No, no need to make it about culture wars.
He’s just clueless technically with haphazard management (no product skills, constant 180s, making it all about fear of being fired, micromanagement).
AFAIK, many people at twitter were actually ok trying out the Musk thing, but they quickly realized it would be way too chaotic.
The same colleague I mentioned before told me that Tesla not only removed radars from the new cars, but disabled its usage in the cars already having it. He told that in US there were cases (case?) of Tesla hitting the motorcycle with 3 wheels (killing the driver), as without radar it just saw two small lights in the back, close to each other, so it thought it is just far away car. Not sure if this is true or not, as I’m not following EV-related news, but according to the experience I see my colleague to be pretty well-informed.
So let me get this straight… the company whose CEO promised but failed to deliver fully autonomous self-driving year after year after year is now removing more helpful sensors from their cars?
Yes it is
That’s called “disrupting the market” 
Well, Solar failed, robotaxis are years away, and the “boring” company is just roads with extra steps.
Mote he becomes a public figure, and more he speaks about stuff no one really wants to know, more we associate the products with his face/attitude. This means society will have an opinion about the guy. You either support him or not. So hardcore supporters will buy anything without questioning the usefulness and people who dont support his ideas will think “ewww Elon” when they see a Tesla and stay away.
As a business you don’t want this behavior, you want to sell to both sides regardless of your personal opinion (that’s why so many CEO’s don’t tweet).
When a kid is learning to ride a bike, it’s using training wheels. If you remove these helpful aids and the kid crashes, then maybe you’ve removed them too soon. Or maybe the kid would never learn without gaining some experience without these crutches. It’s logical to me, that eventually these crutches should be removed. I’m sorry for any lives lost on the way to the goal, but I’m confident that eventually this will be a hugely net positive development. Hundreds of people are dying on the roads Worldwide each day.
…it doesn’t do so on busy public streets or highways. It uses his own, a kid‘s pedaling power and not a metal-clad, high-power battery-fueled machine. And it needs to protect itself, not others, from collisions.
Edit: well, yes, a kid shouldn’t ride into pedestrian others either. But comparing the external dangers of a full-grown 200mph car to a kid on a bicycle, I‘m sure people will catch my drift.
Wow, 7 likes, interesting.
I said it’s political and not cultural war.
I think you are bashing guy for no reason. His antics were known for long time.
His resume speaks for itself, thus product skill or management style criticism is unfounded.
Twitter takeover is almost hostile. Don’t see anything unusual in Musk actions or people reactions in takeover/crisis management phase.
I’m a fan of Musk in terms of successful business founded, but don’t have single share (directly) or product related to him.
I understand that his behavior will hurt Tesla in terms of marketing, but I think Tesla car will fall behind traditional makers not because of his antics. They need another break through ie. self driving to get advantage again.
There’s concern about the safety and quality of his (companies’) products, illegal working conditions, driving employees out and spreading misinformation about a pandemic disease.
When someone fails to deliver on his biggest, breakthrough promise (full self-driving) but nevertheless has the audacity to charge customers good money on a beta version, it begs the question if the guy isn’t straight-out lying - rather than just being somewhat charmingly overoptimistic and overpromising.
I don‘t think his resumé (the number and names of companies founded) and net worth make these criticisms unfounded.
I would attribute this to business conduct or ethics, but not product skill or management style.
And he is no exception in this area. So “dog is barking, caravan is moving”.
Nothing to argue here and I never liked this part. But since he was operating startup area I always attributed this to “parasitic marketing” tactics. Quality of products is in match of buyers decision making quality, so all is good.
Criticism to some behavior, yes, but his flying/orbiting/driving products gets my respect, despite I am not user myself nor investor.
Let’s get back to Tesla since I was interested if it’s still good investment.
I understand it’s till positioned as premium class which limits market, but I would say quickly becoming economy class offering.
If it were up to me, I would make Tesla another “wv golf”, ie. accessible car in every second garage and would try to benefit from the scale and not high margin.
Admittedly, this analogy can only go so far. Inevitably, we’re running into moral dilemmas similar to the trolley problem. 3’700 people die on the road every day worldwide. If we can reduce this number to 1’000 per day, but 10’000 will die in the process of making the software better, is it right to make it possible? There should be no doubt that the software IS getting better. There is maybe some doubt if it can ever get better than the average human driver. But the reward would be huge.
My personal opinion is that people who want to restrict and regulate the self-driving program want to sacrifice long-term safety for short-term safety. Some of them just do it for the sake of seeing Musk fail, to get a sick kick of Schadenfreude, which is something that I find pityful. All of you people who have a laugh everytime there is some bad news about Musk or Tesla, I find such behavior a total disgrace.
Ah, you see. This sounds like a no-brainer, right? But why do you think is Tesla NOT offering 10 new products, and not even a cheaper compact car? Why is the Cybertruck postponed and the Roadster too?
To me, the answer is, that:
To this I would add: ok, maybe there are some products which are on par with Teslas, like the Ioniq 5, Kia EV6, etc. But are they being produced in high volume? (no) Are their producers making money on these cars? (we don’t know). Just because the competition can make a competitive EV and offer it at a competitive price to a Tesla, doesn’t mean they can make millions of them and not go bankrupt.
There’s no inevitable dilemma with regards to sensors or radar.
You can totally keep those sensors as a fail-safe while still improving on the software. Let the software make the first decision - but allow sensors or radar (which are, I heard, rather good at detecting object at limited range) intervene as a fail-safe.
It just costs a bit more (for the time being).
You aren’t saying this should not be restricted and regulated, are you?
One thing is for sure: I don’t want FSD to be run unrestricted and unregulated by someone like Musk - who’s looked a compulsive liar if not utterly incompetent about this FSD stuff year after year after year.
Oh blimey!
Look, I’ll even somewhat admit to that.
But it really isn’t as if they didn’t call for that.
Musk has been lying again and again about the state of FSD for years. And he’s not only sold more stuff with those lies than I will earn in a lifetime. They’ve also shown little regard for people’s life by overstating the capabilities of their system and suggesting it’s basically, virtually, finished.
There’s a line between „overenthusiastic“ marketing (that I‘m going to smile about, remarking „let‘s not get too excited“) and bullshitting, scamming people. And your Musk overlord is squarely in latter territory.
It is however possible to have doubts about whether the technology used for the software allows for enough of an improvement, when taking the limit, to make it viable in the end. We assume it can be improved infinitely but we don’t know if it tends toward a threshold or not, nor whether that threshold, if it exists, meets requirements or not.
Admittedly, I am not well versed on the matter but I fail to see where, when camera and radar inputs are conflicting, the camera inputs should be trusted over the radar ones. Radar inputs being “hard” data, I find harder to dismiss them than trained software data.
Admittedly still, there may be artifacts that make self-driving uncomfortable using too few radar data. I can understand (but don’t support) an argument on price (equipping a car with enough radars to work around the issue could be too expensive) but I have a hard time believing an argument that simply states that there’s no way to increase the reliability of radar data to reduce the inconvenience caused by artifacts to a level that is acceptable to the driver and for the traffic.
No it’s not similar to a trolley problem at all.
European manufacturers’ targets seem to be “zero FSD accidents”, Tesla’s target seems to be “a low enough number with litigation consequences”. Even 1 death is too many.
I’ve now driven VW, Nissan, BMW, Renault and Tesla “Autopilots”. The non-Teslas would disengage way more often on seemingly easy tasks as (and this is my assumption) they would not even want to consider themselves capable to make you think that they can do it - while in reality they probably could.
Being too confident on your execution with “a marginally small error here or there” is some hiccups in Windows, but a couple of dead bodies in case of Tesla. That’s really hard to support morally.
BMW at least is getting more profitable as they sell more BEV’s (now at 15% of total production).
From a consumer’s viewpoint, the ICE cars are as expensive as the BEV ones - it’s a total nobrainer to buy BEV.
This sounds like the new battle apple vs android 
Is your position still 3000 shares at an average price of $196.22?
(after adjusting for the 3:1 split earlier this year)
Possibly an ingredient of today’s drop is Musk’s recent advice to close out margin loans, promptly followed by fanboys, precisely on TSLA shares. See this thread about it.
