4 ms·

While I think Tesla should be transparent, this article doesn't really make sure it is comparing apples to apples either. I think its weird to characterize it

While I think Tesla should be transparent, this article doesn't really make sure it is comparing apples to apples either. I think its weird to characterize it as legitimate and the say "Go Tesla convince me ohterwise" as if the same audience would ever be reached by Tesla or people would care to do their due diligence.

AlexandrB 9mo ago
Tesla (Elon Musk really) has a long history of distorting the stats or outright lying about their self driving capabilities and safety. The fact that folks would be skeptical of any evidence Tesla provided in this case is a self-inflicted problem and well-deserved.
- k4rli 9mo ago
  He did promise his electric trucks to be more cost-effective than trains (still nothing in 2026...). And "world's fastest supercar". And full self-driving by "next year" in 2015. None of these are offered in 2026. There have never been truthful statements from his companies, only hype & fluff for monetary gains.
  - ryandrake 9mo ago
    There used to be [EDIT: still is] a website[1] that listed all of Musk's promises and predictions about his businesses and showed you how long it's been since he said the promise would materialize. It's full of mostly old statements, probably because it's impossible to keep up with the amount of content being generated monthly. 1: https://elonmusk.today https://elonmusk.today
Forgeties79 9mo ago
It’s not weird. They have a history of over promising to the point that one could say they just straight up lie on a regular basis. The bar is higher for them because they have abused the public’s trust and it has to be earned again. The results have to speak for Tesla very loudly and very clearly. And so far they don’t.
- LunicLynx 9mo ago
  But this is more your feelings than actually factual. I mean sure you can say that the timelines did slip a lot but that doesn’t really have anything to with the rest that is insinuated here. I would argue a timeline slipping doesn’t mean you go about killing people and lie about it next. I would even go so far as to say that the timelines did slip to exactly avoid that.
  - epistasis 9mo ago
    That's not "feelings" that's reputational data. Tesla continues to overpromise, about safety, about timelines that slip due to safety. We should be a bit more hard nosed and data based when dealing with these things rather than dismissing the core question due to "feelings" and due to Tesla not releasing the sort of data tha allows fair analysis b
  - close04 9mo ago
    > a timeline slipping You're generous with your words to the point they sound like apologism. Musk has been promising fully autonomous driving "within 1-3 years" since 2013. And he's been charging customers money for that promise for just as long. Timelines keep slipping for more than half of the company's existence now, that's not a slipup anymore. Tesla has never been transparent with the data on which they base their claims of safety and performance of the system. They tout some nice looking numbers but when anyone like the NHTSA requests the real data they refuse to provide it. When NHTSA shows you numbers, they're lying. If I tell you I have evidence Tesla is lying you'll tell me to show it or STFU. When Tesla does the same after so many people died, you go all soft and claim everyone else is lying. That's very one sided behavior, more about feelings than facts. > But this is more your feelings than actually factual. The article is about "NHTSA crash data, combined with Tesla’s new disclosure of robotaxi mileage". Sounds factual enough. If Tesla is sitting on a trove of data that proves otherwise but refuse to publish it that's on them. If anyone is about the feels and not the facts here, it's you.
    - LunicLynx 8mo ago
      But these are not facts it’s your assumptions on the matter. Even the already included escape route. > If I tell you I have evidence Tesla is lying you'll tell me to show it or STFU. I mean I wouldn’t choose those words but yes. Yes, you have to prove it, because you state it as a fact. Innocent until proven guilty. There is a reason to this phrase.

AlexandrB 9mo ago

Tesla (Elon Musk really) has a long history of distorting the stats or outright lying about their self driving capabilities and safety. The fact that folks would be skeptical of any evidence Tesla provided in this case is a self-inflicted problem and well-deserved.

k4rli 9mo ago
He did promise his electric trucks to be more cost-effective than trains (still nothing in 2026...). And "world's fastest supercar". And full self-driving by "next year" in 2015. None of these are offered in 2026. There have never been truthful statements from his companies, only hype & fluff for monetary gains.
- ryandrake 9mo ago
  There used to be [EDIT: still is] a website[1] that listed all of Musk's promises and predictions about his businesses and showed you how long it's been since he said the promise would materialize. It's full of mostly old statements, probably because it's impossible to keep up with the amount of content being generated monthly. 1: https://elonmusk.today https://elonmusk.today

Forgeties79 9mo ago

It’s not weird. They have a history of over promising to the point that one could say they just straight up lie on a regular basis. The bar is higher for them because they have abused the public’s trust and it has to be earned again. The results have to speak for Tesla very loudly and very clearly. And so far they don’t.

LunicLynx 9mo ago
But this is more your feelings than actually factual. I mean sure you can say that the timelines did slip a lot but that doesn’t really have anything to with the rest that is insinuated here. I would argue a timeline slipping doesn’t mean you go about killing people and lie about it next. I would even go so far as to say that the timelines did slip to exactly avoid that.
- epistasis 9mo ago
  That's not "feelings" that's reputational data. Tesla continues to overpromise, about safety, about timelines that slip due to safety. We should be a bit more hard nosed and data based when dealing with these things rather than dismissing the core question due to "feelings" and due to Tesla not releasing the sort of data tha allows fair analysis b
- close04 9mo ago
  > a timeline slipping You're generous with your words to the point they sound like apologism. Musk has been promising fully autonomous driving "within 1-3 years" since 2013. And he's been charging customers money for that promise for just as long. Timelines keep slipping for more than half of the company's existence now, that's not a slipup anymore. Tesla has never been transparent with the data on which they base their claims of safety and performance of the system. They tout some nice looking numbers but when anyone like the NHTSA requests the real data they refuse to provide it. When NHTSA shows you numbers, they're lying. If I tell you I have evidence Tesla is lying you'll tell me to show it or STFU. When Tesla does the same after so many people died, you go all soft and claim everyone else is lying. That's very one sided behavior, more about feelings than facts. > But this is more your feelings than actually factual. The article is about "NHTSA crash data, combined with Tesla’s new disclosure of robotaxi mileage". Sounds factual enough. If Tesla is sitting on a trove of data that proves otherwise but refuse to publish it that's on them. If anyone is about the feels and not the facts here, it's you.
  - LunicLynx 8mo ago
    But these are not facts it’s your assumptions on the matter. Even the already included escape route. > If I tell you I have evidence Tesla is lying you'll tell me to show it or STFU. I mean I wouldn’t choose those words but yes. Yes, you have to prove it, because you state it as a fact. Innocent until proven guilty. There is a reason to this phrase.