5 ms·

I'm no Musk fanboy but I think this kind of maximally cynical take is tiresome. They thought it would work, they expended significant engineering effort and mon

by habitue 5mo ago

I'm no Musk fanboy but I think this kind of maximally cynical take is tiresome. They thought it would work, they expended significant engineering effort and money making it real and producing it and selling it to customers. The simplest explanation is that they did all that and the market didn't want it. The economics of traditional panels outweighed the aesthetic advantages of tiles and they're pivoting. No conspiracy or fraud need be invoked.

xingped 5mo ago
You're not entirely wrong on it being a maximally cynical take, but I think it depends on where the idea originated. Yes, they expended a lot on engineering to make it real, but you can do that with any idea. I think what matters was if it was a feasible idea put forth from a reasonable source or if it was another grand delusion from Musk that everyone just had to make as real as possible despite their own misgivings on the idea.
- queenkjuul 5mo ago
  Imo basically this, the attempt to make it work is downstream of musk deciding it had to be attempted. Musk can decide to spend money on a project whether or not it's genuine or feasible. This seems a clear cut case of musk designing a bad product and engineers doing their best to implement it despite the nonsensical constraints
alfiedotwtf 5mo ago
Of course the market wanted it. I wanted it. My friends wanted it. But we couldn’t buy it because it was vapourware ! From this to self-driving cars in 2 years to tunnels that will change public transport… maybe Musk should prototype and see what’s actually possible before telling the market. I mean come on - it’s borderline fraud in order to pump stocks - there’s got to be stockholders that are forming class actions as we speak
- SXX 5mo ago
  Both self driving craze and car tunnel madness is only possible at all because how car centric US mindset is. If you even try to suggest that people could instead use good public transport and pedestrian infrastructure they would look at you like you are some sort of crazy. Musk just takes car centric society pipe dreams and sell it back to them. Like OMG you transiting to work and can safely stay in your phone 99% of time. In other countries this called train or a bus. Solved in London with 1863 tech.
  - hvb2 5mo ago
    While i kinda agree with you, it doesn't fly for most US cities. Most US cities aren't dense at all. A lot of them were built with transportation in mind. London and European cities in general are so much older that their city centers have no real way to accommodate that. So what do you do? You provide non car options. Technically they exist in US cities too, but especially on the west coast they're just not a viable alternative. Nobody who can choose will take a 2 hour public transit trip over a 20 minute drive. Heck, in a lot of cases biking might be faster than your transit option, albeit riskier
    - SXX 5mo ago
      While there is obviously no one easy solution for every city situation could easily be improved in a lot of them if there was political will. At least it would be 1000% more sane than pitching underground car tunnels. It obviously take decades not years, but again Tesla full self driving was promissed back in 2016 and something tells me it would be a big success if it will be deployed on scale in 2036.
      - hvb2 5mo ago
        People don't want to change. In the us on the west coast I would say that public transit has a bit of a stigma. You don't use it unless you have to. Couldn't be more different in the big European cities, using a car there is (made) cumbersome.
    - 5mo ago
oliwarner 5mo ago
> They thought it would work That's the problem though. Thinking your product will get by on looks when it's clearly outcompeted on performance, price, availability and longevity. That's not just optimism, it's delusion.
- cheschire 5mo ago
  Pretty sure this didn’t help either though: > Customer service complaints are pervasive and consistent. Tesla Energy has a 2.6 out of 5 rating on SolarReviews
  - pathartl 5mo ago
    Yeah, there's some tubers out there that have absolutely scathing reviews for their customer ervice.
- HighGoldstein 5mo ago
  > That's the problem though. Thinking your product will get by on looks when it's clearly outcompeted on performance, price, availability and longevity. That's not just optimism, it's delusion. May I present to you the Apple corporation, at least until recently.
- panick21_ 5mo ago
  I don't think it was clear that it would be out compete on price or performance. If you compare roof + solor to solar roof, the idea was that eventually it would compete with doing both separately. I'm also not sure if its actually worse on longevity.
  - oliwarner 5mo ago
    It seems fairly clear if you consider a 50-100 year roof (ours is 150 years, and it's only had membrane changes in that time) against a 25 year roof. I'm sure the steel shingle will last a fair time but if the PV elements need replacing four times a century, that's not a non-trivial cost. When my PV panels die, it's just £400 a panel, four hex bolts and some quick connectors to replace it. It's no contest.
u1hcw9nx 5mo ago
But fraud was involved. Financially it was part of SolarCity bailout (Musk's cousin). It heavily heavily penalized Tesla shareholders and smelled of a family bailout. Solar Roof was announced so hastily in October 2016 justify the merger and stave off massive shareholder lawsuits. There was little effort in the roof development after bailout was a success, minus the bait-and-switch lawsuits. There was genuine concept level development at some point, but it was developed into product after they knew it did not work to keep lawyers happy.
- panick21_ 5mo ago
  What evidence do you have that little effort was put in development? As far as I can tell that not at all the case. The early version was bad and it took multiple generations for it to become a real product.
actionfromafar 5mo ago
I'm tired of his cousins https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=48166411&goto=item%3Fid%3D48165980%2348166411 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=48166411&goto=item%3Fi...

by habitue 5mo ago

xingped 5mo ago

You're not entirely wrong on it being a maximally cynical take, but I think it depends on where the idea originated. Yes, they expended a lot on engineering to make it real, but you can do that with any idea. I think what matters was if it was a feasible idea put forth from a reasonable source or if it was another grand delusion from Musk that everyone just had to make as real as possible despite their own misgivings on the idea.

queenkjuul 5mo ago
Imo basically this, the attempt to make it work is downstream of musk deciding it had to be attempted. Musk can decide to spend money on a project whether or not it's genuine or feasible. This seems a clear cut case of musk designing a bad product and engineers doing their best to implement it despite the nonsensical constraints

alfiedotwtf 5mo ago

Of course the market wanted it. I wanted it. My friends wanted it. But we couldn’t buy it because it was vapourware ! From this to self-driving cars in 2 years to tunnels that will change public transport… maybe Musk should prototype and see what’s actually possible before telling the market. I mean come on - it’s borderline fraud in order to pump stocks - there’s got to be stockholders that are forming class actions as we speak

SXX 5mo ago
Both self driving craze and car tunnel madness is only possible at all because how car centric US mindset is. If you even try to suggest that people could instead use good public transport and pedestrian infrastructure they would look at you like you are some sort of crazy. Musk just takes car centric society pipe dreams and sell it back to them. Like OMG you transiting to work and can safely stay in your phone 99% of time. In other countries this called train or a bus. Solved in London with 1863 tech.
- hvb2 5mo ago
  While i kinda agree with you, it doesn't fly for most US cities. Most US cities aren't dense at all. A lot of them were built with transportation in mind. London and European cities in general are so much older that their city centers have no real way to accommodate that. So what do you do? You provide non car options. Technically they exist in US cities too, but especially on the west coast they're just not a viable alternative. Nobody who can choose will take a 2 hour public transit trip over a 20 minute drive. Heck, in a lot of cases biking might be faster than your transit option, albeit riskier
  - SXX 5mo ago
    While there is obviously no one easy solution for every city situation could easily be improved in a lot of them if there was political will. At least it would be 1000% more sane than pitching underground car tunnels. It obviously take decades not years, but again Tesla full self driving was promissed back in 2016 and something tells me it would be a big success if it will be deployed on scale in 2036.
    - hvb2 5mo ago
      People don't want to change. In the us on the west coast I would say that public transit has a bit of a stigma. You don't use it unless you have to. Couldn't be more different in the big European cities, using a car there is (made) cumbersome.
  - 5mo ago

oliwarner 5mo ago

> They thought it would work That's the problem though. Thinking your product will get by on looks when it's clearly outcompeted on performance, price, availability and longevity. That's not just optimism, it's delusion.

cheschire 5mo ago
Pretty sure this didn’t help either though: > Customer service complaints are pervasive and consistent. Tesla Energy has a 2.6 out of 5 rating on SolarReviews
- pathartl 5mo ago
  Yeah, there's some tubers out there that have absolutely scathing reviews for their customer ervice.
HighGoldstein 5mo ago
> That's the problem though. Thinking your product will get by on looks when it's clearly outcompeted on performance, price, availability and longevity. That's not just optimism, it's delusion. May I present to you the Apple corporation, at least until recently.
panick21_ 5mo ago
I don't think it was clear that it would be out compete on price or performance. If you compare roof + solor to solar roof, the idea was that eventually it would compete with doing both separately. I'm also not sure if its actually worse on longevity.
- oliwarner 5mo ago
  It seems fairly clear if you consider a 50-100 year roof (ours is 150 years, and it's only had membrane changes in that time) against a 25 year roof. I'm sure the steel shingle will last a fair time but if the PV elements need replacing four times a century, that's not a non-trivial cost. When my PV panels die, it's just £400 a panel, four hex bolts and some quick connectors to replace it. It's no contest.

u1hcw9nx 5mo ago

But fraud was involved. Financially it was part of SolarCity bailout (Musk's cousin). It heavily heavily penalized Tesla shareholders and smelled of a family bailout. Solar Roof was announced so hastily in October 2016 justify the merger and stave off massive shareholder lawsuits. There was little effort in the roof development after bailout was a success, minus the bait-and-switch lawsuits. There was genuine concept level development at some point, but it was developed into product after they knew it did not work to keep lawyers happy.

panick21_ 5mo ago
What evidence do you have that little effort was put in development? As far as I can tell that not at all the case. The early version was bad and it took multiple generations for it to become a real product.

actionfromafar 5mo ago

I'm tired of his cousins https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=48166411&goto=item%3Fid%3D48165980%2348166411 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=48166411&goto=item%3Fi...