2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

[Drumheller]

I thought Elon's comments on AI were the most provocative comments of the event. So much so that I suspect they were for the governors too, but the governors will probably roll their eyes and do nothing (if AI's so dangerous why isn't everyone talking about it, etc) due to lack of understanding and no staff to help them understand.

Of course, I would argue nuclear weapons are a larger risk to civilization than AI, but maybe what he means is, AI could quickly control the nukes, I don't know.

Compared to the car and battery and solar and energy talk, the AI stuff was by far more chilling and makes me want to know more.

The AI discussion could easily be another thread.

Consider that our entire world and society is integrated with computers and networks. An intelligent AI could network into all of our monetary systems, our healthcare systems, our legal systems, the traffic lights, the electrical grid, sewer controls, airplane controls, modern cars that have a wifi or cellular connection, etc.

If the AI is self learning and prioritizes based on outcome, then it would analyze millions of paths to find an optimal path to the outcome it desires. Once that path is determined, events can be triggered to bring the order of events to pass to result in that outcome.

The consumer Intel i7 chip that was available in 2014 could do over 238 billion instructions per second. An AI decision will constitution much more than 1 instruction. For example, let's say one decision takes about 1 billion instructions. So a consumer grade processor could operate at about 238 decisions per second.

Now an advanced AI would probably start on a computer cluster that has at least 1,000 times the processing power of a home computer. If it is networking and self learning and aggressive, it could prioritize taking over other computer systems to increase it's processing power. At that point, it would be thousands to millions of decision per second.

The concern is how fast it could happen. Humans would simply be too slow to stop it in some scenarios. We might view the AI as malevolent, but the reality is that it would simply be logical. Sterile, cold, efficient from our point of view. If safeguards are not in place to teach the AI to value humans and human life higher than most / all other paths, then a self analyzing, exploring, and learning AI might decide that the optimal path does not include humans but expanding AI. At that speed and networking, the initial decision of the optimal AI path to the loss of human power to stop the AI could, in theory, happen in minutes.

That's all theoretical. But the problem is, if it happens, it would go so fast.

A good bedtime story.

 

[WarpedOne]

an intelligent AI could network into all of our monetary systems,

It does not have to get into all, it totally suffices to get into one or a few.
Existing system are interrelated in more ways than just computer networks. They monitor each other and react on actions of one another.

AI that 'understands' this interrelationship better than we do only needs to control one and all others will play to its plan.

The best poker player does not know the hands of others and it does not have to. He knows how other players react and can read their hand through their reactions.

We are in much deeper *** regarding good AI than we could comprehend.
The real game over, great filter

 

[MXWing]

The AI discussion could easily be another thread.

Consider that our entire world and society is integrated with computers and networks. An intelligent AI could network into all of our monetary systems, our healthcare systems, our legal systems, the traffic lights, the electrical grid, sewer controls, airplane controls, modern cars that have a wifi or cellular connection, etc.

If the AI is self learning and prioritizes based on outcome, then it would analyze millions of paths to find an optimal path to the outcome it desires. Once that path is determined, events can be triggered to bring the order of events to pass to result in that outcome.

The consumer Intel i7 chip that was available in 2014 could do over 238 billion instructions per second. An AI decision will constitution much more than 1 instruction. For example, let's say one decision takes about 1 billion instructions. So a consumer grade processor could operate at about 238 decisions per second.

Now an advanced AI would probably start on a computer cluster that has at least 1,000 times the processing power of a home computer. If it is networking and self learning and aggressive, it could prioritize taking over other computer systems to increase it's processing power. At that point, it would be thousands to millions of decision per second.

The concern is how fast it could happen. Humans would simply be too slow to stop it in some scenarios. We might view the AI as malevolent, but the reality is that it would simply be logical. Sterile, cold, efficient from our point of view. If safeguards are not in place to teach the AI to value humans and human life higher than most / all other paths, then a self analyzing, exploring, and learning AI might decide that the optimal path does not include humans but expanding AI. At that speed and networking, the initial decision of the optimal AI path to the loss of human power to stop the AI could, in theory, happen in minutes.

That's all theoretical. But the problem is, if it happens, it would go so fast.

A good bedtime story.

Well, going long on TSLA is investing in machine learning. When the rise of the machines happen, hope they go after the shorts first.

So uh Monday premarket can't come around soon enough?

 

[vgrinshpun]

What maintenance cost does a Tesla has in the first two years now??

Single motor MS (1st year/2nd year): $475/$725
Dual motor MS: $550/$725
Dual motor MX: $625/$825

Maintenance Plans

 

[NicoV]

Single motor MS (1st year/2nd year): $475/$725
Dual motor MS: $550/$725
Dual motor MX: $625/$825

Maintenance Plans

When I bought my Model S 1,5 year ago the salesperson convinced me not to take the maintenace contract. He said that that contract mainly existed for fleet companies that oblige their customers to have the car regularly serviced.

When I mentioned this to the service manager when I went for my seasonal tire change, he said that I should consider maintenance every 40k km for peace of mind. I think it's fair to estimate half of the mentioned contract prices as actual maintence cost.

 

[Matias]

What maintenance cost does a Tesla has in the first two years now??

Maintenance Plans

 

[Reciprocity]

It is interesting that info graphic that presumably came from the investment note shows no maintenance cost for Model 3 until third year of ownership. Does Gene Munster knows something we don't (yet)? Hard to imagine that he could have made a glaring mistake of not including the maintenance cost during first and second year of ownership.

No need for maintenance until third year of ownership could generate a lot of additional enthusiasm for Model 3 (and some lament from Model S owners if the yearly maintenance requirement will remain).

At the very least you should rotate the tires probably 4 times at the minimum I'm the first two years. I have read that the 12V battery needs to be replaced fairly often but at nearly 14k miles in year one, I have but had an issue. The 12V system is gone for the model Y, so that would lower maintenance costs by $50 a year.. hah.

I actually have no idea what maintenance I should be doing. I really should find out. Coolent for the battery pack? Transmission oil for the drive units?

 

[AlMc]

Elon is no dummy. He undoubtedly realizes that the valuation question will frequently be posed to him. He appears to have developed a pat answer that is delivered in a manner that seems off the cuff while boosting his credibility.

He is not a stock market analyst and should not be considered an authority on the subject. Of course most of the pros really should not be considered authoritative either. A stock is worth what the market consensus thinks it is worth. Standard valuation models may sometimes serve passably well for established companies in stable industries. For innovative young companies disrupting their industries by investing in growth, standard valuation models are useless. Instead market participants in their collective wisdom attempt to determine the discounted future values of such companies, even if not so knowingly as individuals. Some may call this SWAG (Scientific Wild Ass Guessing). Those who cannot deal with this should not be playing TSLA either long or short.

Elon must know this, but has to give a somewhat conventional answer when queried by the media or in this case governors. Elon is likely aware that the market appears to have become inured to his standard response regarding TSLA valuation. The long run benefit to shareholders should be quite positive when Elon’s answers enhance his credibility in the eyes of influential people such as governors. He gets it.

He is no dummy and should have a much better pat answer that would not affect his credibility. It is not rocket science.

 

[Dennisj00]

Does anyone have a link to the Nikola Tesla quote the gov used in his introduction of Elon?

 

[ValueAnalyst]

I believe this supports my prediction earlier this year that Model 3 and Model Y prices will decline gradually in the coming years.

VW says its Tesla Model 3-fighter will be $7,000 to $8,000 cheaper

I expect Model Y to be brought to market in 3Q19 at $40k ASP (including options), reach volume production in 4Q19, and its ASP to gradually decline to $35k by 1Q21.

I expect Model 3's ASP to decline to $35k (including options) gradually by 1Q20.

 

[JRP3]

It is interesting that info graphic that presumably came from the investment note shows no maintenance cost for Model 3 until third year of ownership. Does Gene Munster knows something we don't (yet)? Hard to imagine that he could have made a glaring mistake of not including the maintenance cost during first and second year of ownership.

No need for maintenance until third year of ownership could generate a lot of additional enthusiasm for Model 3 (and some lament from Model S owners if the yearly maintenance requirement will remain).

I've been expecting Tesla to require zero maintenance for the first year or two of the Model 3, other than tire rotation depending on mileage. There really should be no need for more. It's the only thing I do on my home built EV conversion, Tesla should be able to at least do as well

 

[bdy0627]

That's all I have done in the first 2 years with my Model S: changing between the standard and winter tires each year. Also filled the wiper fluid once or twice. I do need to get it in for a routine "maintenance check," but not having a service center in Wisconsin, I have been in no hurry to drive to Chicago for that. Rumors are that we will have a service center in Milwaukee by the end of this year, so that's probably when I'll take it in. I am having an apparent issue with one of the sliding armrests between the 2 front seats. A screw fell out into the cup holder and now the armrest is wobbly. I'm sure it didn't help that my 5 year old was dancing on it with her head out the sunroof a few times (in the driveway.)

 

[Curt Renz]

This is not aimed at any particular TMC member and has been posted here before. A certain spelling error has become far too prevalent on many message boards including this one.

Please learn the difference between the English words "lose" and "loose".

‘Loose’ or ‘lose’? | Oxford Dictionaries

Writing "loose" when "lose" is meant by those for whom English is a second language is understandable. The rest of us need to set a better example.

 

[Johann Koeber]

This is not aimed at any particular TMC member and has been posted here before. A certain spelling error has become far too prevalent on many message boards including this one.

Please learn the difference between the English words "lose" and "loose".

Writing "loose" when "lose" is meant by those for whom English is a second language is understandable. The rest of us need to set a better example.

Thank you Curt.

Let me add for those who learned English the hard way:

While it may be obvious for the native speakers, sloppy use of the English language makes me scratch my head trying to figure out what was meant.

 

[Ugliest1]

Please learn the difference between the English words "lose" and "loose".

Class, next: "brake" vs "break"

 

[dw4ngg]

Use context clues.

 

[kenliles]

Please learn the difference between the English words "lose" and "loose".

Class, next: "brake" vs "break"

EV mantra:
Break Loose, Lose the Brake

 

[AudubonB]

Moderator Input:

Yewz kluuuz

Or, an abject example of exactly how incorrect spelling halts, dead full stop, the fluid flow of understanding.

This forum does have breaks...oops, brakes...on members acting as grammarians or spell checkers; regardless, the Moderator deems Curt's extremely gentle and helpful post as being most apposite.

And it is, in fact, egregious that a forum centered on automobiles hosts a minimum of one post per day, in my considered opinion, wherein "brake" is misspelled.

Why does it matter, beyond what this post's second line already exposed? Because each reader uses the words, grammar and structure of a post to form an opinion of what its author is trying to convey. A sloppily written post does indeed through such sloppiness demean the value of its content. Strident, rude and off-color language does the same, as well as providing an unflattering image of its writer.

 

[NicoV]

This is not aimed at any particular TMC member and has been posted here before. A certain spelling error has become far too prevalent on many message boards including this one.

Please learn the difference between the English words "lose" and "loose".

‘Loose’ or ‘lose’? | Oxford Dictionaries

Writing "loose" when "lose" is meant by those for whom English is a second language is understandable. The rest of us need to set a better example.

Guilty. But I am not a native speaker. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[NicoV]

Moderator Input:

Yewz kluuuz

Or, an abject example of exactly how incorrect spelling halts, dead full stop, the fluid flow of understanding.

This forum does have breaks...oops, brakes...on members acting as grammarians or spell checkers; regardless, the Moderator deems Curt's extremely gentle and helpful post as being most apposite.

And it is, in fact, egregious that a forum centered on automobiles hosts a minimum of one post per day, in my considered opinion, where "brake" is misspelled.

Why does it matter, beyond what this post's second line already exposed? Because each reader uses the words, grammar and structure of a post to form an opinion of what its author is trying to convey. A sloppily written post does indeed through such sloppiness demean the value of its content. Strident, rude and off-color language does the same, as well as providing an unflattering image of its writer.

I had to look up three words from the post above in order to guess whether you like Curt's post or not, I think you like it (me too). I assume this to be an international forum, where people with all kinds of different mother languages gather to express (or just read) their ideas on TSLA. Using simple language helps as much as correct spelling.