Tesla Model S & X cancelled [⚠️ ADMIN WARNING: NO POLITICS]

[Blue highway]

Look at how difficult it has been to get autonomous vehicle software working, and it only has to do ONE TASK (stay between these two lines). Admittedly is also has solve for edge conditions, but edge conditions still based off accomplishing only the single task (stay between these two lines). Additionally, this software operates in a piece of hardware (vehicle) that only operates in a 2-D environment (go forward/back; go left/right) and is inherently "stable" (turn car off, car stays in place even if power is removed).

Contrast that effort now, and consider the effort required in order to get autonomous software working for humanoid robots. Not only do they need to do many tasks, they need to LEARN how to do many tasks (e.g., need to be able to handle situations never before seen) in real time. Think again they also need to do these tasks while handling edge conditions, but not just edge conditions against a single task but edge conditions against each task. They now need to operate in a 3-D environment (go forward/back; go left/right; go up/down). They are inherently "unstable" (turn robot off or power is removed, it falls over) so they need to be designed to be stable or solve for stability.

These are just a few differences. But, I have what I think is a more profound personal opinion and that is, why do they need to be humanoid? There is no universal law that says they need to be. The argument is we live in a world created for humans, but why can't a robot have 4 legs or 4 arms or wheels or any other design and still conform to human infrastructure? I think the humanoid form, for now, is misguided.

I'm also thinking economically. I think about Tesla selling cars, and I think how many of them they sell per year, each costing tens of thousands of dollars. Now I think about robots each costing tens of thousands of dollars. People buy cars because they NEED them, and if we are honest nobody today really NEEDs a humanoid robot. Even though people NEED cars, Telsa after all these years of predictions is still not the largest automaker by volume. Not by a longshot (last I checked I think they were something like number 16).

So what really is the market for a Tesla robot that costs nearly the same as a car? Do we really think that soccer moms already deep in debt on their 72-month car notes going to also take out a $750 / month note on a humanoid robot? It's difficult for me to really think that will be the case. I'd love for anyone who disagrees to maybe show some math how a robot the cost of a car will somehow be any more profitable or marketable than their existing car market? Am I missing something?

A few things are true at the same time...

1) a humanoid robot is cool in a sideshow sense... just look at CES this year... there were dozens of the things doing "useful" things like dancing They drew huge crowds.

2) when you spend about half your life in a world where nobody tells you "no" and you have state level resources at your disposal, you pursue what interests you... i.e. cybertruck, robots serving drinks, moving mars, etc... This is not about a strong business case.

3) I save a place in my thinking for things I didn't know I wanted till long after seeing them. I had a "smart" phone as prototype around 2002... way back when Palm Pilots were a thing... It was useless and held no appeal to me. But like most folks, I now think a smart phone is indispensable. So.... maybe I just haven't figured this out yet. Maybe my second car should be a robot? Or maybe humanoid robots are still the sci-fi fantasy they have been for the last 100 years...

4) The first time I heard of an electric car... the tesla roadster or the leaf... I had less than zero interest... now, I expect to never buy an ICE car again.

Sponsored

 

[Blue highway]

Yet if we look at EV as personal transportation, without government subsidies what automotive company truly makes a profit building and selling EV? None.

BYD, Tesla, Xiaomi, Li Auto are profitable now.

 

[SonicBlue]

A few things are true at the same time...

1) a humanoid robot is cool in a sideshow sense... just look at CES this year... there were dozens of the things doing "useful" things like dancing They drew huge crowds.

2) when you spend about half your life in a world where nobody tells you "no" and you have state level resources at your disposal, you pursue what interests you... i.e. cybertruck, robots serving drinks, moving mars, etc... This is not about a strong business case.

3) I save a place in my thinking for things I didn't know I wanted till long after seeing them. I had a "smart" phone as prototype around 2002... way back when Palm Pilots were a thing... It was useless and held no appeal to me. But like most folks, I now think a smart phone is indispensable. So.... maybe I just haven't figured this out yet. Maybe my second car should be a robot? Or maybe humanoid robots are still the sci-fi fantasy they have been for the last 100 years...

4) The first time I heard of an electric car... the tesla roadster or the leaf... I had less than zero interest... now, I expect to never buy an ICE car again.

Exactly. This is what I meant by making markets. Going all in on products that people don’t know they need yet, but might be ubiquitous in 20-30 years. I think that’s likely to be the case for humanoid robots. Why do they need to be humanoid? Mostly it’s just human nature. I’m not saying we’re gonna see these in most households tomorrow, or even in five years. The same goes for Mars. But Musk and his fellow investors have the capital to make long-term plays where the likelihood of ROI is way too far out for most corporations.

 

[SonicBlue]

Yet if we look at EV as personal transportation, without government subsidies what automotive company truly makes a profit building and selling EV? None.

Let’s also not forget that Tesla made most of its money trading fuel credits. A market created by government stupidity. Doesn’t change the fact that Tesla mainstreamed EVs.

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

I said, truly.

Tesla still hasn’t obtained a full year of GAAP profitability without the various emissions credits and trading in them. The others on that list receive subsidies to the manufacturer to encourage lower cost EVs and move technology forward. That direct to company form of subsidy is quite common throughout the world, including here in the USA.

 

[Mach1E]

Come on man, I'm no Musk lover, but Tesla was a Silicon Valley wet dream before Musk got involved. Tesla created the modern EV market, it's indisputable. Starlike absolutely blows away Hughes Net in performance. Space X can land a reusable rocket back on the launch pad. NASA... not so much.

I get it, you hate the guy for his brief delve into politics, but he was Mr. Save-the-planet with EV's and everyone loved him, I bet you too at the time.

Sure, but there is a very important distinction here.

Above people are treating him like he’s an INVENTOR and creating products and markets that never existed.

Reality is he’s a savvy INVESTOR, turning other people’s ideas into profits.

Now some are acting like he invented “the robot.”

 

[Snakebitten]

I don't know who deserves the credit, and selfishly I don't care. But pre-Starlink satellite internet?

I have been in IT since before dial-up.
I have suffered ALL the satellite solutions that have come along for both consumers and enterprise. As well as aviation, the industry I have worked in for the past 27 years.

Starlink changed everything.

Just one example:
That's a screenshot of one of the bosses in a video call from his IPhone pointing at a Starlink mini dish velcro'd in the canopy of an L39.

 

[SonicBlue]

Sure, but there is a very important distinction here.

Above people are treating him like he’s an INVENTOR and creating products and markets that never existed.

Reality is he’s a savvy INVESTOR, turning other people’s ideas into profits.

Now some are acting like he invented “the robot.”

Um… who said that? I know I didn’t.

Also, you didn’t directly say this, but I hope you’re not suggesting that Musk is just a savvy passive investor. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[MacherAWD]

Um… who said that? I know I didn’t.

Also, you didn’t directly say this, but I hope you’re not suggesting that Musk is just a savvy passive investor. Nothing could be further from the truth.

He is a sleezy person. If people still had morals/values he would be laughed out of the business world. He peddles hype, over commits and under-delivers and then has one of his companies buy the other rather than admit defeat.

Wall street loves him because he says what they want to hear, "oh wait, we will build this....." so they keep feeding him money and the wheel keeps going.

He peddles lies and now every company operates the same way. His greatest accomplishment is hastening the fall of Capitalism, so actually maybe he is contributing to the greater good.

 

[Mach1E]

Um… who said that? I know I didn’t.

Also, you didn’t directly say this, but I hope you’re not suggesting that Musk is just a savvy passive investor. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Your direct quote was “Musk has always been forward thinking, making new markets.”

Forward thinking? Yes.

Making new markets? Not at all.

He made “new markets” in the same way that Columbus “discovered America.”

He didn’t create nor invent squat. And people treat him like we used to treat Columbus. Musk gets way too much credit.

 

[SonicBlue]

Your direct quote was “Musk has always been forward thinking, making new markets.”

Forward thinking? Yes.

Making new markets? Not at all.

He made “new markets” in the same way that Columbus “discovered America.”

He didn’t create nor invent squat. And people treat him like we used to treat Columbus. Musk gets way too much credit.

Here ya go. You must have missed this…

Exactly. This is what I meant by making markets. Going all in on products that people don’t know they need yet, but might be ubiquitous in 20-30 years. I think that’s likely to be the case for humanoid robots. Why do they need to be humanoid? Mostly it’s just human nature. I’m not saying we’re gonna see these in most households tomorrow, or even in five years. The same goes for Mars. But Musk and his fellow investors have the capital to make long-term plays where the likelihood of ROI is way too far out for most corporations.

“Making a market” does not mean literally inventing a new product. It means making… a market for a product. Generating supply. And anticipating and ginning up demand.

Complaining that Elon is not literally Tony Stark is dumb. Nobody said he invented any of these things. It is likewise incredibly dumb to argue that he’s just some passive investor. He builds businesses, hires amazing talent, and is a visionary with respect to the development of products and markets.

 

[SonicBlue]

He is a sleezy person. If people still had morals/values he would be laughed out of the business world. He peddles hype, over commits and under-delivers and then has one of his companies buy the other rather than admit defeat.

Wall street loves him because he says what they want to hear, "oh wait, we will build this....." so they keep feeding him money and the wheel keeps going.

He peddles lies and now every company operates the same way. His greatest accomplishment is hastening the fall of Capitalism, so actually maybe he is contributing to the greater good.

It’s so funny when rando anonymous internet dude criticizes the wealthiest man on the planet, who build companies like Tesla, Starlink, and SpaceX into what they are today. As they (presumably) drive a Mach E that wouldn’t even exist without what Musk did with Tesla LOL.

 

[MacherAWD]

It’s so funny when rando anonymous internet dude criticizes the wealthiest man on the planet, who build companies like Tesla, Starlink, and SpaceX into what they are today. As they (presumably) drive a Mach E that wouldn’t even exist without what Musk did with Tesla LOL.

Rando internet guy has integrity, and makes choices not just based on my personal wealth but often considering the greater good. Criticize me, and worship the rich, you do you.

 

[Mach1E]

Here ya go. You must have missed this…




“Making a market” does not mean literally inventing a new product. It means making… a market for a product. Generating supply. And anticipating and ginning up demand.

Complaining that Elon is not literally Tony Stark is dumb. Nobody said he invented any of these things. It is likewise incredibly dumb to argue that he’s just some passive investor. He builds businesses, hires amazing talent, and is a visionary with respect to the development of products and markets.

No I didn’t miss it. And yes I still think you and others give him way too much credit.

Also, not sure why you said “passive investor.” You noted before it’s not what I said nor what anyone is suggesting.

He’s not Tony Stark, but yeah he is Columbus.

Columbus didn’t discover America. He found something that was already there, made a giant mess, took way too much credit, but it did lead to something amazing. And was a horrible person.

So when people seem to worship him, yeah, you’re going to get pushback.

 

[Mach1E]

It’s so funny when rando anonymous internet dude criticizes the wealthiest man on the planet, who build companies like Tesla, Starlink, and SpaceX into what they are today. As they (presumably) drive a Mach E that wouldn’t even exist without what Musk did with Tesla LOL.

How rich do I need to be to criticize him?

How rich do I need to be to worship him?

Sponsored