Most of us don't drive BMWs and neither does most of the market. Compare it to the Rav4 or Toyota Camry, two of the highest selling cars/CUVs.

I can 100% tell you that in 10 years ICE engines won't be a niche, the grid can't take it. When a major city is going to throw out a bid for hundreds of generators that should be a sign. They said there is zero chance they will be able to charge all of the EVs even with current grid updates

So first the bad news for the Big T:

Quote:

---

Musk's comments came during Tesla's earnings call on Tuesday after the company reported disappointing first-quarter numbers. Revenue fell 9% year over year, its steepest annual decline since 2012.

---

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/04/24/tesla-stock-up-after-elon-musk-says-new-affordable-ev-models-coming.html

Whoa. That's not a good sign. The stock did pop though because they said they do plan on rolling out cheaper cars.

Here's the fun stuff. Elon mused he could use idle cars' computing power in the background. No word on if owners will be compensated for the use of their cars' computer chips.

https://www.theverge.com/24139142/elon-musk-tesla-aws-distributed-compute-network-ai

Now that a target timeframe has been announced, I think I'm going to wait around for the lower cost (and hopefully shorter length) Tesla. I'm in no rush.

Bubblez said:

---

Now that a target timeframe has been announced, I think I'm going to wait around for the lower cost (and hopefully shorter length) Tesla. I'm in no rush.

---

Be careful. Cheaper is not necessarily better.

techno-ag said:

---

So first the bad news for the Big T:

Quote:

---

Musk's comments came during Tesla's earnings call on Tuesday after the company reported disappointing first-quarter numbers. Revenue fell 9% year over year, its steepest annual decline since 2012.

---

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/04/24/tesla-stock-up-after-elon-musk-says-new-affordable-ev-models-coming.html

Whoa. That's not a good sign. The stock did pop though because they said they do plan on rolling out cheaper cars.

Here's the fun stuff. Elon mused he could use idle cars' computing power in the background. No word on if owners will be compensated for the use of their cars' computer chips.

https://www.theverge.com/24139142/elon-musk-tesla-aws-distributed-compute-network-ai

---

Profit sharing was mentioned during the earnings call.

Quote:

---

Elon Musk -- Chief Executive Officer and Product Architect
I think it's analogous to Amazon Web Services, where people didn't expect that AWS would be the most valuable part of Amazon when it started out as a bookstore. So, that was on nobody's radar. But they found that they had excess compute because the compute needs would spike to extreme levels for brief periods of the year and then they had idle compute for the rest of the year. So, then what should they do to pull that excess compute for the rest of the year.
That's kind of -- yeah, monetize it. It seems like kind of a no-brainer to say, OK, if we've got millions and then tens of millions of vehicles out there where the computers are idle most of the time that we might well have them do something useful. And then I mean if you get like to the 100 million vehicle level, which I think we will, at some point, get to, then -- and you've got a kilowatt of useable compute and maybe your own Hardware 6 or 7 by that time. Then you really -- I think you could have on the order of 100 gigawatts of useful compute, which might be more than anyone, more than any company, probably more than any company.
Ashok Elluswamy -- Director, Autopilot Software
Yeah, probably because it takes a lot of intelligence to drive the car anyway. And when it's not driving the car, you just put this intelligence to other uses, solving scientific problems like a human or answering dumb questions for someone else.
Elon Musk -- Chief Executive Officer and Product Architect
We've already learned about deploying workloads to these compute nodes.
Ashok Elluswamy -- Director, Autopilot Software
And unlike laptops and our cellphones, it is totally under Tesla's control. So, it's easier to distribute the workload across different nodes as opposed as opposed to asking users for permission on their own cellphones would be very tedious.
Elon Musk -- Chief Executive Officer and Product Architect
Well, you're just draining the battery on the phone, so like technically, I suppose like Apple would have the most amount of distributed compute, but you can't use it because you can't get the -- you can't just run the phone at full power and drain the battery. So, for the car, even if you're a kilowatt-level inference computer, which is crazy power compared to a phone. If you've got 50- or 60-kilowatt-hour pack, it's still not a big deal whether you plugged it or not. It could be plugged in or not like you could run for 10 hours and use 10 kilowatt hours of your kilowatt of compute power.
Lars Moravy -- Vice President, Vehicle Engineering
We got built-in like liquid-cooled thermal management. Yes, it's exactly for data centers. It's already there in the car.
Elon Musk -- Chief Executive Officer and Product Architect
Exactly. It's distributed power generation -- distributed access to power and distributed cooling. That was already paid for.
Ashok Elluswamy -- Director, Autopilot Software
Yes. I mean, that distributed power and cooling, people underestimate that costs a lot of money.
Vaibhav Taneja -- Chief Financial Officer
Yes. And the capex is shared by the entire world. Sort of everyone owns a small chunk, and they get a small profit out of it maybe.

---

I can't believe they would discuss this out loud. Buy your own computers and pay for your own power. Stay the eff out of my business.

techno-ag said:

---

Bubblez said:

---

Now that a target timeframe has been announced, I think I'm going to wait around for the lower cost (and hopefully shorter length) Tesla. I'm in no rush.

---

Be careful. Cheaper is not necessarily better.

---

I hope its somewhere in the 175" range in length. I don't need all the extra length for a daily driver, and it fits better in the garage.

EV sads from across the pond.

Their long term goal is to not sell cars. Not to the general consumer, and that's primarily what they're discussing. The use of their autonomous fleet of vehicles in a maximal way. Driving customers around when the streets are busy, using energy storage/data compute during downtime. The customer side would be an opt in, but the expectation would be that's a small portion of the portfolio.


Not entirely different than what they're doing with their Powerwall and Megapack products. The user gets paid when they opt in for power sharing, but they're under no obligation to do so.

nortex97 said:

---

EV sads from across the pond.

---

Quote:

---

The real reason for hefty discounts on electric cars is desperation. Since 1 January, manufacturers have been under the zero emissions mandate (ZEV), which demands that 22 per cent of the cars they sell in 2024 are pure electric cars. Should they fail to reach this target, they will be fined 15,000 for every vehicle by which they fall short

---

But we were assured on here, repeatedly, that prices on EVs are falling because technology gets cheaper over time. We were told again and again that we just don't understand how things work.

Customers had little interest in renting an EV - imagine that! Which executives with Hertz recommended purchasing 100,000 Teslas and 50,000 Polestars? Did anyone get fired?.....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/yourmoney/article-13349931/Major-car-rental-firm-sell-evs-tesla-cheap.html

Quote:

---

Major car rental firm sells off cheap unwanted Teslas as mammoth losses of $392m are revealed

• The decision to sell EVs forced Hertz to write them down to fair market value
• Selling 30,000 depreciating EVs cost Hertz $195 million in three months
• Hertz's share price was down on Thursday to a record low of $4.48.

By NEIRIN GRAY DESAI CONSUMER REPORTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 15:08 EDT, 25 April 2024 | UPDATED: 15:08 EDT, 25 April 2024

Rental giant Hertz reported losses of $392 million in just the first three months of 2024 - as it announces plans to sell another 10,000 depreciating EVs on the cheap.

The rental company bet big on electric cars back in 2021 when it ordered 100,000 Teslas and 50,000 Polestars in a bid to electrify its fleet.

But the bet failed - customers had little interest in renting them due range anxiety and uncertainty around charging in unknown places...

....

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

This thread runs both ways. I described how EVs would be horrible for me and the EV fanboys came out in force with their "ackchyually" posts to tell me how I'm wrong.

EVs suck and this experience confirmed it. I'll never willingly buy one.

---

This is a type example of how an individual assesses his individual situation and makes a decision. No need to be testy towards us EV owners about that decision. And actually the thought process is not even interesting, nor enlightening for most of us.

It's almost as if this person has a chip on "his" shoulder.

2023 Ford F 150 Lightning owner with at home charging and soon to get Tesla adapter for supercharging.

Drill a hole in accelerator pedal to fix it. Can't make this up.

Quote:

---

Tesla has a solution to the Cybertruck accelerator pedal issue that caused a recall.

A user on X posted a 35-second video drilling a hole into the accelerator pedal to fix the issue.

The solution requires reworking the accelerator pedal on Cybertrucks made on or after November 13.

---

https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-cybertruck-accelerator-pedal-recall-fix-includes-drilling-hole-2024-04?amp

Does the fix also involve zip ties & duct tape, too? Might be a good time to start a "Redneck Tesla" YouTube channel

JayM said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

This thread runs both ways. I described how EVs would be horrible for me and the EV fanboys came out in force with their "ackchyually" posts to tell me how I'm wrong.

EVs suck and this experience confirmed it. I'll never willingly buy one.

---

This is a type example of how an individual assesses his individual situation and makes a decision. No need to be testy towards us EV owners about that decision. And actually the thought process is not even interesting, nor enlightening for most of us.

It's almost as if this person has a chip on "his" shoulder.

2023 Ford F 150 Lightning owner with at home charging and soon to get Tesla adapter for supercharging.

---

I think we can be testy towards ...EV owners if EVs are being subsidized by our tax dollars while the Biden administration has waged an overt war on the Oil and Gas Industry, which many of us have worked for and still own stock in.

WolfCall said:

---

JayM said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

This thread runs both ways. I described how EVs would be horrible for me and the EV fanboys came out in force with their "ackchyually" posts to tell me how I'm wrong.

EVs suck and this experience confirmed it. I'll never willingly buy one.

---

This is a type example of how an individual assesses his individual situation and makes a decision. No need to be testy towards us EV owners about that decision. And actually the thought process is not even interesting, nor enlightening for most of us.

It's almost as if this person has a chip on "his" shoulder.

2023 Ford F 150 Lightning owner with at home charging and soon to get Tesla adapter for supercharging.

---

I think we can be testy towards ...EV owners if EVs are being subsidized by our tax dollars while the Biden administration has waged an overt war on the Oil and Gas Industry, which many of us have worked for and still own stock in.

---

No subsidizing here. Ford Lightning cost far exceeds the amount for which one gets a tax break. I pay my way like everybody else.

Tesla Model Y without credit is less than the average car. People make it seem like Tesla's are out of reach of most Americans but their price is in line. If the 75% income bracket who gets the 7500 credit buys one, the price is no different than mid model Rav 4. Plus at 100K miles, the Tesla would be a much cheaper option saving 10K+ in gas/maintenance.

You will see than in 5-10 years, improvements in infrastructure/charging/battery tech will happen. The past 10 yrs has shown a big improvement in charging, battery, and cost.

When the iphone came, everyone had many of the same complaints. I need my buttons. What is the point of the iphone when all you can do is text. Well guess what, in 5-10 years, the iphone could play music, bluetooth, control equipment, computer use, web surfing, etc.

Once people start to see how much better a Tesla is for 95% of the population, they will be forced to change.

Watch in 10 years when Gas stations will close down, be converted to Tesla chargers, charging time will be much faster. Sweden is the model. It is easier to find a charger than a gas station. People discount technology advancement.

Yup, shockingly I got no credits for my 2 Model Ys.

Medaggie said:

---

Tesla Model Y without credit is less than the average car. People make it seem like Tesla's are out of reach of most Americans but their price is in line. If the 75% income bracket who gets the 7500 credit buys one, the price is no different than mid model Rav 4. Plus at 100K miles, the Tesla would be a much cheaper option saving 10K+ in gas/maintenance.

---

Teslas are dog**** though...


All evs are


Why would you pay anything g for a pile of dog*****

Well, its the best selling car so I guess people like dog****

I guess that is how we should all debate each other. Disagree and start to call it dog****

Why some get all heated and angry over what someone buys is beyond me.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/04/26/tesla-autopilot-linked-to-hundreds-of-collisions-has-critical-safety-gap-nhtsa.html

Wowzers.

Quote:

---

Federal authorities say a "critical safety gap" in Tesla's Autopilot system contributed to at least 467 collisions, 13 resulting in fatalities.

The findings come from a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration analysis of 956 crashes in which Tesla Autopilot was thought to have been in use.

Tesla's Autopilot design has "led to foreseeable misuse and avoidable crashes," the NHTSA report said.

---

techno-ag said:

---

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/04/26/tesla-autopilot-linked-to-hundreds-of-collisions-has-critical-safety-gap-nhtsa.html

Wowzers.

Quote:

---

Federal authorities say a "critical safety gap" in Tesla's Autopilot system contributed to at least 467 collisions, 13 resulting in fatalities.

The findings come from a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration analysis of 956 crashes in which Tesla Autopilot was thought to have been in use.

Tesla's Autopilot design has "led to foreseeable misuse and avoidable crashes," the NHTSA report said.

---

---

Autopilot is dangerous to use on the road, the only thing worse is human drivers.

Kansas Kid said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/04/26/tesla-autopilot-linked-to-hundreds-of-collisions-has-critical-safety-gap-nhtsa.html

Wowzers.

Quote:

---

Federal authorities say a "critical safety gap" in Tesla's Autopilot system contributed to at least 467 collisions, 13 resulting in fatalities.

The findings come from a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration analysis of 956 crashes in which Tesla Autopilot was thought to have been in use.

Tesla's Autopilot design has "led to foreseeable misuse and avoidable crashes," the NHTSA report said.

---

---

Autopilot is dangerous to use on the road, the only thing worse is human drivers.

---

Ha ha, pretty good.

Considering that half of the crashes they investigated they could not place the blame on Tesla's ADAS and in the remaining half, 50% of them were deemed to be avoidable by an attentive driver, and a further 25% were blamed on the driver inadvertently disabling the ADAS system I'd say that holds true.

It really reads like regulatory abuse targeting a single manufacturer rather than a genuine concern over the efficacy of Tesla's ADAS system.


Tesla AEB when confronted with a child mannequin

Nole’ says “Hold My Barbie!”. https://t.co/yOxHWCDKvQ pic.twitter.com/nsDcZ4AhOm

— Miss Jillybean (@MissJilianne) April 25, 2024

Mercedes' AEB system confronted with a child mannequin

$120k Mercedes would run over a standing child without a single beep. 🥴

🎥 @MissJilianne https://t.co/UgAUAOtumU pic.twitter.com/YW2RD6IPaK

— Rusty (@RealRusty) April 25, 2024

In their tests Tesla stopped basically every time whereas Mercedes' failed basically every time.

Logos Stick said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/04/26/tesla-autopilot-linked-to-hundreds-of-collisions-has-critical-safety-gap-nhtsa.html

Wowzers.

Quote:

---

Federal authorities say a "critical safety gap" in Tesla's Autopilot system contributed to at least 467 collisions, 13 resulting in fatalities.

The findings come from a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration analysis of 956 crashes in which Tesla Autopilot was thought to have been in use.

Tesla's Autopilot design has "led to foreseeable misuse and avoidable crashes," the NHTSA report said.

---

---

Autopilot is dangerous to use on the road, the only thing worse is human drivers.

---

Ha ha, pretty good.

---

I wish they would do a detailed analysis of accident rates with and without driver assists. When used correctly, you should get the better of the two drivers because the human can overrule the car when needed but the car doesn't get distracted or have a blind spot. I also have no faith in human drivers especially these days with all of the smart phones, putting on makeup and eating. At least you don't see people reading a newspaper while driving anymore.

hph6203 said:

---

Considering that half of the crashes they investigated they could not place the blame on Tesla's ADAS and in the remaining half, 50% of them were deemed to be avoidable by an attentive driver, and a further 25% were blamed on the driver inadvertently disabling the ADAS system I'd say that holds true.

It really reads like regulatory abuse targeting a single manufacturer rather than a genuine concern over the efficacy of Tesla's ADAS system.


Tesla AEB when confronted with a child mannequin

Nole’ says “Hold My Barbie!”. https://t.co/yOxHWCDKvQ pic.twitter.com/nsDcZ4AhOm

— Miss Jillybean (@MissJilianne) April 25, 2024

Mercedes' AEB system confronted with a child mannequin

$120k Mercedes would run over a standing child without a single beep. 🥴

🎥 @MissJilianne https://t.co/UgAUAOtumU pic.twitter.com/YW2RD6IPaK

— Rusty (@RealRusty) April 25, 2024

In their tests Tesla stopped basically every time whereas Mercedes' failed basically every time.

---

I'm sure you thought you were being clever when you posted this, but it just demonstrates how uncritically you will post things without any investigation into its reliability/accuracy.

That test was performed by a man named Dan O'Dowd, who launched a campaign against Tesla called the Dawn Project, purporting to be a consumer protection advocacy organization, but in reality is just a self protection advocacy campaign.

He is the founder of a company called Green Hill Software that helps develop competing software systems and has previously been shown to have overridden Tesla's software to get it to perform in the way he wants it to (I.e. force it to fail) rather than how it normally performs, by overriding the system with the accelerator pedal cancelling intervention by the AEB system.

It’s a simple question, Dan. Try to answer it directly, without waffling, stammering, equivocating, lying, or changing the subject.

Are you trying to destroy Tesla’s reputation so your company can keep selling inferior software to Tesla’s competitors for as long as possible? pic.twitter.com/q9BJOJxGF7

— James Stephenson (@ICannot_Enough) April 25, 2024

Dont be fooled. Dan O’Dowd is protecting profits of his company by bashing Tesla and giving false claims regarding #FSDBeta. He uses the “shareholders protecting their investment” line as thats exactly what he is doing for his company, Green Hills Software pic.twitter.com/H1YacNlV6n

— Corbin Williams (@corbinwilliams) April 25, 2024

I can't rely on Windows, Chrome, or any of my apps to remain 100% stable on any given day. My cell even less so. I play the role of beta tester every time there is an update.

Why the hell would I ever want to put my life in the hands of an automated driving system that runs on software developed by groups with the same "skill" set?

agent-maroon said:

---

I can't rely on Windows, Chrome, or any of my apps to remain 100% stable on any given day. My cell even less so. I play the role of beta tester every time there is an update.

Why the hell would I ever want to put my life in the hands of an automated driving system that runs on software developed by groups with the same "skill" set?

---

Compare that to the other system used to operate cars and tell me that you really think it is safer.

Ever been on a plane? You're often relinquishing control to a software system.

Ever been in a taxi? You're relinquishing control to an organic system.

Are you under the impression that humans don't have fail states? As a doctor surely not.


You're existing in a false reality where "new" risks are substantially different than existing risks. The question isn't why would you relinquish control to a machine because it has the capacity to fail, but rather at what level of competency/reliability does it make sense to?

Happens all the time where people don't accurately recognize the risks and circumstances they exist with, because they're the norm.

We're not there yet for autonomous driving systems, but it appears to be an eventuality and in all likelihood in a mature state will be far superior to any human, because they will have far more experience and also include redundancy in the case of failures.

Medaggie said:

---

Tesla Model Y without credit is less than the average car. People make it seem like Tesla's are out of reach of most Americans but their price is in line. If the 75% income bracket who gets the 7500 credit buys one, the price is no different than mid model Rav 4. Plus at 100K miles, the Tesla would be a much cheaper option saving 10K+ in gas/maintenance.

You will see than in 5-10 years, improvements in infrastructure/charging/battery tech will happen. The past 10 yrs has shown a big improvement in charging, battery, and cost.

When the iphone came, everyone had many of the same complaints. I need my buttons. What is the point of the iphone when all you can do is text. Well guess what, in 5-10 years, the iphone could play music, bluetooth, control equipment, computer use, web surfing, etc.

Once people start to see how much better a Tesla is for 95% of the population, they will be forced to change.

Watch in 10 years when Gas stations will close down, be converted to Tesla chargers, charging time will be much faster. Sweden is the model. It is easier to find a charger than a gas station. People discount technology advancement.

---

Why would they be "forced" to change? Was that just a poor choice of words?

And I am skeptical about your 95% number. Do you have source for that or is it at just your WAG?

Seems high to me as well.

hph6203 said:

---

Considering that half of the crashes they investigated they could not place the blame on Tesla's ADAS and in the remaining half, 50% of them were deemed to be avoidable by an attentive driver, and a further 25% were blamed on the driver inadvertently disabling the ADAS system I'd say that holds true.

It really reads like regulatory abuse targeting a single manufacturer rather than a genuine concern over the efficacy of Tesla's ADAS system.

---

You seriously think the NHTSA is targeting Tesla as opposed to giving a detailed account and analysis?

hph6203 said:

---

Ever been on a plane? You're often relinquishing control to a software system.

Ever been in a taxi? You're relinquishing control to an organic system.

Are you under the impression that humans don't have fail states? As a doctor surely not.


You're existing in a false reality where "new" risks are substantially different than existing risks. The question isn't why would you relinquish control to a machine because it has the capacity to fail, but rather at what level of competency/reliability does it make sense to?

Happens all the time where people don't accurately recognize the risks and circumstances they exist with, because they're the norm.

We're not there yet for autonomous driving systems, but it appears to be an eventuality and in all likelihood in a mature state will be far superior to any human, because they will have far more experience and also include redundancy in the case of failures.

---

There's always a meat servo ready to take over if something goes wrong in those planes.

I'm a HUGE proponent for autonomous UAS (including ones that would carry passengers). However, I realize that the technical issues are not trivial and that overcoming public resistance is, BY FAR, the biggest hurdle to gaining acceptance.

The same is true for autonomous vehicles.

But, I will tell you that hand waving and dismissal is not going to overcome that hurdle.

hph6203 said:

---

Ever been on a plane? You're often relinquishing control to a software system.

Ever been in a taxi? You're relinquishing control to an organic system.

Are you under the impression that humans don't have fail states? As a doctor surely not.


You're existing in a false reality where "new" risks are substantially different than existing risks. The question isn't why would you relinquish control to a machine because it has the capacity to fail, but rather at what level of competency/reliability does it make sense to?

Happens all the time where people don't accurately recognize the risks and circumstances they exist with, because they're the norm.

We're not there yet for autonomous driving systems, but it appears to be an eventuality and in all likelihood in a mature state will be far superior to any human, because they will have far more experience and also include redundancy in the case of failures.

---

Utopia is just around the corner.