Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[scaesare]

ONLY perception was NNs (though it used quite a few of them, not just one, to do that job)

Admittedly they also discussed portions of procedural code for implementing actual control and execution as well.

 

[jbcarioca]

No comment on those acquistion ideas, but isn’t Tesla already a conglomerate? I’ve long assumed that Tesla is subject to a “conglomerate discount“ due to multiple lines of business.

This is an interesting point.

Seriously, the terms conglomerate/, keiretsu-zaibatsu, chaebol all suggest largely unrelated groups of businesses that are connected by some common shareholding and financial interconnections.I have equated these because the terms are all a bit fexible.

Tesla, in my opinion, would not quality because all their businesses build upon a common technological approach, with common customers. Even when Tesla makes acquisitions, such as Grohmann, Maxwell, Hibar and the others Tesla almost immediately integrates them into Tesla operating units, nearly eliminating other customers. Thus I would call Tesla 'a vertically integrated manufacturer of renewable energy products' or something similar. I would not consider Tesla a conglomerate.

I think the 'Tesla discount' arises because of four related issues:
First, high vertical integration is not well understood in the securities industry. The 'just in time' industrial approach essentially constructs assemblers and franchisers. Thus Tesla is not quite plausible to them. NO auto dealers? That takes vertical integration to an entirely new level! No advertising? How si that even possible? (remember the critics don't yet understand the internet, much less 'word-of-mouth via social media)
Second, The defiance of 'status quo' and constant reinvention cause panic attacks in people who are built to understand momentum, not innovation.
Third, The leadership of Tesla, from Elon Musk to many others like Andrej Karpathy and Andrew Baglino have a common trait. They are all Engineers devoted to the pursuit of better technologies. They all speak in something far afield from the PR-accented simple English of securities analysts.
Four, Tesla accounting rules are among the most conservative among public companies but, a huge but, their income recognition policy is unique in the auto industry, their cash flow results in part from a sales process unique in the auto industry. their energy business is different from all others and, to top it all off, they act as an electrical power distributor in multiple ways, none fo which bear any relationship to what 'securities analysts' know.

Put these four together and magic happens. Magic is anathema to securities analysts. To exacerbate this problem the Tesla work is built on something that is described in "management consultant speak" as 'stretch goals'. Still worse is that these 'stretch goals' are dependent on solving previously insoluble problems, offered by Tesla in glorious detail. The detail, however, is incompressible to people who cannot actually understand the not-very-complex Tesla accounting conventions.

So the message is: "if you are bothered by volatility don't buy TSLA". If you're not prepared to fight constant misunderstanding and misrepresentation from ignorant observers, don't buy TSLA.

We do not need conspiracy to explain ignorance of fact. The probable losers in this transition are enthusiastic critics, and facts just confuse them.
In the meantime we can count on the collective acronyms to fight against progress. US only: SEC, NTSB, FTC, NADA, AMM, UAW and so on.
Still, our four leading issues are enough to feed the opponents for a long time to come.

 

[ByeByeJohnny]

The answer was given because what they will displace is HUMAN jobs. Jobs that people are willing to do and often the alternatives for them are terrible paying jobs. Many many people are unqualified or incapable of doing anything other than boring repetitive jobs. Picking peaches and apples and pruning blueberry stems is still a job and if you are good at it that is $25-35/hour. Which is not bad in rural USA. What they are proposing will gut millions of jobs from the workforce.

That's life though and the answer was obviously something given considerable thought- still I think they botched it. I'd have focused on the jobs for which we don't have adequate labor. Nursing home assistance where they need someone to cut fingernails or polish fingernails or to just make rounds and wave. Someone to weed organically instead of having to use herbicides to control weeds. Someone to take cows out to the next pasture instead of hoping they find their way there. Basically the answer was a reflection of the past and present. I would suggest that they look forward and to the future. As someone working in rural America in the most dangerous job in the USA I am a bit disappointed at the answer.

I think it comes down to whatever job they had named would have gotten pushback. Nuclear cleanup jobs the possible exception.

Anyone holding a job in a field they had named would have been instantly negative to the idea of these bots. So better to try to avoid that.

 

[nativewolf]

But where would I keep my computers?

That's what I mean. They are proposing deep and far reaching changes to humanity. Not only do we have to find new spaces for computers and books sitting on the dining table but we might have to show up to work in a clean tshirt or heaven forbid if you don't have one you'd have to wash the window screens more than once a few years.

 

[fiveten]

So are we all buying today? I might have some coins in the couch to buy a single share, need to look.

 

[ZeApelido]

• I don't get the point of Tesla Bot and how that furthers the mission of sustainable energy and transportation

Humans: Energy intensive with huge CO2 footprint for foodsources

Robots: Feed us clean renewable energy.

 

[NicoV]

But I don't think there's a huge lobby for nuclear meltdown martyrs. That would have been a very good example for him to share.

I doubt the first edition will be enough radiation hardened for that.

 

[thx1139]

Just a warning. My wife got a paycheck today so TSLA and market in general likely to go down.

 

[MC3OZ]

My point was that during the Q&A they were twice asked for what kinds of things might the robot do. Both times the only answer was to repeat
"boring, repetitive, and dangerous" tasks. Of course it's easy to think of lots of such tasks just as many here have done. The thing is that they didn't answer because they didn't want to answer. Announcing even one such task sets a high bar they don't want to set, and for good reason - they haven't started this yet, not even the minimal thinking about the problems so they're not ready to answer. Especially with an absurd 1 year timeline.

Navigating through the world is one thing, interacting with it is another whole ball of wax. There are lots of researchers all over the world working on robotics that "do things" and very little progress has been made. If anyone can solve it, Elon (and the team he will build) can but it will still take a decade or more before it's even slightly general.

Your example is super narrow and might be a good starting point because it is so limited (yet still very difficult), but it's not inspiring so there is no way that would be an answer they could have given last night.

Seems to me most tasks are a specific program or app that is purchased, each app has it's own NN which needs training.
Most tasks will not need the same precision as FSD becuase the Robot will generally move slowly in a constrained space and coming to a complete stop is usually permitted.
The robot owner may need to help train the robot for thier space, but the Robot can build up a detailed map and the owner can help confirm object identifies.
For some tasks a special Telsa tool may need to be purchased, e,g vaccum cleaner lawn mower.

My takeaway was the sci world of robots needing high intelligence and having emotions is inaccurate the user selects a function, like clean house and the Robot does it using a premapped view of that world and the tools they must use.

Mow lawn is a separate program and again the Robot has been trained for that task, perhaps special markers are used to help map the lawn ... e,g a cover for plants that must not be mowed.

Each program while not as intense as FSD is still a lot of work and fleet size is needed for each task.

I can't see how robots can work without something like Dojo, training seems to be needed for every task.

 

[SO16]

Show a place to purchase Dojo and then we will include it.
Heck show Dojo running in an HPC and then we will include it.
Heck show Dojo running on anything other than a test bench in a single node with rudimentary neural network and then we will include it.

There is only one exapod in existence, the other is photoshopped. Hey I can make photoshopped images too and throw specs on there.

I gave this a like because right now it isn’t worth much to the end customer and it isn’t solving problems for them (right at this very moment).

So now the question is, should investors get in before it does mean something to the end customer? The answer seems pretty clear to me. Getting in early before others realize the potential on these types of things can certainly pay off handsomely. This has been my entire TSLA thesis since day one.

 

[22522]

The answer was given because what they will displace is HUMAN jobs. Jobs that people are willing to do and often the alternatives for them are terrible paying jobs. Many many people are unqualified or incapable of doing anything other than boring repetitive jobs. Picking peaches and apples and pruning blueberry stems is still a job and if you are good at it that is $25-35/hour. Which is not bad in rural USA. What they are proposing will gut millions of jobs from the workforce.

That's life though and the answer was obviously something given considerable thought- still I think they botched it. I'd have focused on the jobs for which we don't have adequate labor. Nursing home assistance where they need someone to cut fingernails or polish fingernails or to just make rounds and wave. Someone to weed organically instead of having to use herbicides to control weeds. Someone to take cows out to the next pasture instead of hoping they find their way there. Basically the answer was a reflection of the past and present. I would suggest that they look forward and to the future. As someone working in rural America in the most dangerous job in the USA I am a bit disappointed at the answer.

Elon has said several times that taking care of old people is not a desirable job. I think you may be putting a narrower set of application on this robot than Elon is.

These are meant to be encouraging words.

 

[NicoV]

Humans: Energy intensive with huge CO2 footprint for foodsources

Robots: Feed us clean renewable energy.

Humans are not energy intensive compared to robots. In general, biological systems are very energy efficient. A human consumes around 100 Watt. I doubt Tesla will build an entire robot within that power envelope.

 

[Mengy]

Who knew Dennis Huang could dance?

Nah, it was probably Grimes in the Teslabot suit dancing!

 

[ZeApelido]

Humans are not energy intensive compared to robots. In general, biological systems are very energy efficient. A human consumes around 100 Watt. I doubt Tesla will build an entire robot within that power envelope.

You are talking about at rest, I am talking about when doing physical work.

The conversion of food into ATP, and then ATP into muscle force and work, lose a lot of the energy such that losses can be around 80%.

Battery to motor torque output (ATP into muscle force equivalent) is much more efficient.

At rest...turn the robot off.

 

[StealthP3D]

I can't see much if any connection between a Teslabot and the company's mission ("Tesla’s mission is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy")

Will they find some way to fit the bot in, or will the mission need to be updated?

A key part of transitioning the world to sustainable energy is reducing the amount of energy required to perform necessary or desirable functions. Manufacturing is not going to go away. Every robot that can perform a human task is one less person that needs to be transported to/from work each day. Robots stay at the factory which increases efficiency. The best trip is no trip. Sure, the displaced worker is still going to go places but the lack of needing to be somewhere everyday likely means a whole lot less moving about.

While I think a robot capable of generally replacing typical human workers is perhaps more than a handful of years away, I don't think it's productive to argue that advancements like this could not (eventually) benefit the mission. It's critical that humanity learn how to support our lives more efficiently. If robots can increase our standard of living it will be because it's a more efficient way to do things. But that day is some time off. Currently, it is not considered cost-effective to have the simplest of robots, basically a servo motor and a hinge, turn a solar panel from east to west to keep it pointed at the sun throughout the day due to mechanical expense and the need to keep it functional. I would like to see something like that become cost-effective before assuming we will have humanoid robots that are extremely mechanically complex to perform other menial tasks in a cost-effective way. As Elon said, humans are under-rated.

I do support Tesla developing this but I don't think it will pay for itself for over a decade or more. Eventually, it will be a very lucrative field.

 

[Nocturnal]

Elon no doubt knew the haters wouldn't be able to understand the rest of the presentation and instead focus on the bot. Like handing a child a shiny coin. He just doesn't care. It was a bat signal to all the dreamers and nerds of the world. "Come here. Do cool things...or stick with your current job that doesn't matter."

I think it comes down to whatever job they had named would have gotten pushback. Nuclear cleanup jobs the possible exception.

Anyone holding a job in a field they had named would have been instantly negative to the idea of these bots. So better to try to avoid that.

Nobody wants to care for older people. It's a dirty, thankless job with high turnover and high rates of neglect and abuse.

People who can't do more than basic menial tasks? I'd rather they sit at home and collect UBI from my taxes than do dangerous jobs badly, or neglect the disabled, or ruin break their backs etc.

 

[StealthP3D]

Nah, it was probably Grimes in the Teslabot suit dancing!

I assumed it was Grimes (but I am not familiar with her dancing ability or style) so just an uniformed guess based on the fact that she played Cybergirl at the Cybertruck reveal.

 

[AquaY]

This is what happens when your mission statement is more than "make money for the boss".... you get the most talented engineers in the world. (SpaceX and Tesla battle for the number 1 and 2 spots)

I'm sure they all do the work for free.

 

[nativewolf]

These are meant to be encouraging words.

Oh I think quite alot about this topic so I don't think I'm off base there. Boring repetitive dangerous jobs is something a lawyer would write or someone trying to think like a lawyer(having consulted with big law firms for years before heading back to forestry that is just personal experience). That's risk control, caution and driving with a rearview mirror. I can imagine what this will mean for my industry ..very clearly. One way is we'll be able to cut 8/10 jobs on the upstream side of things. But that's the negative way of looking at it. The point I believe they should have made is not what sorts of jobs they'll do but imagine a world where our infirm are treated more humanely, where an disabled child is cared for 24/7, where farms are cleaner, where an entrepreneurs dreams are not constrained by labor. For us it will mean we can expand our line of sustainably harvested wood products and sell furniture directly to those desiring to pay for furniture really sourced from sustainably harvested forest (vs the sham certification such as FSC, etc). We can focus our limited time on further developing the certification process, we can pay our landowners more for the forest we manage, we can pay ourselves (would be nice), we can invest more in automating our forest planning processes.

In short it is not about what sorts of jobs the robot will do but what they will enable society to do. Trying to be clear and maybe I was not; I think this is a very important distinction because all the press is going to talk about is robots taking jobs. We need to move the conversation past robots taking jobs to making a better society.

 

[JusRelax]

Anyone that was wondering if Tesla will monetize Dojo to create AWS for AI, I believe your answer is right here:

I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have made dojo so easy to drop into PyTorch coding unless they had plans to monetize Dojo usage for AI. They also mentioned during the talk how they could control how many D1 chips were used for a processing job, which would imply to me that they are already considering how they can handle many different jobs of many sizes simultaneously.