stupidhn
Not sure I'd base my livelihood on fraud.
What a world we live in. Most of the country (and planet) is so broke they are just scraping by, while programmers have "drivers" and personal shoppers. Wouldn't want to distract those people who have to get to work every day to figure out how to sell the poor people ads!
The calculus is simple: liabltiy has increased and you have responsibility due to the commercial transaction.
Most people's experience with Mr. Fresco likely came from the Zeitgeist films, which were sort of a phenomenon and many people's first experience with the "vast, global conspiracy" (right as the world economy imploded in 2008). I count myself as one of those people.
I think a better analogy might be "reading a single article on the internet, then projecting yourself as an expert".
I fully expect that the Pope could debate your average atheist into submission.
Option 2: In the opinion of a Tesla analyst who works for a bank that underwrote Tesla capital raises, it's a strategic move because the Autopilot is so awesome that it will eat away at Model S sales, though the mechanism by which that happens is unclear. And of course, Elon Musk is known for keeping things close to the chest.
I mean, it could be option 2, but I know where I'd put my money.
Being able to pop your trunk (and have it open) on your approach to the car is actually quite convenient. I didn't think much of it until I had the option. I wouldn't call it a deal-breaker though.
People sure are willing to reach with their rationalizations.
You might be right. But consider that, maybe, Tesla has to remove what they can because they now realize that making a $35k EV without losing piles of money is very, very, difficult.
Comparing the safety history of a company that has produced fewer than 200,000 vehicles ever to companies that produce many multiples of that, annually, and have been in operation for over a hundred years is ridiculous.
Man, if you can brand yourself a "tech company" the Silicon Valley technorati will apologize for anything.
People seem to think it matters when they claim Tesla is "above average" in autonomous driving capability, or automated car manufacturing.
But yeah, "who cares" about people getting hurt in blue-collar industries, am I right?
Anything anti-Tesla is part of some PR conspiracy. Meanwhile, 10 vapid, fluff-pieces from Electrek or random Musk tweets show up on the front page every week.
Have you considered that, perhaps, it's not all rainbows and unicorns with this company?
It's far more dangerous to tell people with psychological issues to avoid "drugs".
The brand is already hyper-exclusive and doing extremely well, and I didn't get the impression from the article that there is any concern about the bots.
Perhaps these people are fine doing what they're doing, and don't need to grow, grow, grow the brand. Perhaps it's Silicon Valley that should be learning some lessons here...
No, but we could at least hold out on castigation until it's proven they've broken the law. A class action lawsuit isn't proof of anything.
But I'd hardly describe that as a "reckoning". It sounds more like a predictable "regression to the mean"
China's unprecedented growth is unsustainable; people know this. Case in point: this article.
There are a few subjects where the average HN denizen thinks they know more than the professionals by having read a mainstream book or two. Economics is one. You can identify these people when they ask, 'How come economists couldn't predict the crisis?'
Are you honestly asking whether Mankiw discusses supply/demand price effects in his textbook?
That'd be nice on an island. Otherwise, have fun competing against technology behemoths from other nations, some receiving subsidization from the government.
Imzy is a company that came, raised over $10MM in funding, and went out of business in 7 months. This is the first I've heard of them.
How on earth does that happen? It's inexplicable.
And you base that on what exactly? Their EVs are in the pipeline.
>that also plays it safe with most of their lineup.
As opposed to..who? Who do you consider "living dangerously" in the auto industry?
>Ford's current 2017 lineup still struggles a bit to compete with the original Chevy Volt
Have you considered that they aren't trying to compete in the market yet? That there have been precisely zero EVs that are being produced profitably?
Despite what HN conveys, the EV market is WIDE OPEN. Tesla hasn't won anything. The excitement is forthcoming, not decided.
It'll happen to all these dual-class shares when the tide turns and the tech sector falls from favour.
If you're fine with an iPad 2, the new Surface is probably overkill.
As someone who just retired an iPad 4 (first retina I think?), new tablets will be much faster and lighter. I'm currently using a $200 Lenovo tablet, mostly as an ereader, and it's snappier than the old iPad (though the screen is worse). Also, Opera mini is great on these old devices.
Price has nothing to do with performance?
0-60 time is 0-60 time, regardless of how it feels. "Performance" can be measured. Maybe I'm still missing your point.
Motorcycle enthusiasts understand this concept. Driving an overpowered (for your experience) bike isn't fun compared to throwing a smaller bike around.
Good looking (subjective), reliable, quick, fun to drive?
Why did you buy your car?
The MSRP on the Tesla is twice as much as the ATS, so I would expect performance differences.
>and we rarely do 0-60 in actual real-life driving.
Many people would be mostly satisfied with great handling over speed in daily driving, but don't know what that feels like in a car.