sure you can actually get one. A friend of mine paid the $10k as a "line jumping fee" to get his car 4 months earlier, and I assume that most informed buyers treat the FSD package the same.
        4y ago
- ben_w 4y ago
  The problem with that, is that “Theranos makes compelling equipment even if it is a little rough around the edges. It's ok because it's a step in the right direction.” wasn’t true, and that’s why Elizabeth Holmes was convicted for fraud. Now, I’m not happy that Tesla is still calling the driving assistance software “autopilot” given some governments are criticising this name choice as misleading, but it’s not like the (limited and not ready) software is completely fictional — it can actually get people from A to B by itself, even if though it really isn’t at the quality level where this is a generally wise replacement for most humans, but only for, e.g. impaired humans in a medical emergency and even then it’s really only sane on highways (old story, but probably still illustrative based on the published safety statistics): https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/08/tesla-model-x-missouri-medical-emergency https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/08/tesla-mod... However, considering Tesla as an EV company rather than as an AI company: it does what it says on the tin. There’s no secret gasoline tank hiding inside the batteries.
  - pclmulqdq 4y ago
    It was true. They had 2-3 working tests running on their machines by the end of the company. They sold over 100. In my mind, this is the same as advertising "the human is only there for liability reasons" on an L2 ADAS system. As to what Tesla is, the moment people accept that it's an EV company, I will be happy. The market currently does not, largely due to the insane promises of the company's CEO. Let's not forget that Elizabeth Holmes was acquitted of defrauding patients. She was convicted of defrauding investors. What's the difference?
    - avgDev 4y ago
      Theranos defrauded investors. Lied about their product and NEVER delivered on what was promised.

pclmulqdq 4y ago

People want point of care testing, and everyone is at risk of dying of cancer. Theranos makes compelling equipment even if it is a little rough around the edges. It's ok because it's a step in the right direction. Nothing wrong with that, or is it wrong to have ideals? Oh wait...

oxplot 4y ago
What a disingenuous analogy to make, between Tesla that has delivered time and time again and surpassed expectations, led the market for the past 10 years and continues to outsell all of its century old competitors, with Theranos which burnt investor money and never produced a working machine, ever.
- Planktonne 4y ago
  > Tesla that has delivered time and time again and surpassed expectations Tesla has consistently failed to meet the expectations set by its own management.
  - oxplot 4y ago
    It's called aiming high!
    - dmitriid 4y ago
      "We want FSD some day and are working on it" is aiming high. Calling it's driver assist Autopilot, calling its software FSD, repeatedly saying "FSD is coming next year" is overpromising, misleading marketing and lying
    - oxplot 4y ago
      > Calling it's driver assist Autopilot, calling its software FSD, repeatedly saying "FSD is coming next year" is overpromising, misleading marketing and lying OK, finally an actual example and the one I expected. TL;DR is that if Tesla was in fact doing anything the regulators found to be hurting the customers, they would be forcing Tesla to make changes (and they have re FSD in some minor ways). It's fun to make a big deal about nothing but no one is buying FSD and thinking, Tesla robbed me $10K. They get it, play with it, it doesn't do what they promised, they can get a refund for the FSD package, and even a full refund for the entire car. People tend to keep their Teslas, so that's a non issue. Majority of people don't buy Teslas for promise of FSD (in fact, most don't even believe it). They buy it because right now, it's a great car. As far as delivering great cars is concerned (which is the vast majority of cases), Tesla has delivered time and again. Also, Tesla has never lied about FSD, only missing deadlines. If anything, their progress has shown anything but any attempt to lie to customers. They are moving as fast as they can and no one in the industry comes close. I'll be happy to see, for once, someone talk about misleading marketing about anything but FSD. You can take FSD away any day and it won't make a blip of difference to Tesla's sales or margins.
      - pclmulqdq 4y ago
        I'll do it. The ranges of the cars are exaggerated, in a way that makes them look more attractive in the market compared to other EVs: https://auto.hindustantimes.com/auto/cars/tesla-revises-exaggerated-claims-of-model-3-range-in-this-country-41645164299137.html https://auto.hindustantimes.com/auto/cars/tesla-revises-exag... https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a33824052/adjustment-factor-tesla-uses-for-big-epa-range-numbers/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a33824052/adjustment-f... Also, regulators are catching up to "FSD" in many places, but they work slowly. They are also catching up on the promised ranges - unlike "mpg," there is no standard by which the range of an EV is required to be evaluated. All of these rules take a LONG time to put in place. As far as a refund on the package is concerned, I'm not sure you can actually get one. A friend of mine paid the $10k as a "line jumping fee" to get his car 4 months earlier, and I assume that most informed buyers treat the FSD package the same.
        4y ago
ben_w 4y ago
The problem with that, is that “Theranos makes compelling equipment even if it is a little rough around the edges. It's ok because it's a step in the right direction.” wasn’t true, and that’s why Elizabeth Holmes was convicted for fraud. Now, I’m not happy that Tesla is still calling the driving assistance software “autopilot” given some governments are criticising this name choice as misleading, but it’s not like the (limited and not ready) software is completely fictional — it can actually get people from A to B by itself, even if though it really isn’t at the quality level where this is a generally wise replacement for most humans, but only for, e.g. impaired humans in a medical emergency and even then it’s really only sane on highways (old story, but probably still illustrative based on the published safety statistics): https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/08/tesla-model-x-missouri-medical-emergency https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/08/tesla-mod... However, considering Tesla as an EV company rather than as an AI company: it does what it says on the tin. There’s no secret gasoline tank hiding inside the batteries.
- pclmulqdq 4y ago
  It was true. They had 2-3 working tests running on their machines by the end of the company. They sold over 100. In my mind, this is the same as advertising "the human is only there for liability reasons" on an L2 ADAS system. As to what Tesla is, the moment people accept that it's an EV company, I will be happy. The market currently does not, largely due to the insane promises of the company's CEO. Let's not forget that Elizabeth Holmes was acquitted of defrauding patients. She was convicted of defrauding investors. What's the difference?
  - avgDev 4y ago
    Theranos defrauded investors. Lied about their product and NEVER delivered on what was promised.