-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
Aren't you expecting a sell off after earnings - hopefully very short term?!
Emotionally I agree. However, the better technology becomes the easier using it becomes. That certainly is the case with aircraft as it is with automobiles and computers. "Dumbing down" iOS the process that allows broader acceptance; it is making operation easier and more intuitive while being less error prone. I suspect you'd agree with all that.
The problem I'm thinking about is just vocabulary. Nothing in my statements suggested dictating who does what. It does suggest making as much as possible easier to understand to poorly informed people. It has nothing to do with what is often called Political Correctnesss. It has to do with easy communication.
Many of us, are disagreeing with me, almost of of you are ones I respect. We do, I think, have an obligation to better understand the people buying Tesla products who are not Weill-informed, thoughtful or even well-disciplined. To wit: the early adopters, like most of us, are being joined by the 'hoi polloi'. How should Tesla cope with that transition?
Dumbing Down: making complex products usable by the mass market.
woodisgood
Optimustic Pessimist
We're all sick of it. The enemies of electrification will continue their pursuit of any means necessary. It's disgusting and disheartening, but we all know when money is involved everything else is second priority, even the fate of our beautiful planet and the health of our people.
The difference is, by now it's quite obvious that the FUD will NOT end the mission, and it will NOT crush Tesla. That makes it a little easier. Tesla has essentially won, and now it's just a matter of watching events play out with a sense of security that was absent for early shareholders and supporters of the company.
Regarding words, names and trademarks -
First - and I do say this not with humility but with pride - I think that most here recognize, and some acknowledge, that I wear the mantle of TMC’s word maven. The most “Disagrees” I’ve ever garnered was, in fact, for a post in which I declared “Words matter.”
Now, I understand, appreciate but disagree with the crux of @jbcarioca’s post. @Unpilot, @StealthP3D, @Krugerrand and others disagree for different reasons; mine are encompassed in my reasonably longstanding Sig-line. In that the new TMC format truncates signatures, I’m repeating it in-post:
”To NHTSA, NTSB and German Courts: Ban the deceptive word ‘Automobile’!”
Now, before someone jumps in with historical claims of intent: no - you cannot claim that “auto” means “horseless”, because it does not, regardless of whether that was indeed the intent of the word’s originators. However, even if you wish to take that line, it thereupon opens the use of the prefix to mean exactly what Tesla chooses it to mean.
And yes, I am being tongue-in-cheek with my call for proscription. Rather, I am using my line’s obvious facetiousness to shame them for their two-facedness. It is utterly incumbent, to the point that ===>NO<=== deviation must occur, upon those in authority and those charged with upholding and interpreting the law that they remain consistent in their dictates and terminology. One cannot, I aver, turn a blind eye to the idiocy of “automobile” and then proscribe “autopilot”.
With that, I would address @jbcarioca’s concerns by suggesting that rather than capitulating and altering its name, there should be a movement, one in which Mr Musk should aggressively participate, to excoriate those criticizing “autopilot” by revealing this double standard - this duplicity.
First - and I do say this not with humility but with pride - I think that most here recognize, and some acknowledge, that I wear the mantle of TMC’s word maven. The most “Disagrees” I’ve ever garnered was, in fact, for a post in which I declared “Words matter.”
Now, I understand, appreciate but disagree with the crux of @jbcarioca’s post. @Unpilot, @StealthP3D, @Krugerrand and others disagree for different reasons; mine are encompassed in my reasonably longstanding Sig-line. In that the new TMC format truncates signatures, I’m repeating it in-post:
”To NHTSA, NTSB and German Courts: Ban the deceptive word ‘Automobile’!”
Now, before someone jumps in with historical claims of intent: no - you cannot claim that “auto” means “horseless”, because it does not, regardless of whether that was indeed the intent of the word’s originators. However, even if you wish to take that line, it thereupon opens the use of the prefix to mean exactly what Tesla chooses it to mean.
And yes, I am being tongue-in-cheek with my call for proscription. Rather, I am using my line’s obvious facetiousness to shame them for their two-facedness. It is utterly incumbent, to the point that ===>NO<=== deviation must occur, upon those in authority and those charged with upholding and interpreting the law that they remain consistent in their dictates and terminology. One cannot, I aver, turn a blind eye to the idiocy of “automobile” and then proscribe “autopilot”.
With that, I would address @jbcarioca’s concerns by suggesting that rather than capitulating and altering its name, there should be a movement, one in which Mr Musk should aggressively participate, to excoriate those criticizing “autopilot” by revealing this double standard - this duplicity.
Contributing to this deluge of incredible assertions regarding the accident is likely the fact that the police officer who responded to the accident right out asserted that no one was driving. While to me this seems to be a wholly inappropriate and untimely statement from a responding police officer, the media is not going to ignore that. This is the best I could find as a source for this initial claim - although I believe initial reports named a different police officer as being the first to make a statement at the scene:
Tesla Crash That Killed 2 Had No Driver, Houston Cops Say
The Tesla crash that killed 2 in Texas happened with nobody behind the wheel.
www.tmz.com
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Pezpunk
Active Member
I know there's nothing wrong with the name "Autopilot". But changing the name would disarm Tesla's enemies of one of their favorite weapons -- permanently ending one of the most common lines of attack. The cost to Tesla would be mild inconvenience. It's an easy win, objectively. But petty pride stand in the way of actually taking that road. Most people would rather FEEL strong and beat their chest stubbornly rather than actually BE strong and do the smart, pragmatic thing that would negatively impact their emotions for a moment, but ultimately move them closer to achieving their long-term goals.
Making actual, real-world large scale change requires intelligent choices that remove roadblocks from the path. Standing there yelling that the roadblock has no right to be there -- even correctly -- is the dumb thing to do. It makes one feel superior, but it is ultimately a weak course of action that accomplishes nothing.
We've been entrenched in the dumb "autopilot" name debate for YEARS. So rip the rug out from under Tesla's opponents. Problem solved. Force THEM to scramble and do the work to find some other tool to attack with, make THEM have to do the work of establishing some new negative narrative. Put THEM on the defensive and in a position of having to build a new obstacle somewhere else further down the path. It would cost Tesla practically nothing.
That's how to move forward on this if one cares more about the long-term goals than one's own ego.
Will it end their assaults, or be considered an admission of guilt?
I really hate to disagree with you, but I must. As for training pilots I did that including LA and NY. Over and over I trained pilots transitioning to PIC in Boeing and Airbus products. Over and over I had to do remedial training in basic 'stick and rudder' skills and cope with inadequate knowledge of aircraft systems. Of course nearly all of them did not grow up in military training, nor were they with major US airlines. Bluntly, I am referring to the masses who do not have proper backgrounds nor training. We all know where most airline accidents come from. We also know fly-by-night freight operators also have those poor accident rates.
The point I am addressing is mass market adoption with poor command of the technologies they use. By definition most of us are fairly technologically literate and we are mostly early adopters. Neither we nor other well trained, disciplined or qualified people are the ones I am discussing.
Pezpunk
Active Member
Either way it forces them to change tactics, which waters down their message and allows Tesla to move forward. As far as sacrifices go, it's nothing. It's the product name of a collection of features. It's very, very low on the list of things Tesla needs to dominate the world.
LiveLong&Profit
Member
Kind words - many thanks!
Yes, it somewhat changes my view.
Only somewhat, though. The missing but promised solar panels are a bit of an IOU: Tesla has been cash-strapped, and bandwidth-strapped for years, but with ~20B in cash, at some point you run out of excuses for not having many of your rooftops covered in solar panels if you want to be taken seriously as a global new energy leader. Better late than never...! Tesla is getting to a point where ill-will and bad PR is more costly than just doing the right thing, and carpet-bomb your roofs with solar, regardless of any long-term plan. You can can chalk it up to marketing.
Yeah, it seems there is a stampede of people fleeing California in general and going to Austin (amongst them a lot of comedians I follow, so not only business but also culture...) and some (much fewer i suspect) might stamp by Nevada as well, good point.
Tesla epitomizes being agile. Just because they have pivoted away from Giga Nevada does not preclude them pivoting back! I could see them using Giga Nevada for a lot of things, but fundamentally, the co-location effect of people and goods seems very important in Elons and Teslas world-view.
If, in the end, bright and talented engineers are the critical gating function for Teslas future growth then the question we must answer is: Where do bright and talented engineers want to live?
That only works if they are legitimately concerned citizens & regulators. My bet is once TSLA has changed the name, they will have zero trouble finding something else and they are going to be exactly like this: "Remember Tesla admitted it was wrong to name the feature Autopilot? Now they are doing THIS."
Maybe Elon will announce that his sons will take TSLA private with their recent gains on Doge.
Last edited:
Then why is iOS much harder and less intuitive to use now? Some of that is replacing colours with shades of grey that aren't always apparent at a glance. But a lot of it is that it's now much harder to find what you want to do. (and yes, iOS isn't as bad as some others).
MarketWatch - this morning: Mizuho Boosts TSLA Price Target
Excerpt:
Rakesh reiterated his buy rating but raised his stock price target to $820, which implies a 15% gain off Monday’s closing price, from $775.
Excerpt:
Rakesh reiterated his buy rating but raised his stock price target to $820, which implies a 15% gain off Monday’s closing price, from $775.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
Additionally, for those old enough to recall when "Cruise Control" appeared as an option on cars, there were were incidents where drivers engaged cruise and then fully expected the car to drive itself (rather than merely keep the speed constant as intended).
There were collisions and deaths as a result. Yet, "Cruise Control" survived. Now, years later, it is perfectly clear what the term's meaning is to the majority of drivers.
Tesla's Autopilot and FSD are so much safer, even in circumstances where the meaning is misunderstood. It will actively attempt to prevent a crash due to negligence. Not always successfully, mostly because humans are particularly clever in finding ways to harm themselves.
At some point we need to accept that part of the evolution of any species on the planet includes mistakes that result in death, and in disruption for that gene set propagating further. No amount of Luddishness or Political Correctness can overcome people's ability to make stupid mistakes.
Joe F
Disruption is hard.
Fight fire with fire?
Those of us with Twitter: Ask the Harris County Fire Marshal's Office Twitter account, @hcfmo and tag the Today Show's Twitter @TODAYshow asking why it took their fire company 4 hours to put out a raging fire. Maybe tag Tesla, Musk and someone with a ton of followers to amplify the message. I'm going to tag CNBC as well, not that they care...
Let the FUD correction come from the fire department.
Word it stating that you saw on the Today Show that your fire department took four hours to put out a car fire, and ask why would it take them so long?
Teslarati - this morning: Fire Chief Debunks Media Coverage of Tesla Crash
Excerpt of fire chief's comments:
“With respect to the fire fight, unfortunately, those rumors grew way out of control. It did not take us four hours to put out the blaze. Our guys got there and put down the fire within two to three minutes, enough to see the vehicle had occupants. After that, it was simply cooling the car as the batteries continued to have a chain reaction due to damage.
“We could not tear it apart or move it around to get ‘final extinguishment’ because the fact that we had two bodies in there and it was then an investigation-slash-crime scene. We had to keep it cool, were on scene for four hours, but we were simply pouring a little bit of water on it. It was not because flames were coming out. It was a reaction in the battery pan. It was not an active fire,” Buck said.
“We did not (call Tesla), and I do not know where (that rumor) came from. There is a chance someone else did, maybe the Harris County Fire Marshal, but we did not call (Tesla). Tesla has an emergency manual for first responders,”
“The first calls that came in were a fire in the woods. Then we got at 9:30 p.m. where we got the first call when someone said, ‘I see a car in a tree, and it is on fire. They reported a car hit a tree, and it had exploded… That is when we added extra units (to the response). There is a big lake, and (the accident) was just to the left of the lake, closer to the exiting part of the street, not the end of the cul de sac. It was at an undeveloped lot.
“(The Tesla) was heavily involved in flames. When the fire was put out, it was noticed there were two bodies (inside), and they were deceased. They continued extinguishment of the woods around (the car), putting out the trees and pine needles and what have you. I was there probably five to 10 minutes after that and at that point, every once in a while, the (battery) reaction would flame and it was mainly keeping water pouring on the battery,” Buck explained, adding that this was a process recommended by Tesla in cases of burning batteries.
Excerpt of fire chief's comments:
“With respect to the fire fight, unfortunately, those rumors grew way out of control. It did not take us four hours to put out the blaze. Our guys got there and put down the fire within two to three minutes, enough to see the vehicle had occupants. After that, it was simply cooling the car as the batteries continued to have a chain reaction due to damage.
“We could not tear it apart or move it around to get ‘final extinguishment’ because the fact that we had two bodies in there and it was then an investigation-slash-crime scene. We had to keep it cool, were on scene for four hours, but we were simply pouring a little bit of water on it. It was not because flames were coming out. It was a reaction in the battery pan. It was not an active fire,” Buck said.
“We did not (call Tesla), and I do not know where (that rumor) came from. There is a chance someone else did, maybe the Harris County Fire Marshal, but we did not call (Tesla). Tesla has an emergency manual for first responders,”
“The first calls that came in were a fire in the woods. Then we got at 9:30 p.m. where we got the first call when someone said, ‘I see a car in a tree, and it is on fire. They reported a car hit a tree, and it had exploded… That is when we added extra units (to the response). There is a big lake, and (the accident) was just to the left of the lake, closer to the exiting part of the street, not the end of the cul de sac. It was at an undeveloped lot.
“(The Tesla) was heavily involved in flames. When the fire was put out, it was noticed there were two bodies (inside), and they were deceased. They continued extinguishment of the woods around (the car), putting out the trees and pine needles and what have you. I was there probably five to 10 minutes after that and at that point, every once in a while, the (battery) reaction would flame and it was mainly keeping water pouring on the battery,” Buck explained, adding that this was a process recommended by Tesla in cases of burning batteries.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
