If having the disease spread more widely among populations and more COVID deaths translates as "benefit" to you then yes. Tesla is concerned about only profits but what's profitable for the company may not be for people.

You're talking about whether companies should reopen. The parent was talking about whether

> There's hundreds of thousands, probably millions of businesses that have been shuttered by COVID-19, and yet, of course, who should it be but the constant media circus that is Tesla--whose hit is miniscule compared to the restaurants, hotels and other businesses that actually can't earn revenue--that decides to publicly take it to the courts.

is a fair complaint. It's clearly not. It's basically the Starving African Children argument. Throwing bad arguments around (even to support a good cause) is not conducive to quality discussion, and your criticism (via emphasizing how good the cause is, with an attack on Tesla thrown in, neither of which is pertinent) of someone pointing this out doesn't help.

I think it's important to argue precisely on Internet forums where our discussions don't directly translate into policy decisions and this is the hill I will die on.

I’m not sure you understand the position we’re in. The intent of all this intervention is to flatten the curve, not to zero, but to keep hospitals at capacity. Thus spreading the disease and causing more deaths, but preventing only those deaths that would have been preventable save lack of hospital capacity.

As a swede said, not eliminating deaths just shifting them in time.

Yes, spreading the disease is a benefit to the population.

I'd love to know what these plans to wipe out covid 19 are that everyone but me seems to have been informed about. I must clearly have missed some big news.

Here's a plan to wipe out covid 19 with a version that's proven to be safe. https://www.tillett.info/2020/04/05/a-solution-to-covid-19/

As a company it is exactly what Tesla should be concerned of. Tesla is not charity.

My point is that this is yet another case where it is Tesla who is in the news for some controversial conflict. Such as the many times it's attempted to fight the SEC, played fast and loose with health and safety regulations in its factories, attempted to manipulate markets to burn short sellers, or bricked the cars of second-hand sellers. Sure, one or two of those events could be explained. But there is a social compact here. At a certain point, it reminds me of Uber's historical attitude towards local regulations or user privacy. This is not a comparison that I am happy to make.

This, of course, is besides the highly contentious notion that anyone will "benefit" from a public health order being overturned.

Elon plays fast and loose with his opinions in public discourse, but generally when Tesla makes an official move like this it seems to be more thoroughly considered by a larger group of people than just Elon. I have the same gut feeling that you seem to have when I first hear these stories, but the associated press releases seem to consistently have concrete foundations that I don't initially expect.

In this case, they point to their experience dealing with exactly this process in Shanghai, and running the Gigafactory over there for 3 months successfully since reboot. That gave me pause - they've seen this and dealt with it firsthand already, which isn't something nearly anyone commenting on this can say. Maybe they're lying, but that feels like a pretty serious unearned accusation.

I think everyone agrees that we should restart businesses if it's reasonable to, but it doesn't seem like anyone is evaluating what "reasonable" means outside of "what the local government is saying". And then you have to wonder why we're suddenly assuming the state/city government is competent in this case.

I don't know where I stand, but I know that I'm not assuming Tesla is in the wrong here. I know far less than they do and it would take a miracle to convince me that the local government is properly thoroughly evaluating the situation and making nuanced, reasonable decisions (as opposed to simply reacting to the political environment). It's increasingly difficult to figure out how to proceed, but at some point we have to decide that we're able to open businesses back up (with safety measures that we decide are adequate). It's scary, but we can't just wait around for a vaccine forever - it could be years out.

It's just a fundamentally hard problem.

This really is the best comment I read on here.

I'd like to add that in the Joe Rogan interview, Elon's main point is not "let's open Tesla factories, I don't care that many people will die" like some seem to imply here on Hacker News. His main point was that the data is we have on covid epidemiology doesn't say much and we "need to cleanup the data", which seams totally reasonable to me.

Decisions are being taken by government (through epidemiologists) with extremely poor data. The data simply does not hold the information needed to take a proper decisions about the lock down. And when it comes to pandemics & politics this lack of information means that the only option available is to go for overly cautious. Decisions about the economy that can (prematurely) make or break the economy permanently. As in: the end of the US/Western empire forever.

It's very easy for the media and people to jump onto the "omg, you only care about money" bandwagon whenever someone argues that maybe we should think this lockdown thru. It's also unoriginal, unsubstantiated and unproductive.

As of this writing, 281,057 people have died from COVID 19. 2 months ago that number was < 8,000. Forgive me if I don't advocate for massively increasing the transmission rate during an active, uncontained, global pandemic.

Please consider more critical thinking.

What we know is that certain outlets report that 281,147 deaths in the world were attributed in part due to symptoms potentially related to Covid19.

This is a sad terrible time, but the likelihood that those numbers mean what you think or say they mean is low in my opinion.

The data is getting getting buried in communal graves in some parts of the world, like Italy. It's not like there is an option to quietly gather more data until we take a decision, decisions must be made today.

Them wasting our tax dollars with a lawsuit.

Wasting? Tesla paid for those courts and associated costs with their taxes as well. They're meant to be used by all.

If I sue somebody for something that will in the end be thrown out and I know if but am only trying to cause a nuisance or maybe trying to pump up my ego then, despite my having paid taxes, I am wasting tax money. Since the tax money is pooled it is hard to say if I am wasting mine or others.

When the government is not cooperating in the good-faith manner with a business, you have no choice but the court to come to a settlement. Is it civilize way to solve disagreements, isn’t?

>> If I sue somebody for something that will in the end be thrown out and I know

It's not at all clear that the lawsuit will fail.