The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
But seriously, he's not out there designing batteries, testing rockets, installing solar panels or idk, something with vacuum sealed hamster tubes?
He's running around doing PR and shit posting and hoping investors don't notice that money isn't coming in.
People who work for him do good engineering work that, while not particularly marketable, is worthy of appreciation. I'm a socialist after all, I won't fault rocket scientists for not making a profit. But without Musk someone else would be doing these things, and people are already doing these things.
The Rocket Scientists are already making a profit, and people weren't doing those things. They are now, because Tesla and SpaceX started doing them.
Tesla didn't invent the electric car nor are they the sole manufacturer. They're a tiny niche product. As for SpaceX, its true they have unique technologies, but they're not the only aero-space firm in the game or the only group looking at the problem of cost.
The people with the actual skills being used don't exist because of Musk and they wouldn't go away without him.
From Wikipedia: "The Tesla Roadster (2008) was the first production automobile to use lithium-ion battery cells and the first production EV with a range greater than 200 mi (320 km) per charge"
Yes, Tesla didn't invent the electric car. They are, however, responsible for turning the electric car from a golf cart with delusions of grandeur to an actual car that people want to drive. This is basically the only positive thing I have to say about Elon Musk.
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
edit: for more context, the average daily urban commute seems to be somewhere around 7-10 miles.
But seriously, he's not out there designing batteries, testing rockets, installing solar panels or idk, something with vacuum sealed hamster tubes?
He's running around doing PR and shit posting and hoping investors don't notice that money isn't coming in.
People who work for him do good engineering work that, while not particularly marketable, is worthy of appreciation. I'm a socialist after all, I won't fault rocket scientists for not making a profit. But without Musk someone else would be doing these things, and people are already doing these things.
The Rocket Scientists are already making a profit, and people weren't doing those things. They are now, because Tesla and SpaceX started doing them.
Tesla didn't invent the electric car nor are they the sole manufacturer. They're a tiny niche product. As for SpaceX, its true they have unique technologies, but they're not the only aero-space firm in the game or the only group looking at the problem of cost.
The people with the actual skills being used don't exist because of Musk and they wouldn't go away without him.
From Wikipedia: "The Tesla Roadster (2008) was the first production automobile to use lithium-ion battery cells and the first production EV with a range greater than 200 mi (320 km) per charge"
Yes, Tesla didn't invent the electric car. They are, however, responsible for turning the electric car from a golf cart with delusions of grandeur to an actual car that people want to drive. This is basically the only positive thing I have to say about Elon Musk.
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
The Roadster, without question. If you want to be mean to Elon in relation to this issue, you can focus on the fact that the revolutionary breakthrough Tesla made on this issue occurred in about 2003-2004 when the original founders (Eberhard etc) performed the calculations which showed you totally could use current lithium ion tecnology to build a practical electric vehicle and that every single current car manufacturer (who all said that was impossible) was completely wrong. Without the Roadster, there would have been no Leaf, since Nissan literally had a series of technical documents, studies, and cost investigations which said building the Leaf was impossible and not profitable which they believed 100% until Tesla rolled the first roadster off the line.
The roadsters "Holy Shit, bring me my tecnical team and fire them all!" effect is well documented throughout the automotive industry.
If your goal behind electric cars is environmental I'm not sure how a car that no one could afford or even find on market weighs more heavily than a successful and relatively cheap one.
Charitably, the way you're describing the roadster is a tech demo.
Basically the entire world is focused on battery development in some way or another. It's odd for anyone to imply Musk has been necessary for it's development.
But seriously, he's not out there designing batteries, testing rockets, installing solar panels or idk, something with vacuum sealed hamster tubes?
He's running around doing PR and shit posting and hoping investors don't notice that money isn't coming in.
People who work for him do good engineering work that, while not particularly marketable, is worthy of appreciation. I'm a socialist after all, I won't fault rocket scientists for not making a profit. But without Musk someone else would be doing these things, and people are already doing these things.
The Rocket Scientists are already making a profit, and people weren't doing those things. They are now, because Tesla and SpaceX started doing them.
Tesla didn't invent the electric car nor are they the sole manufacturer. They're a tiny niche product. As for SpaceX, its true they have unique technologies, but they're not the only aero-space firm in the game or the only group looking at the problem of cost.
The people with the actual skills being used don't exist because of Musk and they wouldn't go away without him.
From Wikipedia: "The Tesla Roadster (2008) was the first production automobile to use lithium-ion battery cells and the first production EV with a range greater than 200 mi (320 km) per charge"
Yes, Tesla didn't invent the electric car. They are, however, responsible for turning the electric car from a golf cart with delusions of grandeur to an actual car that people want to drive. This is basically the only positive thing I have to say about Elon Musk.
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
The Roadster, without question. If you want to be mean to Elon in relation to this issue, you can focus on the fact that the revolutionary breakthrough Tesla made on this issue occurred in about 2003-2004 when the original founders (Eberhard etc) performed the calculations which showed you totally could use current lithium ion tecnology to build a practical electric vehicle and that every single current car manufacturer (who all said that was impossible) was completely wrong. Without the Roadster, there would have been no Leaf, since Nissan literally had a series of technical documents, studies, and cost investigations which said building the Leaf was impossible and not profitable which they believed 100% until Tesla rolled the first roadster off the line.
The roadsters "Holy Shit, bring me my tecnical team and fire them all!" effect is well documented throughout the automotive industry.
General Motors EV1
EDIT: Like, Eberhard and Tarpenning didn't do this just out of the blue. They were responding to GM killing off the EV1.
If you want to talk about the Leaf being iterative on the Roadster, then surely we must recognize the Roadster being iterative upon its forebears too?
But seriously, he's not out there designing batteries, testing rockets, installing solar panels or idk, something with vacuum sealed hamster tubes?
He's running around doing PR and shit posting and hoping investors don't notice that money isn't coming in.
People who work for him do good engineering work that, while not particularly marketable, is worthy of appreciation. I'm a socialist after all, I won't fault rocket scientists for not making a profit. But without Musk someone else would be doing these things, and people are already doing these things.
The Rocket Scientists are already making a profit, and people weren't doing those things. They are now, because Tesla and SpaceX started doing them.
Tesla didn't invent the electric car nor are they the sole manufacturer. They're a tiny niche product. As for SpaceX, its true they have unique technologies, but they're not the only aero-space firm in the game or the only group looking at the problem of cost.
The people with the actual skills being used don't exist because of Musk and they wouldn't go away without him.
From Wikipedia: "The Tesla Roadster (2008) was the first production automobile to use lithium-ion battery cells and the first production EV with a range greater than 200 mi (320 km) per charge"
Yes, Tesla didn't invent the electric car. They are, however, responsible for turning the electric car from a golf cart with delusions of grandeur to an actual car that people want to drive. This is basically the only positive thing I have to say about Elon Musk.
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
The Roadster, without question. If you want to be mean to Elon in relation to this issue, you can focus on the fact that the revolutionary breakthrough Tesla made on this issue occurred in about 2003-2004 when the original founders (Eberhard etc) performed the calculations which showed you totally could use current lithium ion tecnology to build a practical electric vehicle and that every single current car manufacturer (who all said that was impossible) was completely wrong. Without the Roadster, there would have been no Leaf, since Nissan literally had a series of technical documents, studies, and cost investigations which said building the Leaf was impossible and not profitable which they believed 100% until Tesla rolled the first roadster off the line.
The roadsters "Holy Shit, bring me my tecnical team and fire them all!" effect is well documented throughout the automotive industry.
General Motors EV1
EDIT: Like, Eberhard and Tarpenning didn't do this just out of the blue. They were responding to GM killing off the EV1.
If you want to talk about the Leaf being iterative on the Roadster, then surely we must recognize the Roadster being iterative upon its forebears too?
Yeah, the EV1 proved that usable electric vehicles were already feasible in the late '90s. The final models with NiMH batteries could do 160 miles of driving, posted sub-8s 0-60 times, and were equipped with all the amenities that any other car from that era would likely feature. The only real compromise was in the 2-seat layout with somewhat limited storage space, but the Tesla Roadster certainly isn't that much more practical.
if anyone's responsible for bringing EVs to the mass market it's Apple
for driving smartphone demand and laptop hardware demand such that better and--more importantly--cheaper Li-ion batteries got made
the problem with EVs was never 'how do you put together batteries and motors to make a car?' it's been 'can you put in enough battery to get a range people will accept for a price people will pay?'
which isn't hard when you're selling $80k+ vehicles
the real trick tesla pulled was driving demand for luxury EVs, and that was a gamble for sure
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
But seriously, he's not out there designing batteries, testing rockets, installing solar panels or idk, something with vacuum sealed hamster tubes?
He's running around doing PR and shit posting and hoping investors don't notice that money isn't coming in.
People who work for him do good engineering work that, while not particularly marketable, is worthy of appreciation. I'm a socialist after all, I won't fault rocket scientists for not making a profit. But without Musk someone else would be doing these things, and people are already doing these things.
The Rocket Scientists are already making a profit, and people weren't doing those things. They are now, because Tesla and SpaceX started doing them.
Tesla didn't invent the electric car nor are they the sole manufacturer. They're a tiny niche product. As for SpaceX, its true they have unique technologies, but they're not the only aero-space firm in the game or the only group looking at the problem of cost.
The people with the actual skills being used don't exist because of Musk and they wouldn't go away without him.
From Wikipedia: "The Tesla Roadster (2008) was the first production automobile to use lithium-ion battery cells and the first production EV with a range greater than 200 mi (320 km) per charge"
Yes, Tesla didn't invent the electric car. They are, however, responsible for turning the electric car from a golf cart with delusions of grandeur to an actual car that people want to drive. This is basically the only positive thing I have to say about Elon Musk.
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
The Roadster, without question. If you want to be mean to Elon in relation to this issue, you can focus on the fact that the revolutionary breakthrough Tesla made on this issue occurred in about 2003-2004 when the original founders (Eberhard etc) performed the calculations which showed you totally could use current lithium ion tecnology to build a practical electric vehicle and that every single current car manufacturer (who all said that was impossible) was completely wrong. Without the Roadster, there would have been no Leaf, since Nissan literally had a series of technical documents, studies, and cost investigations which said building the Leaf was impossible and not profitable which they believed 100% until Tesla rolled the first roadster off the line.
The roadsters "Holy Shit, bring me my tecnical team and fire them all!" effect is well documented throughout the automotive industry.
General Motors EV1
EDIT: Like, Eberhard and Tarpenning didn't do this just out of the blue. They were responding to GM killing off the EV1.
If you want to talk about the Leaf being iterative on the Roadster, then surely we must recognize the Roadster being iterative upon its forebears too?
I agree 100%, but the EV1 used a different battery chemistry, which a far more significant difference than it might first appear. In addition, while the EV1 was much loved by its owners, it existed in response to a government program which mandated that it HAD to exist. GM didn't really make money selling the EV1, and because of the battery chemistry they really couldn't do so. As such, as soon as the order expired, they stopped making them.
The EV1 proved there was a market for electric vehicles, that people would happily charge at home etc, and that you could technically build one. However, it had so many limitations that when the companies themselves did their investigations of it after it was built they said...
"This kinda works, but there's no money to be made, it can't do what the general public wants, and its a technological blind alley. We won't do this any more, as this proves it doesn't work".
Remember, the EV1 wasn't really a 'car'. It was an evaluation by GM on whether electric cars could work. GM (and the other automakers) uniformly agreed that the evidence from the EV1 showed without question that they did not.
Like your Nissan Leaf? Thank the early folks at Tesla for realizing that everyone else in the whole world was wrong.
I think there's a legitimate skill even just in finding the right people to hand money to, and he may well have done a lot to push the early direction of each company, I don't know. What SpaceX has accomplished is legitimately remarkable, and Tesla has come a long way very quickly even though they're still mostly a luxury product which may or may not succeed in breaking into the broader market. Musk is an asshole who deserves a lot of criticism, but I think you guys are pushing it a bit far in undermining literally every thing he's ever done.
+9
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Teamregular
Tesla released (but more importantly marketed) an electric car mainstream audiences lusted after. Which is great because it brought awareness to a vehicle type that other companies have made less expensive more consumer friendly versions of.
And Musk is basically what we have right now when it comes to driving efficiencies and forward momentum in space. I would 10000% rather it be done by my government, but in the absence of good leadership there I will take what I can get.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
But seriously, he's not out there designing batteries, testing rockets, installing solar panels or idk, something with vacuum sealed hamster tubes?
He's running around doing PR and shit posting and hoping investors don't notice that money isn't coming in.
People who work for him do good engineering work that, while not particularly marketable, is worthy of appreciation. I'm a socialist after all, I won't fault rocket scientists for not making a profit. But without Musk someone else would be doing these things, and people are already doing these things.
The Rocket Scientists are already making a profit, and people weren't doing those things. They are now, because Tesla and SpaceX started doing them.
Tesla didn't invent the electric car nor are they the sole manufacturer. They're a tiny niche product. As for SpaceX, its true they have unique technologies, but they're not the only aero-space firm in the game or the only group looking at the problem of cost.
The people with the actual skills being used don't exist because of Musk and they wouldn't go away without him.
From Wikipedia: "The Tesla Roadster (2008) was the first production automobile to use lithium-ion battery cells and the first production EV with a range greater than 200 mi (320 km) per charge"
Yes, Tesla didn't invent the electric car. They are, however, responsible for turning the electric car from a golf cart with delusions of grandeur to an actual car that people want to drive. This is basically the only positive thing I have to say about Elon Musk.
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
The Roadster, without question. If you want to be mean to Elon in relation to this issue, you can focus on the fact that the revolutionary breakthrough Tesla made on this issue occurred in about 2003-2004 when the original founders (Eberhard etc) performed the calculations which showed you totally could use current lithium ion tecnology to build a practical electric vehicle and that every single current car manufacturer (who all said that was impossible) was completely wrong. Without the Roadster, there would have been no Leaf, since Nissan literally had a series of technical documents, studies, and cost investigations which said building the Leaf was impossible and not profitable which they believed 100% until Tesla rolled the first roadster off the line.
The roadsters "Holy Shit, bring me my tecnical team and fire them all!" effect is well documented throughout the automotive industry.
General Motors EV1
EDIT: Like, Eberhard and Tarpenning didn't do this just out of the blue. They were responding to GM killing off the EV1.
If you want to talk about the Leaf being iterative on the Roadster, then surely we must recognize the Roadster being iterative upon its forebears too?
I agree 100%, but the EV1 used a different battery chemistry, which a far more significant difference than it might first appear. In addition, while the EV1 was much loved by its owners, it existed in response to a government program which mandated that it HAD to exist. GM didn't really make money selling the EV1, and because of the battery chemistry they really couldn't do so. As such, as soon as the order expired, they stopped making them.
The EV1 proved there was a market for electric vehicles, that people would happily charge at home etc, and that you could technically build one. However, it had so many limitations that when the companies themselves did their investigations of it after it was built they said...
"This kinda works, but there's no money to be made, it can't do what the general public wants, and its a technological blind alley. We won't do this any more, as this proves it doesn't work".
Remember, the EV1 wasn't really a 'car'. It was an evaluation by GM on whether electric cars could work. GM (and the other automakers) uniformly agreed that the evidence from the EV1 showed without question that they did not.
Like your Nissan Leaf? Thank the early folks at Tesla for realizing that everyone else in the whole world was wrong.
If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants.
like, I have no doubt that if Tesla never did it's thing with the roadsters and the model S the other automakers would still be making EVs today
it's just the natural response to the improvements in battery tech
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Tesla released (but more importantly marketed) an electric car mainstream audiences lusted after. Which is great because it brought awareness to a vehicle type that other companies have made less expensive more consumer friendly versions of.
And Musk is basically what we have right now when it comes to driving efficiencies and forward momentum in space. I would 10000% rather it be done by my government, but in the absence of good leadership there I will take what I can get.
Again, being a visionary is not a license to be an ass. People aren't asking Musk to not be creative, they're asking him to not be a dick who gets his workers harmed and refuses to deal fairly with them. And his response to this request is to basically have a temper tantrum about the press being unfair.
But seriously, he's not out there designing batteries, testing rockets, installing solar panels or idk, something with vacuum sealed hamster tubes?
He's running around doing PR and shit posting and hoping investors don't notice that money isn't coming in.
People who work for him do good engineering work that, while not particularly marketable, is worthy of appreciation. I'm a socialist after all, I won't fault rocket scientists for not making a profit. But without Musk someone else would be doing these things, and people are already doing these things.
The Rocket Scientists are already making a profit, and people weren't doing those things. They are now, because Tesla and SpaceX started doing them.
Tesla didn't invent the electric car nor are they the sole manufacturer. They're a tiny niche product. As for SpaceX, its true they have unique technologies, but they're not the only aero-space firm in the game or the only group looking at the problem of cost.
The people with the actual skills being used don't exist because of Musk and they wouldn't go away without him.
From Wikipedia: "The Tesla Roadster (2008) was the first production automobile to use lithium-ion battery cells and the first production EV with a range greater than 200 mi (320 km) per charge"
Yes, Tesla didn't invent the electric car. They are, however, responsible for turning the electric car from a golf cart with delusions of grandeur to an actual car that people want to drive. This is basically the only positive thing I have to say about Elon Musk.
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
The Roadster, without question. If you want to be mean to Elon in relation to this issue, you can focus on the fact that the revolutionary breakthrough Tesla made on this issue occurred in about 2003-2004 when the original founders (Eberhard etc) performed the calculations which showed you totally could use current lithium ion tecnology to build a practical electric vehicle and that every single current car manufacturer (who all said that was impossible) was completely wrong. Without the Roadster, there would have been no Leaf, since Nissan literally had a series of technical documents, studies, and cost investigations which said building the Leaf was impossible and not profitable which they believed 100% until Tesla rolled the first roadster off the line.
The roadsters "Holy Shit, bring me my tecnical team and fire them all!" effect is well documented throughout the automotive industry.
General Motors EV1
EDIT: Like, Eberhard and Tarpenning didn't do this just out of the blue. They were responding to GM killing off the EV1.
If you want to talk about the Leaf being iterative on the Roadster, then surely we must recognize the Roadster being iterative upon its forebears too?
I agree 100%, but the EV1 used a different battery chemistry, which a far more significant difference than it might first appear. In addition, while the EV1 was much loved by its owners, it existed in response to a government program which mandated that it HAD to exist. GM didn't really make money selling the EV1, and because of the battery chemistry they really couldn't do so. As such, as soon as the order expired, they stopped making them.
The EV1 proved there was a market for electric vehicles, that people would happily charge at home etc, and that you could technically build one. However, it had so many limitations that when the companies themselves did their investigations of it after it was built they said...
"This kinda works, but there's no money to be made, it can't do what the general public wants, and its a technological blind alley. We won't do this any more, as this proves it doesn't work".
Remember, the EV1 wasn't really a 'car'. It was an evaluation by GM on whether electric cars could work. GM (and the other automakers) uniformly agreed that the evidence from the EV1 showed without question that they did not.
Like your Nissan Leaf? Thank the early folks at Tesla for realizing that everyone else in the whole world was wrong.
If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants.
Eh, I'd more make the quote...
"If I have seen further, it is more because everyone else in the entire world decided for some odd reason to wear a blindfold and I was all like, hey, take off your blindfolds. And they said, "NO! The blindfold is all, I will never take it off regardless of what you say". And then I want and like, wandered over to see what there was over there, and it took WAY longer than I thought it would and I came back and everyone else STILL had their blindfolds on except now when I asked them to take them off they told me that they weren't wearing blindfolds. It was just dark."
like, I have no doubt that if Tesla never did it's thing with the roadsters and the model S the other automakers would still be making EVs today
it's just the natural response to the improvements in battery tech
Right like where the world is at almost everyone that makes machinery of some kind has its eyes on battery technology and its hands too, if it can afford it.
I mean even in this series of events, of scientists building on eachother's work, musk is just the money. That's it. Two other guys there are the engineering revolutionaries. Musk was just the guy making a bet they would be right and that he could maybe make some money off of it.
But seriously, he's not out there designing batteries, testing rockets, installing solar panels or idk, something with vacuum sealed hamster tubes?
He's running around doing PR and shit posting and hoping investors don't notice that money isn't coming in.
People who work for him do good engineering work that, while not particularly marketable, is worthy of appreciation. I'm a socialist after all, I won't fault rocket scientists for not making a profit. But without Musk someone else would be doing these things, and people are already doing these things.
The Rocket Scientists are already making a profit, and people weren't doing those things. They are now, because Tesla and SpaceX started doing them.
Tesla didn't invent the electric car nor are they the sole manufacturer. They're a tiny niche product. As for SpaceX, its true they have unique technologies, but they're not the only aero-space firm in the game or the only group looking at the problem of cost.
The people with the actual skills being used don't exist because of Musk and they wouldn't go away without him.
From Wikipedia: "The Tesla Roadster (2008) was the first production automobile to use lithium-ion battery cells and the first production EV with a range greater than 200 mi (320 km) per charge"
Yes, Tesla didn't invent the electric car. They are, however, responsible for turning the electric car from a golf cart with delusions of grandeur to an actual car that people want to drive. This is basically the only positive thing I have to say about Elon Musk.
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
The Roadster, without question. If you want to be mean to Elon in relation to this issue, you can focus on the fact that the revolutionary breakthrough Tesla made on this issue occurred in about 2003-2004 when the original founders (Eberhard etc) performed the calculations which showed you totally could use current lithium ion tecnology to build a practical electric vehicle and that every single current car manufacturer (who all said that was impossible) was completely wrong. Without the Roadster, there would have been no Leaf, since Nissan literally had a series of technical documents, studies, and cost investigations which said building the Leaf was impossible and not profitable which they believed 100% until Tesla rolled the first roadster off the line.
The roadsters "Holy Shit, bring me my tecnical team and fire them all!" effect is well documented throughout the automotive industry.
General Motors EV1
EDIT: Like, Eberhard and Tarpenning didn't do this just out of the blue. They were responding to GM killing off the EV1.
If you want to talk about the Leaf being iterative on the Roadster, then surely we must recognize the Roadster being iterative upon its forebears too?
I agree 100%, but the EV1 used a different battery chemistry, which a far more significant difference than it might first appear. In addition, while the EV1 was much loved by its owners, it existed in response to a government program which mandated that it HAD to exist. GM didn't really make money selling the EV1, and because of the battery chemistry they really couldn't do so. As such, as soon as the order expired, they stopped making them.
The EV1 proved there was a market for electric vehicles, that people would happily charge at home etc, and that you could technically build one. However, it had so many limitations that when the companies themselves did their investigations of it after it was built they said...
"This kinda works, but there's no money to be made, it can't do what the general public wants, and its a technological blind alley. We won't do this any more, as this proves it doesn't work".
Remember, the EV1 wasn't really a 'car'. It was an evaluation by GM on whether electric cars could work. GM (and the other automakers) uniformly agreed that the evidence from the EV1 showed without question that they did not.
Like your Nissan Leaf? Thank the early folks at Tesla for realizing that everyone else in the whole world was wrong.
If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants.
Eh, I'd more make the quote...
"If I have seen further, it is more because everyone else in the entire world decided for some odd reason to wear a blindfold and I was all like, hey, take off your blindfolds. And they said, "NO! The blindfold is all, I will never take it off regardless of what you say". And then I want and like, wandered over to see what there was over there, and it took WAY longer than I thought it would and I came back and everyone else STILL had their blindfolds on except now when I asked them to take them off they told me that they weren't wearing blindfolds. It was just dark."
The people you literally cited posts ago were literally motivated by GM unduly killing off the EV1 and worked to continue that trend with their own company, and The Grand Visionary Musk didn't even come along until after they'd already founded the company and were in a subsequent round of financing.
like... this is the thing! This is a prime example of the problem here!
This isn't some thing about blindfolds and grand visionaries and whatever the fuck. You had two guys who realized that the idea was feasible, because people before them had managed to create a less successful but proven iteration of it, which they refined with additional work and technological advances.
But seriously, he's not out there designing batteries, testing rockets, installing solar panels or idk, something with vacuum sealed hamster tubes?
He's running around doing PR and shit posting and hoping investors don't notice that money isn't coming in.
People who work for him do good engineering work that, while not particularly marketable, is worthy of appreciation. I'm a socialist after all, I won't fault rocket scientists for not making a profit. But without Musk someone else would be doing these things, and people are already doing these things.
The Rocket Scientists are already making a profit, and people weren't doing those things. They are now, because Tesla and SpaceX started doing them.
Tesla didn't invent the electric car nor are they the sole manufacturer. They're a tiny niche product. As for SpaceX, its true they have unique technologies, but they're not the only aero-space firm in the game or the only group looking at the problem of cost.
The people with the actual skills being used don't exist because of Musk and they wouldn't go away without him.
From Wikipedia: "The Tesla Roadster (2008) was the first production automobile to use lithium-ion battery cells and the first production EV with a range greater than 200 mi (320 km) per charge"
Yes, Tesla didn't invent the electric car. They are, however, responsible for turning the electric car from a golf cart with delusions of grandeur to an actual car that people want to drive. This is basically the only positive thing I have to say about Elon Musk.
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
The Roadster, without question. If you want to be mean to Elon in relation to this issue, you can focus on the fact that the revolutionary breakthrough Tesla made on this issue occurred in about 2003-2004 when the original founders (Eberhard etc) performed the calculations which showed you totally could use current lithium ion tecnology to build a practical electric vehicle and that every single current car manufacturer (who all said that was impossible) was completely wrong. Without the Roadster, there would have been no Leaf, since Nissan literally had a series of technical documents, studies, and cost investigations which said building the Leaf was impossible and not profitable which they believed 100% until Tesla rolled the first roadster off the line.
The roadsters "Holy Shit, bring me my tecnical team and fire them all!" effect is well documented throughout the automotive industry.
General Motors EV1
EDIT: Like, Eberhard and Tarpenning didn't do this just out of the blue. They were responding to GM killing off the EV1.
If you want to talk about the Leaf being iterative on the Roadster, then surely we must recognize the Roadster being iterative upon its forebears too?
I agree 100%, but the EV1 used a different battery chemistry, which a far more significant difference than it might first appear. In addition, while the EV1 was much loved by its owners, it existed in response to a government program which mandated that it HAD to exist. GM didn't really make money selling the EV1, and because of the battery chemistry they really couldn't do so. As such, as soon as the order expired, they stopped making them.
The EV1 proved there was a market for electric vehicles, that people would happily charge at home etc, and that you could technically build one. However, it had so many limitations that when the companies themselves did their investigations of it after it was built they said...
"This kinda works, but there's no money to be made, it can't do what the general public wants, and its a technological blind alley. We won't do this any more, as this proves it doesn't work".
Remember, the EV1 wasn't really a 'car'. It was an evaluation by GM on whether electric cars could work. GM (and the other automakers) uniformly agreed that the evidence from the EV1 showed without question that they did not.
Like your Nissan Leaf? Thank the early folks at Tesla for realizing that everyone else in the whole world was wrong.
If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants.
Eh, I'd more make the quote...
"If I have seen further, it is more because everyone else in the entire world decided for some odd reason to wear a blindfold and I was all like, hey, take off your blindfolds. And they said, "NO! The blindfold is all, I will never take it off regardless of what you say". And then I want and like, wandered over to see what there was over there, and it took WAY longer than I thought it would and I came back and everyone else STILL had their blindfolds on except now when I asked them to take them off they told me that they weren't wearing blindfolds. It was just dark."
This metaphor is more mangled than a worker at Tesla's factories.
they put out a kind of chintzy car with an 80 mile range that looked ugly as sin (it had to, for maximum aerodynamics) and sold it for enough to get you a traditional (non-luxury brand) car with every option and extras package
and it became the best selling EV of all time
they're gonna lose that crown now that the other automakers have created the second generation of 200 mile cars. but the leaf was gen 1
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I don't care if Elon Musk funds research that cures cancer, we should still be able to call him out if that research center had unsafe working conditions and the employees there were treated like shit.
"Dickinson is a senior lecturer in Chemical and Material Engineering at Auckland University, and an associate investigator at the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology." - Wiki
Also aside from the "Musk is upset about the bad press" angle, the other thing driving him at the moment seems to be the fact that people are pointing out his company's bad labor practices to his current girlfriend, a musician named Grimes (who seems to have a more liberal reputation than Musk?).
Also aside from the "Musk is upset about the bad press" angle, the other thing driving him at the moment seems to be the fact that people are pointing out his company's bad labor practices to his current girlfriend, a musician named Grimes (who seems to have a more liberal reputation than Musk?).
So
Dude is lashing out
If anything, Grimes' breathless defense of Musk only goes to show how great he is at gas-lighting his supporters to make excuses for him.
Elon Musk is a wealthy Afrikaner who codeveloped a money-laundering instrument and left South Africa because he didn't accept majority rule. He then bought his way onto the board of AC Motors, told them he'd take care of all their needs, and then when the bills came due he stopped payment and held them hostage, demanding they rewrite the company's history such that America's worthless press could crown him Science Fuhrer. Imagine I made a meme of Stalin photoshopping Trotsky out and Musk photoshopping himself in and posted it here.
The good version of Elon Musk is a dude who lives in South Africa or another Commonwealth nation, has a drug habit, gives money to an atmospheric balloon startup, and was recently anally violated by ICE while travelling to an American convention because he said unkind things about whichever reactionary fuck techlord is Rocket Jesus in his timeline and had something on his person that said "hacker" "IT" "systems" or "security".
And if you don't believe that, here's Musk calling Existential Comics a chimp.
Existential Comics is a comic that was critical of Musk on Twitter. Since being called a chimp by a white South African, they have made this comic, which is great. It isn't in the main-line of Existential Comics because Elon Musk is neither a philosopher or a proponent of a real philosophy.*
*While Ayn Rand is generously awarded the title of philosopher to dunk on her, Elon Musk is literally the bad guy from Atlas Shrugged, taking government grants and scamming investors by lying about his numbers.
I have a burning hatred of Musk and have had it since Tesla was first a thing. That may have made my slam against him too salty for human consumption, and for that I apologize. Frequently, a wistful wish is made, "If only Musk was better to his workers and didn't engage in historical revisionism to garner prestige.". My go-to for that is to point out that that version of Musk never left South Africa because he accepts democracy as a valid form of government.
e:Also the Dark Enlightenment is bad, and Musk has basically confirmed himself to be one of them with his Pravduh thing because that's literally their thing of surrounding themselves with Stalinist propaganda so that they can spend every waking minute seething in rage.
"Dickinson is a senior lecturer in Chemical and Material Engineering at Auckland University, and an associate investigator at the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology." - Wiki
I use to like Musk, I like Tesla, the cars are cool and the batteries and solar technology are great and I'm glad someone is researching it, Space X is cool, the idea of a hyper loop seems really cool. He just has cool ideas, and when he appears on TV he seems so fun.
Then you read comments about and from employees, people in the factories, the engineers, the coders, you look harder at stuff and it looks like corners are being cut, people are being underpaid, over worked and treated like garbage and because he has "so many ideas" he never seems to stay focused on a single project long enough to work out all the kinks.
Then you see him handle online criticism, he calls people names and blocks then outright instead of engaging in meaningful conversation. He's not as awful as Jeff Bezos, but he's no everyman and he doesn't care about the world or its people
I'm not sure if he simply doesn't care, or if his utopian vision is simply Objectivist in nature, and that he feels that by being a Randian hero he can inspire others to follow a similar path. That he'll inspire a culture-wide yank on bootstraps.
I mean, simply in terms of tech, there seems to be a pretty clear endgame for him:
Paypal - easy, paperless money system.
SpaceX - reliable space travel.
Tesla - reliable electric vehicles of different makes and models, capable of working on earth, the moon, or Mars. Solar roofs and batteries for the same purpose.
The Boring Company/Hyperloop - underground transportation and perhaps habitation.
Starlink - planetary internet.
Neurolink - AI/future tech.
Ditto for his brother, Kimbal, with his Square Roots project in which people grow vegetables in shipping containers. There's your food source, which simply relies on artificial light and less water than traditional farming.
With all that, I think he has a pretty clear vision of a utopian future in mind. Whether or not it's actually humane, ethical, etc. is another question entirely.
I think he cares, it's just that his caring is a lot like Mr. Burns with Lil' Lisa's Slurry.
I still don’t know why Elon Musk is so focused on mars when we should at least get to the moon first.
Nah. Even NASA has shifted their focus. Mars has actual potential for long term colonization and resources. Since there's water, an atmosphere, and stronger gravity, colonies could, theoretically, expand over time. The best the moon has to offer is maybe a jumping off point.
I still don’t know why Elon Musk is so focused on mars when we should at least get to the moon first.
Nah. Even NASA has shifted their focus. Mars has actual potential for long term colonization and resources. Since there's water, an atmosphere, and stronger gravity, colonies could, theoretically, expand over time. The best the moon has to offer is maybe a jumping off point.
I still don’t know why Elon Musk is so focused on mars when we should at least get to the moon first.
Nah. Even NASA has shifted their focus. Mars has actual potential for long term colonization and resources. Since there's water, an atmosphere, and stronger gravity, colonies could, theoretically, expand over time. The best the moon has to offer is maybe a jumping off point.
Posts
It also carried a nearly 100k base price tag, had constant production problems, and had two separate safety recalls.
For contrast, the 2010 Nissan Leaf was offered at 32k before tax incentives with a 80-110 mile range depending on rating agency.
I can tell you without blinking which one was a bigger deal for society.
edit: for more context, the average daily urban commute seems to be somewhere around 7-10 miles.
The Roadster, without question. If you want to be mean to Elon in relation to this issue, you can focus on the fact that the revolutionary breakthrough Tesla made on this issue occurred in about 2003-2004 when the original founders (Eberhard etc) performed the calculations which showed you totally could use current lithium ion tecnology to build a practical electric vehicle and that every single current car manufacturer (who all said that was impossible) was completely wrong. Without the Roadster, there would have been no Leaf, since Nissan literally had a series of technical documents, studies, and cost investigations which said building the Leaf was impossible and not profitable which they believed 100% until Tesla rolled the first roadster off the line.
The roadsters "Holy Shit, bring me my tecnical team and fire them all!" effect is well documented throughout the automotive industry.
Charitably, the way you're describing the roadster is a tech demo.
Basically the entire world is focused on battery development in some way or another. It's odd for anyone to imply Musk has been necessary for it's development.
General Motors EV1
EDIT: Like, Eberhard and Tarpenning didn't do this just out of the blue. They were responding to GM killing off the EV1.
If you want to talk about the Leaf being iterative on the Roadster, then surely we must recognize the Roadster being iterative upon its forebears too?
This has a lot to do with the tech press, which is basically a lapdog.
Yeah, the EV1 proved that usable electric vehicles were already feasible in the late '90s. The final models with NiMH batteries could do 160 miles of driving, posted sub-8s 0-60 times, and were equipped with all the amenities that any other car from that era would likely feature. The only real compromise was in the 2-seat layout with somewhat limited storage space, but the Tesla Roadster certainly isn't that much more practical.
for driving smartphone demand and laptop hardware demand such that better and--more importantly--cheaper Li-ion batteries got made
the problem with EVs was never 'how do you put together batteries and motors to make a car?' it's been 'can you put in enough battery to get a range people will accept for a price people will pay?'
which isn't hard when you're selling $80k+ vehicles
the real trick tesla pulled was driving demand for luxury EVs, and that was a gamble for sure
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I agree 100%, but the EV1 used a different battery chemistry, which a far more significant difference than it might first appear. In addition, while the EV1 was much loved by its owners, it existed in response to a government program which mandated that it HAD to exist. GM didn't really make money selling the EV1, and because of the battery chemistry they really couldn't do so. As such, as soon as the order expired, they stopped making them.
The EV1 proved there was a market for electric vehicles, that people would happily charge at home etc, and that you could technically build one. However, it had so many limitations that when the companies themselves did their investigations of it after it was built they said...
"This kinda works, but there's no money to be made, it can't do what the general public wants, and its a technological blind alley. We won't do this any more, as this proves it doesn't work".
Remember, the EV1 wasn't really a 'car'. It was an evaluation by GM on whether electric cars could work. GM (and the other automakers) uniformly agreed that the evidence from the EV1 showed without question that they did not.
Like your Nissan Leaf? Thank the early folks at Tesla for realizing that everyone else in the whole world was wrong.
And Musk is basically what we have right now when it comes to driving efficiencies and forward momentum in space. I would 10000% rather it be done by my government, but in the absence of good leadership there I will take what I can get.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
it's just the natural response to the improvements in battery tech
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Again, being a visionary is not a license to be an ass. People aren't asking Musk to not be creative, they're asking him to not be a dick who gets his workers harmed and refuses to deal fairly with them. And his response to this request is to basically have a temper tantrum about the press being unfair.
Eh, I'd more make the quote...
"If I have seen further, it is more because everyone else in the entire world decided for some odd reason to wear a blindfold and I was all like, hey, take off your blindfolds. And they said, "NO! The blindfold is all, I will never take it off regardless of what you say". And then I want and like, wandered over to see what there was over there, and it took WAY longer than I thought it would and I came back and everyone else STILL had their blindfolds on except now when I asked them to take them off they told me that they weren't wearing blindfolds. It was just dark."
It's also the natural evolution of hybrid technology as well.
Right like where the world is at almost everyone that makes machinery of some kind has its eyes on battery technology and its hands too, if it can afford it.
The people you literally cited posts ago were literally motivated by GM unduly killing off the EV1 and worked to continue that trend with their own company, and The Grand Visionary Musk didn't even come along until after they'd already founded the company and were in a subsequent round of financing.
like... this is the thing! This is a prime example of the problem here!
This isn't some thing about blindfolds and grand visionaries and whatever the fuck. You had two guys who realized that the idea was feasible, because people before them had managed to create a less successful but proven iteration of it, which they refined with additional work and technological advances.
This metaphor is more mangled than a worker at Tesla's factories.
they put out a kind of chintzy car with an 80 mile range that looked ugly as sin (it had to, for maximum aerodynamics) and sold it for enough to get you a traditional (non-luxury brand) car with every option and extras package
and it became the best selling EV of all time
they're gonna lose that crown now that the other automakers have created the second generation of 200 mile cars. but the leaf was gen 1
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
"Dickinson is a senior lecturer in Chemical and Material Engineering at Auckland University, and an associate investigator at the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology." - Wiki
So
Dude is lashing out
If anything, Grimes' breathless defense of Musk only goes to show how great he is at gas-lighting his supporters to make excuses for him.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
The good version of Elon Musk is a dude who lives in South Africa or another Commonwealth nation, has a drug habit, gives money to an atmospheric balloon startup, and was recently anally violated by ICE while travelling to an American convention because he said unkind things about whichever reactionary fuck techlord is Rocket Jesus in his timeline and had something on his person that said "hacker" "IT" "systems" or "security".
And if you don't believe that, here's Musk calling Existential Comics a chimp.
Existential Comics is a comic that was critical of Musk on Twitter. Since being called a chimp by a white South African, they have made this comic, which is great. It isn't in the main-line of Existential Comics because Elon Musk is neither a philosopher or a proponent of a real philosophy.*
To the front half of your post: What in the goddamned shit
e:Also the Dark Enlightenment is bad, and Musk has basically confirmed himself to be one of them with his Pravduh thing because that's literally their thing of surrounding themselves with Stalinist propaganda so that they can spend every waking minute seething in rage.
"no u"
-Elon
I'm not sure if he simply doesn't care, or if his utopian vision is simply Objectivist in nature, and that he feels that by being a Randian hero he can inspire others to follow a similar path. That he'll inspire a culture-wide yank on bootstraps.
I mean, simply in terms of tech, there seems to be a pretty clear endgame for him:
Paypal - easy, paperless money system.
SpaceX - reliable space travel.
Tesla - reliable electric vehicles of different makes and models, capable of working on earth, the moon, or Mars. Solar roofs and batteries for the same purpose.
The Boring Company/Hyperloop - underground transportation and perhaps habitation.
Starlink - planetary internet.
Neurolink - AI/future tech.
Ditto for his brother, Kimbal, with his Square Roots project in which people grow vegetables in shipping containers. There's your food source, which simply relies on artificial light and less water than traditional farming.
With all that, I think he has a pretty clear vision of a utopian future in mind. Whether or not it's actually humane, ethical, etc. is another question entirely.
I think he cares, it's just that his caring is a lot like Mr. Burns with Lil' Lisa's Slurry.
WoW
Dear Satan.....
Nah. Even NASA has shifted their focus. Mars has actual potential for long term colonization and resources. Since there's water, an atmosphere, and stronger gravity, colonies could, theoretically, expand over time. The best the moon has to offer is maybe a jumping off point.
Also moon dust is horrifying.
TO THE SPACE THREAD
Mars is literally toxic so
It seems like carving up the moon might be a poor idea
Like that's ever stopped a mining company before