In a Wide-Ranging Interview, Elon Musk Talks About Visiting Mars, Battle To Keep Tesla Afloat, and Neuralink (medium.com) 180
Elon Musk reckons there's a 70 percent chance he'll go to Mars, even as he knows there's a good chance he won't survive there. "I'm talking about moving there," the SpaceX and Tesla CEO said in a wide-ranging, but brief interview with Axios on HBO. "We've recently made a number of breakthroughs that I'm just really fired up about."
In the interview, he also spoke about Neuralink, the company he launched last year to build brain-enhancing implants. "The long-term aspiration of Neuralink would be to achieve a symbiosis with artificial intelligence," he said. "If we have billions of people with a high-bandwidth link to an AI extension of themselves, it would actually make everyone hyper-smart."
Musk also revealed that Tesla had been "single-digit weeks" away from death with the company "bleeding" cash as it ramped up Model 3 production. He said he was worried about imploding and that the stress of working seven days a week and sleeping at the Tesla factory was very painful."It hurts my brain and my heart," said Musk, who recently publicly urged people to explore electric cars, even if they come from companies Tesla competes with.
In the interview, he also spoke about Neuralink, the company he launched last year to build brain-enhancing implants. "The long-term aspiration of Neuralink would be to achieve a symbiosis with artificial intelligence," he said. "If we have billions of people with a high-bandwidth link to an AI extension of themselves, it would actually make everyone hyper-smart."
Musk also revealed that Tesla had been "single-digit weeks" away from death with the company "bleeding" cash as it ramped up Model 3 production. He said he was worried about imploding and that the stress of working seven days a week and sleeping at the Tesla factory was very painful."It hurts my brain and my heart," said Musk, who recently publicly urged people to explore electric cars, even if they come from companies Tesla competes with.
Mars... (Score:1)
I pity those that go there looking for adventure only to realize they are standing in a tube.
Re:Mars... (Score:5, Informative)
Many people have enjoyed exploring Antarctica, even when it's mostly just sitting around in ugly research bases through the winter and occasionally looking at a bleak white landscape. It's not for me, but I'm sure there are people who will enjoy Mars.
Would mod up if I could .... but yes! (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think any explorer, ever, just came to a new land for the first time and lived an immediate life of comfort.
The point is, somebody has to be first to attempt to colonize a new land (or world in the case of Mars), and that's a task certain people find a VERY rewarding challenge
And yes - a few people enjoy spending time in places with very harsh conditions, where there aren't many other human beings around. My dad was friends with a teacher who took a sabbatical leave to visit Antarctica and live in one of those research facilities for a year or so. He came back with some amazing photos and stories, and didn't regret it a bit. (Not saying he'd be eager to do it again or to move there permanently ... but it's something not many people have experienced, so I can see the attraction.)
re: no clue (Score:2)
I think I have a bit of a clue.... Nobody is saying visiting Antarctica is "much like a trip to Mars". We're saying that right now, it's probably one of the most inhospitable places a person can travel to -- and yet many people have chosen to do it anyway.
Any serious attempt at a Mars mission would presumably include transporting up some basic building blocks to take a decent stab at living there for a period of time. On the plus side, you don't have to worry about wild animals attacking you on Mars or ge
Re: (Score:2)
No domes. Meteorites are still a problem. Tesla is going to put a car sized boring machine over there and build underground facilities. It's easier to keep warm, blocks radiation, free support materials. Every company he's working on is part of the goal.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, in much greater detail. The interview in question is generally not being talked about any more on mainstream outlets because it would advertise the fact that mainstream media has competitors that technically pull greater numbers in terms of viewership than said mainstream media. You don't want to advertise that your competition does what you do better than you do for obvious reasons.
Interview in question if you want to watch it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Antarctica has a summer population of around 1,000 and winter population of around 200. On a purely scientific basis, I can imagine getting similar numbers on Mars -- 1000 temporary residents, 200 permanent.
But humans are not purely scientific. They love to do apparently incredibly stupid things like climb Mt Everest without oxygen or free-climb El Capitan. Like those, Mars captures the imagination of many people who love to suffer and tempt fate. If Musk makes the economics of it possible for the wealthy,
Re: (Score:2)
Usually, those ships crews were very desperate or suckered/forced into being crew.
Re: (Score:2)
Antarctica has a summer population of around 1,000 and winter population of around 200.....But humans are not purely scientific.
No. And of those 1,000, a minority are scientists. Our Antarctica population is a small, specialized town with a couple of satellite outposts, and it requires almost all the jobs that a small town needs. Just more specialized, since it's so isolated.
Cooks, janitors, logistics and project management, pilots, fuel handlers, sanitation workers, heavy machine operators, construction workers and carpenters, scientific equipment maintenance, crane operators, etc., etc., etc. The list goes on and on.
Likewise if we
Re: (Score:2)
It would sure beat the life of many people that spend their time in small cubes. At least distances in one dimension would be bigger...
Re: (Score:2)
I pity those that go there looking for adventure only to realize they are standing in a tube.
I think a lot of people hope they will be remembered as a Lewis or Clark. Maybe have a town named after them on Mars for being one of the original settlers.
They see what they're doing as glorious and adventurous, burning a trail... and maybe it is. Not something I'd want to do. I'm all for us trying to colonise another planet if for no other reason than the undoubted tech it will spark... but I don't want to go. Not even the prospect of having Mcweanyville be named the capital city of Mars would encoura
Model 3 Yaaay (Score:5, Insightful)
the good thing is, Tesla is on the right track now....
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:5, Insightful)
the good thing is, Tesla is on the right track now....
No, the good thing is that as Tesla succeeds, it forces other companies to make competing offers. Tesla Motors lit a fire under all the car makers and now they are scrambling to catch up. Without Tesla Motors electric cars would still be in the "well it's a nice idea..." category.
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:4, Insightful)
the good thing is, Tesla is on the right track now....
No, the good thing is that as Tesla succeeds, it forces other companies to make competing offers.
They're both good. Tesla being on the right track means they stay around longer, which means they exert more pressure on the other automakers, which is the thing you like.
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:4, Insightful)
That's doubtful. VW is out saying how they'll have a "Model 3 Killer", in what, 2023? That's so far out it can easily slip to double that.
I would rather buy an electric pickup from Ford, given that they know how to build a body that can haul rock, pull stumps, and plow snow for three decades, but it doesn't look like I'm going to get that chance. My 25-yr-old ICE Chevy pickup will probably get replaced with a Tesla five years before Ford has their first FE-250 in the showrooms.
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:5, Interesting)
Tesla deserves a lot of credit, but they were not the only ones driving this revolution.
Nissan produced an affordable, practical EV that figured out a lot of the basic issues with an electric drivetrain, from the instrumentation to the integration with existing car tech to how to sell it to the public. They also built large rapid charging networks in several countries.
There are many more too, especially in the commercial vehicle space. People said busses were too large to go electric, so BYD and others build 450kWh batteries and proved they worked just fine. LG have made a huge breakthrough in getting the battery cost down by using flat "pouch" cells (like in phones) rather than cylindrical ones. Hyundai and Kia have developed the most efficient EV drivetrains and figured out how to subtly adjust the bodywork to make their vehicles look "normal" but also get excellent range.
So credit where credit is due. Tesla gets a lot of press but they are only the performance end of the market, they don't even make an affordable model and are only a bit player in many important markets like Europe, Japan and China.
Re: (Score:3)
Tesla deserves a lot of credit, but they were not the only ones driving this revolution. Nissan produced an affordable, practical EV that figured out a lot of the basic issues with an electric drivetrain, from the instrumentation to the integration with existing car tech to how to sell it to the public.
The Nissan Leaf is a great car for what it does, and what it does is what most people actually need. In its way it was, and is, quite as groundbreaking as the Tesla.
What Tesla did, however, was different: what they did was to change the entire mindset about electric cars. Before Tesla, what people thought about with electric cars was "ok, maybe they work, but they're basically glorified golf carts, ok I guess if you are ok with being poky and not driving very far." What Tesla did was make the public thin
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:4, Informative)
No manufacturer wants to be cut off from that much of the U.S. market, so they are all tripping over themselves developing EVs for sale. If they can't sell enough of them, they run sales and incentives to move enough of them off the lots so they can hit the percentage. That's why there are occasionally those crazy deals on EV leases in 2015 and 2016 (best I saw was $49/mo for 3 years for a VW eGolf). And that's why those crazy deals are only available in California (only EVs sold in California count towards the ZEV mandate).
In other words, the percentage of car sales which are EVs is not organic. It's pre-ordained by CARB. The formula is a bit complex, but for 2018 it's about 2.5% of vehicle sales which need to be ZEVs. For 2025 it's about 8%.
CARB has tried this before. They were first set to implement the ZEV mandate in 2000. That's why GM invested nearly a billion dollars developing the EV-1. By 1999, theirs was the only vehicle which could meet the ZEV mandate. GM stood to make billions of dollars licensing the technology to other automakers. The other automakers petitioned CARB saying that technology just wasn't developed enough to produce viable ZEVs, and the best they could do at the time was a hybrid drivetrain (which environmentalists initially hated because they derive all their energy from gasoline). CARB relented and rescinded the ZEV mandate, pulling the rug out from under GM and basically flushing their billion dollar investment down the toilet. In retaliation, GM recalled every EV-1 and destroyed them, and locked up their research in a basement file cabinet so that California would never benefit from their double-cross.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla is actually a late-comer but with the benefit of being able to focus completely on the electric car. They were able to utilize a supplier chain that was already established and only had to worry about the battery technology.
I see Tesla like Apple when the iPods came out. Not the first to do it but the 1st to market the heck out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, reality proves that big auto companies never learn, even when the future is right in front of them (Tesla proving that electrical works and has many advantages).
Just today, an example: General Motors announced that it will close 8 plants [bbc.com].
Re: (Score:3)
The plant closings have little to do with electric cars, and much to do with the fact that American sedans have steeply declined in popularity over the past decade.
To whit, Ford did the same thing last year, for the same reasons - slough off the models that are costing us money so we can focus on moving the brand forward.
Re: (Score:2)
My point is this ...
Tesla produces sedans and have a long waiting list, so the demand is there (but electric instead of ICE).
But instead of capitalizing on this demand and making electric vehicles (sedans and otherwise), the big auto companies just shut down the plants, rather than producing viable alternatives.
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Parent is possibly referring to:
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/09/06/tesla-sales-acura-audi-bmw-car-infiniti-jaguar-lexus-car-mercedes-car-sales-in-usa-august-sales/
and the pretty clickable graph on:
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/07/28/tesla-model-3-sales-vs-small-midsize-luxury-car-sales-usa-tesla-now-crushing-the-competition/
that demonstrates how crushing their ramp up is (though note the suspicious 'static' levels of other manufacturers throughout teslas increase - if they increased that much the other w
Re: Model 3 Yaaay (Score:1)
Tesla and their shareholders care, as so you, obviously. Still pissed about losing the house on your short bet.
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:4, Interesting)
0.001%? Electric cars are 39% of new car sales in Norway, 8% [evadoption.com] in California, and around 5% [247wallst.com] in China. If you live in a backwater that can't even keep up with China, maybe it's not relevant to your area yet.
Re: (Score:2)
0.001%? Electric cars are 39% of new car sales in Norway, 8% [evadoption.com] in California, and around 5% [247wallst.com] in China. If you live in a backwater that can't even keep up with China, maybe it's not relevant to your area yet.
I think he was specifically referring to Teslas - which very much are still a luxury product - not electric cars in general.
Doubt many 0.001 percenters are rolling around in a Nissan Leaf.
Re: (Score:2)
A Nissan Leaf in particular? No. But cheap cars? definitely yes [cnbc.com]. Note Sergey Brin and Larry Page with Priuses and Balmer with a Ford Fusion Hybrid.
Rich people don't necessarily drive luxury cars, and I'm not sure that the Model 3 counts as luxury anyway. Lots of crappy SUVs cost the same or more as at least the base model, which is what they're finally starting to roll out. Sure, you can add on options to crank the price way up, but you can do that with most cars.
Re: (Score:3)
Their batteries are not the cheapest. South Korean manufacturers like LG are ahead on that front.
Not only are LG packs cheaper per kWh, the have longer warranties too. Hyundai and Kia are offering an unlimited warranty in the US, unlimited time and miles. In the rest of the world the warranty is longer than Tesla's too. LG packs also have more than adequate thermal management (including heating).
Tesla packs are competitive, no doubt, but they are not exceptional or magical. Where they are doing very well is
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:4, Informative)
The point of his comment was to troll. That's what he does.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Please point out how I'm a "fanboy" from anything I've ever said about the man. It's true that there is plenty of kool-aid being splashed around, but I'm not drinking it.
I personally think he's a huge gaping asshole of a man who, like Jobs (another gaping orifice), managed to find themselves in a favorable environment to bring about needed change in an industry and took full advantage.
Being successful at something doesn't preclude someone being a giant fucking industrial-sized bag of douche, which
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
False:
https://www.theguardian.com/fo... [theguardian.com]
https://slate.com/technology/2... [slate.com]
Using this independent emissions calculator [ucsusa.org] with a Model 3 in a zip code where basically 100% of the electricity comes from coal (an East suburb of Cincinnati, Ohio), it is still producing 1/2 of the carbon emissions of the average ICE-powered vehicle. It's even more compelling if you are in a zip code with a more clean energy mix, such as Portland, Oregon. (less than 1/4 the emissions) [ucsusa.org] The up-front carbon cost to manufacture will be
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:4, Informative)
Anyone who rides around in a vehicle that only the 0.01% can afford and claims it is "green" is a complete douchebag, which fits in with Musk fanboys.
The Tesla 3 could probably be called overpriced- but it is in fact only 10k (25% more) than the median new car price in the US. You certainly have to be better of than average to afford it; but "0.01% of population can afford" is a huge exaggeration. In reality probably about half the population COULD afford it if they really wanted to and made sacrifices elsewhere- and 25% of total population in US COULD probably afford it comfortably.
Can you get a better (more luxurious anyway) car for the price? Yeah, certainly, but a significant % of people could afford it if they really wanted to.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's pointless to do so in this context. To evaluate the impact of someone buying a Tesla, you have to compare it to the impact of the expected alternative behavior. Not to the hypothetical ideal alternative.
I'm going out on a limb here, and guess that nobody buying a Tesla would seriously consider riding a bike or using mass transit instead. Few would even consider just not buying a new car and continuing to drive what they have. (And with the trickle-down effects of the used car market the society-scal
Re: (Score:1)
Neither. They are equally bad. So stop pretending one is better than the other.
Re: (Score:3)
Moving the goalposts each time you're shown to be wrong.
If someone is going to buy a new car, they are going to buy a new car regardless of your wishes of what they do with their resources. If they buy a Tesla (or any other EV) they will emit less carbon over the lifetime of the vehicle than if they buy an ICE-powered car. Thus, the EV is cleaner. QED.
Feel free to STFU now. The claim was "cleaner" which is true and supported by linked research and statistics, and you cannot argue that so you desperately
Re: (Score:2)
Early adopters of anything are the folks who overpay for the chance to be the first users of something that everybody will be buying at sane prices a few years from now. Without such people, there would be no risk-taking and no innovation.
Re: (Score:2)
>They are equally bad
Your evidence for that assertion?
Meanwhile, the fact remains that one *is* going to happen, and the only choice is which one. At least so long as consumers are allowed to make their own choices, and a massive cultural shift doesn't take place. I'm all for the cultural shift, but I'm not holding my breath. Just making electric cars popular is taking decades - but it does seem like the energy of that is also spreading a bit to electric scooters and the like, which are a big step in
Re: (Score:3)
You realize that nobody can afford new cars at the median price point either right?
That this is the reason used prices are starting to shoot through the roof?
I make well over average income and have never been able to afford a new car, and the most I've ever spent is $12k. Currently trying to keep my girlfriend and I's now-dodgy mid-2000s cars running since I'm not in a position to replace either, even with a newer used car. Not even sure I'd want a car on the market right now, they're all full of computer tech that can't be good for more than 6 or 7 years.
People can't "afford" them but buy them anyone to keep up with the neighbors- all on credit, which hurts them in the end. I've never understood it. I took the sensible route myself and got a nice subcompact for half the median price. I could probably "afford" a $35k+ car/SUV, but then I wouldn't be able to afford something else. I've never felt the need to impress the neighbors by driving a big SUV. A subcompact is all I need, I don't need to impress anyone with a pretty SUV (that I don't actually get t
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather people drive diesel SUVs than gasoline. Far better fuel economy.
Unfortunately they don't exist in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Most people just want to drive to work and have fun speeding up off-ramps.
(look at how badly most American "muscle" cars handle, but everybody still swears by them)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Model 3 Yaaay (Score:2)
You're here making up retarded nonsense, and you have the balls to call others delusional?
Buddy. Try some introspection.
Re: (Score:3)
You almost had a point until the needless racism.
Re: Electric cars date back to at least the 1900s. (Score:2)
He never even approached a point. Yeah, sure, extending the range of electric cars by an order of magnitude is just "making them sexy".
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:4, Insightful)
That's because they are "compliance" cars - they only exist because of California regulations that require them to exist or pay money to competitors with credits to sell (such as Tesla).
Traditional auto makers and their network of dealerships make way too much money on maintenance for them to give up on internal combustion so quickly.
Re:Model 3 Yaaay (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Besides compliance, they are probably interesting in further exploring the technology; a couple have appeared on the road here in the Netherlands as well.
Military interest in fuel-cell vehicles is driving the technology. In an attempt to make it profitable sooner, they're putting it into cars. Barring massive advances in battery technology sooner than later, the next generation of wheeled military vehicles will probably by HFCVs.
Re: (Score:2)
Meh. Can't they just build everything else in the car to require constant repairs, like Tesla does? :-D
Range and taking EVs seriously (Score:4, Insightful)
Which is good, there aren't that many options on the market with comparable range (around 400km), price and specs. You have the Hyundai Kona and the Kia e-Niro, and not much else.
The Chevy Bolt EV has range that is comparable to the standard and mid-range Model 3. Honestly except for long distance trips on the highway, anything north of 350km range is more than adequate. I have a Bolt EV and I've never had to use a third party charging station yet in nearly 10,000 miles of driving in the last 6 months. The only real range issue I see with it for local driving is that at highway speeds the range goes to shit because it only has the one gear. I think a highway gear would help a lot though definitely not a deal breaker since the battery pack is more than big enough to deal with any reasonable trip in our metro area. I have exceeded the range of a Nissan Leaf but
After living with an EV for most of the last year, I'm convinced the majority of range and fast charging issues are important but also overblown. I have a gas powered truck for the occasional longer trip or could easily rent one if I didn't have it. Unless your daily drive is something stupidly long with a LOT of highway miles, the range on any of the vehicles mentioned above is more than adequate provided you have some means of doing Level 2 charging at your primary residence and/or place of work. I don't think I've gotten to less than 50 miles of range yet and I've been doing the opposite of hyper-miling much of the time. (EVs are fun to drive)
Huyndai expects to make 30.000 EVs a year... less than Tesla makes in a month.
That's because they still aren't taking EVs seriously. Just like almost every other car company. I own a Chevy Bolt EV and it's a good car and good value but it is obvious how much of it is borrowed from other Chevy vehicles. Hell it goes down the same assembly line as the Chevy Sonic which should give you some idea how similar those cars are. Like them or hate them, Tesla is really the only significant company selling no compromise EVs as of this writing. Even dedicated EVs like the Nissan Leaf are just chock full of compromises and ugly/bad design. It's not clear to me why they think every EV owner wants an ugly hatchback compliance car. (seriously, SO many EVs are just hideous to look at) I think my Bolt EV is decent looking but I certainly don't think it's a pretty vehicle and I'm not convinced GM has gone all-in on EVs. I think they made the Bolt and are resting on their laurels rather than pushing hard to scale up EV production and sales.
Re: Range and taking EVs seriously (Score:5, Insightful)
The only real range issue I see with it for local driving is that at highway speeds the range goes to shit because it only has the one gear. I think a highway gear would help a lot
It shouldn't. Induction motor efficiency doesn't vary with RPM the way an ICE engine does. Electric motors tend to be pretty inefficient at low loads and more efficient at higher ones. Efficiency does taper down slightly at the high end but certainly not enough to cause range to "go to shit".
Re: (Score:1)
Probably has something to do with the energy required for 60mph being 4 times that of 30mph. On top of that you have aerodynamic resistance.
And a google later if found this which seems to further strengthen the hypothesis.
https://electrek.co/2016/08/08/chevy-bolt-disaster-aero-lead-designer-drag-coefficient-of-0-32/
Re: (Score:2)
Probably has something to do with the energy required for 60mph being 4 times that of 30mph. On top of that you have aerodynamic resistance.
Not really. Yes there one needs to expend energy to get the vehicule's kinetic energy up to speed and that is proportional to the square of the speed: 0.5*m*v^2. But outside of city driving and 1/4 mile races that's peanuts and you can even recover most of it when you break. That leaves aerodynamic drag which, if you are going any distance, is the reason why 60mph consumes 4 times the energy of 30mph.
Re: Range and taking EVs seriously (Score:2)
Maybe learn how to read before trying to object.
Re: Range and taking EVs seriously (Score:2)
Both "sjbe" and I were talking about efficiency. Then a dimwit showed up and started banging on about torque and power.
His claims about torque and power were both more-or-less correct ... and yet they have nothing to do with efficiency. His response was completely off topic yet he clearly believes that it was somehow a refutation to what I said.
You seem similarly confused.
Re: (Score:2)
I test drov
Not serious (Score:4, Informative)
Not sure about that. Manufacturers are starting to build vehicles that have been designed as EVs from the ground up.
Not really. Not seriously anyway. If they were serious about it they would be investing heavily in battery companies and securing supplies. The only company I've seen working on making an EV that doesn't look idiotic recently is Porsche [porsche.com]. The new Leaf looks better than the old one but that's not saying much - the old one was terrible looking. The Kona is just another boring and fairly ugly hatchback. I own a Bolt and while I like the styling for a hatchback, it isn't exactly sexy either.
The big automakers are just dipping their toes in the water and waiting. They don't want to take the risk and possibly be wrong.
This is not just a shakeup in car design, but in their production lines and logistics as well, and such things take some time and effort (as Tesla found out).
Of course but I work in the industry and they aren't really putting in the effort or money. They're all claiming they are going to introduce electrified cars but none of the big autos are really pushing their chips onto the table and those promises haven't materialized into real products for the most part.
My understanding is that a couple of these companies are simply having a real hard time sourcing the batteries.
They're having a hard time of it because it's a critical technology they wouldn't be outsourcing if they were serious about it. Tesla seems to be the only ones that grok the fact that they need to vertically integrate to get the economies of scale and a competitive advantage. Unless Tesla's competitors have a lead on some mysterious battery tech that will supplant Li-Ion in the near future and are willing to dump tons of money on it then they are playing a dangerous game.
Re: (Score:2)
The only real range issue I see with it for local driving is that at highway speeds the range goes to shit because it only has the one gear.
No, that's not the reason. Having more gears wouldn't change the efficiency of the electric motor, unlike an ICEV. The Bolt's problem at highway speeds is that it has high drag coefficient, 0.32. My Nissan Leaf has the same problem, though not quite as bad as the Bolt. My Tesla Model S, on the other hand, loses very little range at highway speeds. It also has only one "gear".
Gears in EVs (Score:2)
Having more gears wouldn't change the efficiency of the electric motor, unlike an ICEV.
That's not true at all. EVs have motors that are relatively efficient across a broad RPM range (up to 20,000) so engineers can pick a gear that works well for most day to day driving. But make no mistake that this gear choice is a compromise. They do not have perfect efficiency across the whole band and there are limits to how fast you can spin them. My Bolt EV has a max speed of 91mph largely thanks to choice of gears and this does play a role in it's (relatively) crappy fuel economy at speeds above 70m
Re: (Score:2)
My Tesla Model S, on the other hand, loses very little range at highway speeds.
Unless you have highways with low speed limits, that isn't true [insideevs.com]. Highway speeds where I live are between 70-80mph and that has a notable effect on fuel economy even for Tesla. You are correct that the Tesla is more streamlined so the effect is smaller but the effect is still there and still notable.
It's there, but it's quite small. Highways near me have 75-80 mph limits so I drive 80-85.
Re: Model 3 Yaaay (Score:4, Informative)
If you are intellectually honest and want to hold Tesla liable for "murdering" with their cars, then you better haul in every single other car manufacturer too.
Here's a hint: if you use autopilot, you are still responsible for the safe operation of the vehicle, and the vehicle tells you so before it allows you to turn on Autopilot. Also, Autopilot is clearly stated for use on divided highways only, so anyone that crashes into stopped vehicles on surface streets because of Autopilot is already at three strikes: 1. not keeping control of their vehicle; 2. not heeding the legal warnings about use; and 3. using it outside of the intended bounds as clearly stated in the instructions.
Go anonymously fuck yourself.
Re: (Score:1)
He already autonomously fucks himself :-D
Re: (Score:2)
Let me guess. Your retirement fund got stuck with a bunch of GM shares.
How exciting! (Score:1)
Zap mosquitoes with lasers (Score:4, Interesting)
IMHO, there are people that zap mosquitoes with lasers, then shy away from delivering an actual useful product at the end. And there are people who deliver a mosquito laser zapping box, but along the way, blind a few early adopters while they get the real world kinks out.
I put Musk in the later category. The world needs more Musks, I just don't want to be an early adopter of his products.
Re: (Score:1)
To be fair to Tesla their cars don't seem to be any more dangerous than other brands. What pisses people off is that they, or more specifically Musk, promise features that then don't materialize. The whole "your car will get continual software updates" thing turned out to be just like every other kind of software - release beta quality crap and patch it later.
Take your pick. Works and properly tested but never updated, or half baked but might be amazing one day, maybe.
Sure thing, Elon (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Super smart... (Score:5, Interesting)
"If we have billions of people with a high-bandwidth link to an AI extension of themselves, it would actually make everyone hyper-smart."
I am afraid most of us would become immensely powerfully idiotic. Most humans are probably born as smart as your good scientist or good writer. Like most people are born with a body with the potential to be an athlete.
It is just most people have not desire for excellence. They are not educated that way. Our problem is not that much a lack of brain processing power. We already have intelligence magnifying tools. Take writing for example. Wonderful things have indeed been written and that is not over. But most people won't bother with books and plenty of magazines with stories about celebrities are sold. Internet is used to watch porn and hurl insults to each other, etc...
Tools and system are fine and all. But you need the right people to do nice things with them. We are not there yet.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah no. We are not born equal. Otherwise there would be many Usain Bolt's.
And this the liberal mind forgets when they try to measure results and complain that they are unequal so opportunity is obviously unfair.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
I tried to watch an episode of the Kardashians yesterday.
I lasted about a minute, if that's the human race then we're doomed.
(not even making this up)
Re: (Score:2)
"If we have billions of people with a high-bandwidth link to an AI extension of themselves, it would actually make everyone hyper-smart."
I am afraid most of us would become immensely powerfully idiotic.
It's a pretty pie-in-the-sky way of looking at the situation, especially considering that "providing more access to accurate information" has decidedly not been the trend in technology over the past few decades; back in the 90's, we saw the fledgling internet (then consisting of mostly government and university websites) as a great means of disseminating information; but since the dot-com boom of the early 2000's, that mission scope has changed; now the internet's mantra is "how can we get more money/clicks
Re: (Score:2)
Rise of the hyper-jerks (Score:2)
"Hyper-smart" people will be hyper-able to take advantage of those who don't have AI augmentation.
To prevent or offset this, you will see a "progressive" movement to regulate the implants. They will only be permitted if they also change the personality of the implantee -- making the implantee "hyper-compassionate" (as defined by a regulatory body).
Also look for promotion of the idea that if the "hyper-smart" are not hyper-taxed, they simply aren't paying their fair share.
I think brain enhancement is very possible soon. (Score:2)
I just don't think that a "symbiosis with artificial intelligence" is likely to be the path. AI is basically just a bunch of ways of getting computers to do things that humans already do, albeit sometimes with more data than a human could possibly be trained on. I don't see that these methods mesh with the brain as they are based either on (a) pure philosophical speculation on how the mind works, (b) statistical algorithms that don't have a clear use-case for interfacing directly to our brains or (c) mod
Yeah right (Score:1)
Look, the "Telsa's going private" episode proved beyond reasonable doubt that either he is a pathological liar or that he isn't able to separate wishful thinking from reality. It also demonstrated profoundly poor judgment. We should listen to this guy why? But sign me up for brain surgery, I'm definitely ok with having some active electronic device inserted into my brain. As long as it's postmortem.
MARS, more hospitable than Edmonton. (Score:2)
...explore EV (Score:2)
Surely, Elon you can muster a AWD design brief for a utility V that has 9" ground clearance, tow 8.000#, haul 10 overhead storage bags; 5 souls and get 300 mi. before empty that's not just another pickup truck. The Tesla X does not an SUV make. Arguably its the coolest, best crossover. Its not utility. Tesla owns the E in EV, lead it. Elon you have the cajones to juggle not two but three tech companies; four if SolarCity counts.
Begin with '97 2 door, barn door Tahoe 4x4 aesthete as Tesla's brief. Design a
Just watch Rogan's interview for actual details (Score:3)
If you want to know more, and not the sanitized tidbits that a mainstream outlet thinks you should know and nothing else, Rogan's interview with Musk provides a good insight into the man and his views.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Even crazy can be put to good use sometimes. He can rocket himself to Mars and die from radiation-induced cancers, but he's still moved the needle back here on Earth to make transportation cleaner.
Re: (Score:1)
In a way he has some engineering background. He has an interest (ie. practical experience) and a degree in physics.
Take me for example. I have no formal schooling in electronics or engineering yet I work in that field. My degrees are in computer science and math but I spend most of my time writing software, designing and building electronics, designing and building CAD designs, etc.
It's called leadership (Score:1)
Yes, you like so many, do not understand the value of "Leading from the Front". Your idea of leadership is, "Hey you, go take that hill" whereas real leaders say, "Follow me!"
Re: (Score:2)
I've never had a problem with "Ok, people, follow me" - It almost always works.
I've never managed to get them to go take that hill without me. No one else wants to take that first bullet. It's a different kind of skill to persuade others to go first.
Seems leaders are admired for being the first to take the big
Re: (Score:3)
It's a different kind of skill to persuade others to go first.
Really? For most of military history they simply shot the people who disobeyed.
High possibility of being shot by the enemy vs. 100% possibility of being shot by your own people. What do you choose?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just because he doesn't have a mechanical engineering degree doesn't mean he can't have some aptitude and ask questions of the assumptions of those that do. And as long as the right questions are being asked of the right people, then things move forward. It definitely takes it's toll though - why do you think there's been such a revolving door in the executive offices? Collisions of ego show that, like traffic accidents, mass wins; and Musk's ego is bigger than all else.
Any engineer knows that talking wi