Posted by coloneltcb 2 days ago
There's some HN discussion of it here which got flagged for some reason https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45726459
Maybe regional roll-outs? I was reading it yesterday.
It's my understanding that Musk has only minimal influence on SpaceX.
Edit: I would like to repeat the point that I owned one, for four years, during which it had to go in for service 12 times, four of which were "car is completely dead". And almost every time I had to fight for service. Every Tesla owner I ever spoke in person to described a similar experience. It's funny how online, the message is very different.
I certainly wouldn't buy a Tesla though.
I wouldn't say that Musk is the only person who could have brought SpaceX and Tesla to where there are now, and certainly there are many individuals who contributed heavily to get them there. That being said, not many people have the money and interest to do it.
1) Deport Musk to South Africa 2) Nationalize SpaceX & sell Tesla to GM or Ford 3) Pull the life support cable on Twitter
The SSA data heist also sticks out.
I suspect that just as with SpaceX, he shows off more than he does actual work. He is well known for taking credit for other people work, but you can't deny that he takes credit (and money) for the work of the right people, and it has value!
As for the cars themselves, Tesla is usually in the middle of the pack, with the Japanese on top and Americans at the bottom, making Tesla rather good for an American car brand. All that to say, nothing special on the reliability side, except that people talk a lot about Tesla in one way or another. You probably got unlucky while the people contradicting you got lucky.
You can't possibly be serious?
Cars… not great, but good enough to turn Tesla from a joke into an OK company selling in a "Blue Ocean"* market. Which isn't nothing, but then a bunch of other electric car companies popped up and now Tesla cars are solidly B-tier… well, except for the Cybertruck which is just a flop.
>PSA: author is Alejandra Caraballo [...]
The reply:
>Yep, this whole article is basically just -->his<-- very biased opinions [...]
My reply:
>Alejandra Caraballo is a woman.
I'm correcting them.
I'm not even particularly fond of the man but this is childish behavior.
If he didn’t want bad publicity for everything he touched, he shouldn’t have done that.
I'm working on building a social media site that wants to improve on moderation and I've found the case of the Grokipedia curious. So I'd love to get in touch with your but didn't find any details in your bio. Please reach out to me and let's do a user interview (can be via email too). My contacts are in my bio
Perhaps if Wikipedia hadn't drifted so far left (on culture war topics, it's fine for science etc), then maybe it wouldn't have been necessary.
https://manhattan.institute/article/is-wikipedia-politically...
Sanger has been voicing politically motivated antipathy towards Wikipedia for a quarter of a century or so, and worked for competing projects for most of that time. This includes supporting far-right nasties like The Heritage Foundation.
Commonly I also disagree with people on ethical or religious grounds. For example I vehemently disagree with most protestants on the issue of capitalism which they consider compatible with the teachings of the biblical Jesus, and I while I agree with many catholics on this same issue I disagree with church mediated caritas as the social solution.
Frankly, I think you're the one that mostly comes across as scared here.
https://supremetransparency.org/powerbrokers/manhattan-insti...
https://centerjd.org/content/fact-sheet-manhattan-institute
https://www.monitoringinfluence.org/org/manhattan-institute/
Because the right has 99% of the big bad evil dudes. Manhattan Institute is one of dozens of identical (ok not every pit has a king cobra FedSoc Leonard Leo) billionaire funded pits of world burning vipers. The E1 Global Elite class aka the barbarians (https://alexdanco.com/2021/01/22/the-michael-scott-theory-of...) are not the richest people by being liberal or nice or progressive. They're where they are because they are right wing people who (in right wing style) don't give half a fig about anyone else or much besides their bottom line and power.
I find it so beyond pathetic that George Soros is parroted around as some incredible omni-present mastermind of the left. But the right's favorite tactic is projection, is the classic "Accuse your enemy of what you are doing, as you are doing it" "Paint one's self as being the defender of the very thing you are aiming to destroy." Neither of these has any respect for reality or facts: they are what the right radically embraces: flooding the zone with shit. Not respecting reality. Sowing confusion. It's just so pathetic that such a mild mannered decent dude as Soros is the best cope ya'll could come up with for a boogeyman: quaking in your boots, at this guy? For reals.
perhaps i thought your clearly biased "institute" didn't deserve any more feedback than that