Re:That Tesla Data: What It Says and What It Doesn’t
by brown9-2 on Thursday February 14, 2013 @07:20PM
(#5223601)
Does no one else find it odd that everyone accepts the Tesla-provided data as a given fact, given that they are the only people with access to it?
Can a third party verify the data?
And how do readers know that the data-collection itself works without flaws?
Re:That Tesla Data: What It Says and What It Doesn’t
by TillE on Thursday February 14, 2013 @07:29PM
(#5223640)
The whole thing hinges on whether you're stupid enough to leave Norwich without sufficiently charging.
Do the same run a hundred more times, and nobody will fail as long as they exercise that basic amount of care. In that sense, reproduction is pointless. We already know the result, within a margin of error.
Re:That Tesla Data: What It Says and What It Doesn’t
by HelloMcFly on Thursday February 14, 2013 @10:47PM
(#5224317)
I just don't think that's fair. If Tesla Engineers tell you "an hour's charge will bring the battery back" then I think many people would just take that at face value.
I don't think so, it's just that one part of the HN crowd likes data more than 'someone said'.
So now it is up to Tesla to provide even more data, preferably with an exact re-run of the conditions in the presence of said journalist. That should clear up any kind of difference and would establish whether or not there is either a bug in the system, a bug in the procedures or a systemic problem with the car. If the problem can't be reproduced with proper handling of the car then there should be a retraction. Regardless of which it is the bickering should stop.