It's not as if I live out in the sticks. Our city borders on Dallas.Maybe it wasn't worth their while for the rates/charge? A RT can go there, but I'm sure this is something that $$ can fix.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's not as if I live out in the sticks. Our city borders on Dallas.Maybe it wasn't worth their while for the rates/charge? A RT can go there, but I'm sure this is something that $$ can fix.
Obviously this is a big thing. Has there been any communication from Tesla explaining what they are going to do beside the layoffs/firings?
I agree there will be ownership for quite some time. Maybe, as we previously discussed, the "second car" could be avoided... I mean, if every day I go to work and then send the car home to my wife, society gets more traffic, but one less car built. Sustainability-wise, not sure is a great idea.You spent a 50 years getting to phones, that's what Tony misses. In most countries phone ownership was still frightfully low. Internet connections non existent. So they moved to cell phones in 1990. Every wealthy Thai had a cell phone in 1990. 17 years later we had smart phones and it was not that it was that big a jump. People had already moved to cell phones. We were in a 5 year upgrade window or even 4 years. Altogether it took over 20 years to move from landlines to smart phones. This is where Tony glosses over things. It wasn't overnight. It also was exactly counter to the phenomena he expects to see with TaaS. He expects people to share cars like they shared phones. I suspect he is missing societal nuances there. We'll see in 10 years. I think people will pay for FSD and own cars. I think most RT use will only occur when forced by travel, substance abuse, and physical network friction (parking). Some people sure, not most.
The thing to watch is when pepsi start using their semi's in autonomous mode?
Source?
You missed my point and the big picture my friend... that's too bad.
It looks like Chancellor McCormick of Delaware is trying to move the hearings forward in the musk compensation case to preempt the shareholder vote scheduled for June 8th:
The hearing on the Motion will take place on July 8, 2024.
I agree there will be ownership for quite some time. Maybe, as we previously discussed, the "second car" could be avoided... I mean, if every day I go to work and then send the car home to my wife, society gets more traffic, but one less car built. Sustainability-wise, not sure is a great idea.
What still intrigues me about RTs is that its "algorithmic transportation". Right now, taxi have incentives to single-customer rides. Taxi drivers actually prefer people not to share cabs, so the "profit cake" is bigger and shared among the whole taxi fleet. Maybe they are lucky and do a few trips. Every customer a cab, even if they go in the same direction: think about conferences, conventions, etc.
I've seen many times long lines to get a taxi outside a train station, even if most people go to the same convention center: this is actually some "game theory" in action. Taxi drivers don't really care to make people share the ride, as mentioned above. People self-organize and try to share... but rarely do that, with strangers. Maybe the taxi fare is paid by their company and they don't care to save the money. Maybe they are shy and don't want to talk to strangers and beg to share a ride. End result is inefficient transportation.
This could change dramatically with software-operated RTs. If FSD is solved, they can operate like an organized swarm. Tesla could have the data of all the booked trips, and know how much people want to go to X. IF there is too much demand, they can ask people to share rides, offering discounts and proposing great value for cities (less traffic, less energy used, no emissions).
Tesla could do what they do best and have an AI working 24/7 on the best deploy and use of RTs, based on real-time data. If a RT sees an incident on a road and needs to deviate, all the fleet automatically will know instantly.
I'm quite sure there will be, in the future, many options: do you want to rent a vehicle for a few hours? just a trip from A to B? shared or not? only women? do you have a 5-10-30-minute window? are you willing to switch cabs for a discount? Real-time pricing based on current situation. Incentives and disincentives based on pricing.
I never took an Uber but I get they let people become "taxi" taking care of the software side of the business, but they have to rely on humans who need the rides to get their money. Game theory applies.
But Tesla could manage a swarm of ants/cars/robots directed by their AI Queen. And they can deploy them *at cost*. And then it's just energy-used, cleaning and maintenance (done by Optimus? but humans could be ok anyway).
I see a path, in the medium-long term, in which Taas can actually eat a segment of car ownership in certain areas. It won't be quick but it can happen.
Yeah, and then there's this reply
Yes I could see that happening ...I also think that's hard slow work but possible.I agree there will be ownership for quite some time. Maybe, as we previously discussed, the "second car" could be avoided... I mean, if every day I go to work and then send the car home to my wife, society gets more traffic, but one less car built. Sustainability-wise, not sure is a great idea.
What still intrigues me about RTs is that it's "algorithmic transportation". Right now, taxi have incentives to single-customer rides. Taxi drivers actually prefer people not to share cabs, so the "profit cake" is bigger and shared among the whole taxi fleet. Maybe they are lucky and do a few trips. Every customer a cab, even if they go in the same direction: think about conferences, conventions, etc.
I've seen many times long lines to get a taxi outside a train station, even if most people go to the same convention center: this is actually some "game theory" in action. Taxi drivers don't really care to make people share the ride, as mentioned above. People self-organize and try to share... but rarely do that, with strangers. Maybe the taxi fare is paid by their company and they don't care to save the money. Maybe they are shy and don't want to talk to strangers and beg to share a ride. End result is inefficient transportation.
This could change dramatically with software-operated RTs. If FSD is solved, they can operate like an organized swarm. Tesla could have the data of all the booked trips, and know how much people want to go to X. If there is too much demand, they can ask people to share rides, offering discounts and proposing great value for cities (less traffic, less energy used, no emissions).
Tesla could do what they do best and have an AI working 24/7 on the best deploy and use of RTs, based on real-time data. If a RT sees an incident on a road and needs to deviate, all the fleet automatically will know instantly.
I'm quite sure there will be, in the future, many options: do you want to rent a vehicle for a few hours? just a trip from A to B? shared or not? only women? do you have a 5-10-30-minute window? are you willing to switch cabs for a discount? Real-time pricing based on current situation. Incentives and disincentives based on pricing.
I never took an Uber but I get they let people become "taxi drivers", taking care of the software side of the business, but they have to rely on humans who need the rides to get their money. Game theory applies.
But Tesla could manage a swarm of ants/cars/robots directed by their AI Queen. And they can deploy them at cost. And then it's just energy-used, cleaning and maintenance (done by Optimus? but humans could be ok anyway).
I see a path, in the medium-long term, in which Taas can actually eat a segment of car ownership in certain areas. It won't be quick but it can happen.
They are now, yes. But one of, if the biggest reason people are hesitant in buying BEV's from other manufacturers is charging. A lot of that reticence will disappear when they know they can refuel easily and reliably. Heck that's now one of Ford's big selling points in their current advertising.Even after opening up, aren't the vast majority of people charging driving Teslas? Tesla made a profit when only Tesla owners used the Superchargers so why would the small amount of non-Teslas make it an expense?
Yes, it is so huge that, if anyone has a photo of a prismatic cylinder I would like to see it. I believe there is some chance these contain a prismatic 4680 developed by CATL ....the irony is huge ...just huge.
Are you telling me you know all the places you will go all the time when you head out? Honestly that type of scenario we do all of the time. When people go shopping is it always to the store and then home. Then to another business and then home. Then to another and then home.Did you actually spend time fabricating this nonsense?
Urban city centers consistently have the best mass transit, the best taxi and ride share and will have most of Robitaxi if mapping and directions are good enough. Those will be certainly geofenced to some extent.Yes to keep from using parking or when drinking. But trips to countryside, no. Shopping in NJ? No, visiting friends in CT, no, vacation in Maine, no. NYC is a special case. They have always owned cars and used taxis and public transport to move around in the city. That has not changed, taxis become Uber. Pandemic goosed Uber rides business. It also is not used by suburbanites to travel back and forth into NYC. They drive. Uber hasn't really touched commuters, too expensive and they already own vehicles and Uber can only take 1 person in and out of the city in a commuting window. It's why TaaS is not, my prediction, able to impact either car ownership nor city congestion. Possible in some places to make 2 trips but that's not much of an impact.
Then there are the countries in which >95% of all banking transactions and even street artists and beggars have smartphone money transfer for their benefactors to use. Those in such places as Kenya, Brazil and, notably, Afghanistan where government employees have been paid via smartphone for quite some time.My understanding is that even the poorest countries (maybe NK is the exception) there is at least one smartphone per family. At the local solar society meeting, there were speakers showing an $80-$120 solar charging system for smartphones plus a couple of electric lights that used easily obtainable tech, rugged, and easily repairable. The speakers said that a family without electricity--of which there are many in poor countries--now charge at the convenience store (or equivalent for $1.00).
Yes, and they have now required Tesla to file their motion on June 7 before the vote. So Tesla cannot use the results of the vote in their motion and likely cannot reference it in the hearing which will be based on the filings.Having lived in Canada myself I can confirm even with the conversion rate, June 8th still comes a full month before July 8th.
Typically if you want to preempt something you need to schedule it before the thing.
I don’t know why we wittingly or unwittingly keep repeating this FUD. Giga Mexico is paused because Tesla are trying out the unboxed manufacturing method in Giga Texas first. This is a logical, rational, financially & technologically sound reason to pause Giga Mexico.- Pausing Giga Mexico and not announcing any other new Giga's, essentially pausing car production growth.
Also, the second statement is also incorrect as Elon clarified in the recent CC - Tesla has existing capacity that can be boasted up to 3 million EVs, maintaining the 50% growth run rate.
I feel like banging my head against a wall when I see this FUD repeated.
Smart phones need towers, networks, sim cards, regulatory approval. etc.The complexity of RT adoption is significantly more difficult that was that of smartphones.