Fisker model will be built in Ohio by Foxconn plant says Fisker on CNBC.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sarcasm tends to demand a soupçon of intelligence. /s demeans the very concept.Sarcasm is not as sarcastic when you put /s
Legacy would be too slow for Elon. At this point Tesla could probably get a new factory up and running before the legacy partner could get a "tesla" model out.Seems to me Tesla doesn't have the bandwidth to service a partnership and provide for the scale they need to grow their own business
The flaw in your premise is one of causation.Sarcasm tends to demand a soupçon of intelligence. /s demeans the very concept.
E Musk is adept, and rarely explains when he deploys the concept. Sarcasm is mocking, bitter, contemptuous by intent, thus marking a sarcastic comment as such defeats the very purpose.
In Musk usage sarcasm regularly generates stupid and ignorant responses, precisely as sarcasm is intended to do.
If we accept that premise, drawn from OED definitions, we also must accept misunderstanding as a purposeful impact if sarcasm…
So we also should accept a certain amount of stock price volatility that results from sarcasm. After all, the market manipulators tend to be regarded as inarticulate, greedy and ignorant. Thus they are ideal targets for sarcasm.
For those of us who are day traders, my ‘analysis’ shows an incredibly high correlation between E. Musk sarcastic comments and TSLA momentary share price drops. Bet on that and you’ll prove the entire thesis.
You expect Tesla and SpaceX to solve all the worlds problems? Putting a giant dent in climate change and making our species multi planetary while also making a profit is not enough?Elon continues to ignore the collapse of biodiversity, which is a much bigger threat than climate change already. None of his projects aims at preventing this catastrophe and IMO, both SpaceX and Tesla will speed up the biodiversity collapse by 1) reducing the cost of transportation, 2) making it easier to live/work in remote places (however clean!) and 3) reducing the cost of labor (which makes it muich easier to exploit nature for some quick bucks).
That's a long story but remember it took a long time for Elon to realize that climate change had become an existential risk (he admitted to recognize this long after he joined/funded Tesla). Since biodiversity collapse is happening now and keeps accelerating (NB: world leaders are only starting to work on CO2 emissions when biodiversity is dropping at a faster rate than temperature are rising...), I doubt Elon will change his position early enough, mostly because all his projects will be at the forefront of the new main threat. We'll see...
I generally agree with you on that (and I'd guess most everyone here does) but @AudubonB is absolutely correct in cases where an information source continues to state things as fact, without a source or basis for their info and is always wrong. That's noise, not signal, and we should strive to reduce that here. And noise like that is materially different than a source that shares estimates and shows their work and even engages here like Troy. No comparison.I can't believe people are seriously talking about censoring. I mean...have they learned nothing? Nothing? How could you care about Tesla and want to censor anything?
NOW I understand!Sarcasm tends to demand a soupçon of intelligence. /s demeans the very concept.
E Musk is adept, and rarely explains when he deploys the concept. Sarcasm is mocking, bitter, contemptuous by intent, thus marking a sarcastic comment as such defeats the very purpose.
In Musk usage sarcasm regularly generates stupid and ignorant responses, precisely as sarcasm is intended to do.
If we accept that premise, drawn from OED definitions, we also must accept misunderstanding as a purposeful impact if sarcasm…
So we also should accept a certain amount of stock price volatility that results from sarcasm. After all, the market manipulators tend to be regarded as inarticulate, greedy and ignorant. Thus they are ideal targets for sarcasm.
For those of us who are day traders, my ‘analysis’ shows an incredibly high correlation between E. Musk sarcastic comments and TSLA momentary share price drops. Bet on that and you’ll prove the entire thesis.
Elon continues to ignore the collapse of biodiversity, which is a much bigger threat than climate change already. None of his projects aims at preventing this catastrophe and IMO, both SpaceX and Tesla will speed up the biodiversity collapse by 1) reducing the cost of transportation, 2) making it easier to live/work in remote places (however clean!) and 3) reducing the cost of labor (which makes it muich easier to exploit nature for some quick bucks).
That's a long story but remember it took a long time for Elon to realize that climate change had become an existential risk (he admitted to recognize this long after he joined/funded Tesla). Since biodiversity collapse is happening now and keeps accelerating (NB: world leaders are only starting to work on CO2 emissions when biodiversity is dropping at a faster rate than temperature are rising...), I doubt Elon will change his position early enough, mostly because all his projects will be at the forefront of the new main threat. We'll see...
Does anyone expect one person to solve every problem? Clearly not.You expect Tesla and SpaceX to solve all the worlds problems? Putting a giant dent in climate change and making our species multi planetary while also making a profit is not enough?
Yes...but...to say "Elon continues to ignore the collapse of biodiversity" that is too much IMHO.Does anyone expect one person to solve every problem? Clearly not.
That does not mean it's wrong to point out existing problems that are insufficiently addressed, in my opinion.
Maybe in another thread. Let's stick to Tesla and not increase noise on this forum. Thank You, in advance.Does anyone expect one person to solve every problem? Clearly not.
That does not mean it's wrong to point out existing problems that are insufficiently addressed, in my opinion.
Thank you for the correction. /sMaybe in another thread. Let's stick to Tesla and not increase noise on this forum. Thank You, in advance.
Well... cureVac is working on that .. & they aquired stuff via the grohman-aquisition ..Yes...but...to say "Elon continues to ignore the collapse of biodiversity" that is too much IMHO.
Why not also say "Elon STILL has not cured cancer"
That’s typically not how partnerships go when melding two different cultures - I’m referencing ‘smoothness’ of decisions, plans, movement towards goal, etc…Better to have friends than enemies.
There would have been 0 risk to Giga Berlin delays or shenanigans had Tesla partnered with Mercedes as an example. Build ANOTHER factory with their money, put Tesla batteries and AP software in those cars.
You open up EV lines that didn't exist before and Tesla doesn't have the bandwidth to handle. EV Minivans, EV coupes, EV SUVs without FWD.
Selfishly, I would personally love a Mercedes Sprinter van with FSD a 225KW battery pack.
Assuming you did it without visually looking at the charts, how were you able to identify this? Which platform did you use?
I agree wholeheartedly with this.That’s typically not how partnerships go when melding two different cultures - I’m referencing ‘smoothness’ of decisions, plans, movement towards goal, etc…
The Panasonic partnership has certainly had visible ups and downs. Most assuredly there’s a lot we don’t know and I’m positive it’s not all been silky whipped cream.
Indeed, partnerships tend to epically fail at some point. It’s a rare partnership that lasts simply because it takes a lot of work by both parties on so many levels when they START on the same page. Tesla and Mercedes are not even reading from the same book.
As much as it would help ‘us’ for other companies and entrepreneurs to partner with Elon and his various companies, the truth to me seems to be that most are unwilling to risk everything for what’s important for all.
I don’t foresee any automotive partnerships consisting of the old guard. Toyota, Mercedes and Daimler all had a chance to go big with Tesla and they all packed up their toys and went home. I believe it’s too late now. Elon wouldn’t hardly give an inch when Tesla was struggling to survive, he’s not going to now. It’s his way (what he believes to be the best approach) or it’s no way. And there’s no way Mercedes is going to do it Elon’s way.
I agree that the idea aligns with the mission... and I think Elon remains open to the concept/idea, however a couple of things have seemed to become evident over time:Well, no reason other than the Tesla Mission Statement.
Such an arrangement offers Tesla the opportunity to increase the rate of the transition.
Or, do you think that Elon is just an "us versus them" kinda guy? I don't.