... Another? Like Starlink, Tesla and SpaceX? Geez I don't know what people are on about sometimes.
The Boring company has dug tunnels more slowly than hoped.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-boring-company-tunnel...
alternatively: https://archive.ph/EYPpc
The same mentality that pretends Boring is a failure already, leads to people saying the Model S would never be manufactured at scale and neither would the Model 3 (HN for one was filled to the brim with such comments back then).
As should you since flamebait isn't conducive to good conversation.
He executed well after taking over Tesla and kicking out the founders, but self driving was way over sold.
Cybertruck production date keeps being pushed back.
Tesla has far fewer models? Maybe that is part of the advantage?
Look there are things Tesla can be praised for, but I don’t think anyone seriously believes they’ve got a good record on recalls especially with the year they’ve had
The only physical fix I’ve gotten was replacing a cable for the backup camera. Apparently some models had a cable that could wear out, causing the camera to fail.
If we used the same standard for iPhones, then 100% have been recalled. The NHTSA really needs to have more levels of severity, because current recall stats are obfuscating the actual reliability and safety of different models and manufacturers.
which says that Tesla is the 4th best auto manufacturer in terms of recall rate at .936, which is better than the industry average of 1.115; Ford is at 1.139, This was in 2016, when Tesla had only been shipping relatively small volumes of cars. If recent articles which put Tesla's recall rate at 0.25 are to be believed (I'm not sure that they should; they seem to carry the tone that this recall rate is exceptionally bad), that would certainly make Tesla the least-recalled car brand.
Also J.D. Power is pay to play.[1] From the WSJ[2]:
> Each year, J.D. Power & Associates gives out quality awards based on surveys of thousands of new-car owners. It sells the results to auto makers and charges licensing fees for using the survey's rankings in marketing and ad campaigns. According to one car maker, J.D. Power charges as much as $300,000 for copies of a survey, and the same amount to use the awards in ads. J.D. Power declined to confirm its charges.
1. https://www.consumerreports.org/consumerist/can-you-trust-th...
2. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703404004575198...
I don’t know if Tesla is an outlier in terms of recalls, but I think this isn’t the right way to compare.
Let's keep honest.
Terming that a recall is a farce
I cannot comment about Gwynne Shotwell; I lack the corresponding knowledge. I can only note that if Elon Musk is a completely mediocre person, he still must be doing something right because the world is full of mediocre people who achieve much less than he has, and I don't believe in blind luck.
The platform has more engagement than anyone has seen in years, and there is finally transparency around the moderation decisions. Twitter is also finally taking child exploitation seriously. The only negative was the haphazard release of Twitter Blue "verification," which felt chaotic and was turned off as a result pending relaunch, but was hardly a fiasco.
Yes, you get more photos of a train wreck than a routine train passing through town, too.
> Twitter is also finally taking child exploitation seriously.
There's no real evidence of this (in both that Twitter wasn't, and that Musk changed something). The tweet thread that put this talking point into play was immediately debunked in various spots, like the claim there was no CSAM reporting option when there had been for years.
Can you point me at the clear explanation for why Crimethinc was suspended?
Musk says that Ye was suspended for inciting violence. Does that mean anyone posting a swastika will be suspended? Since Musk says permanent suspensions are bad, does that mean Ye gets to come back at some point? If so, what are the conditions?
Twitter has stated that they’re relying more heavily on automation. Musk claimed he was going to open the algorithms. Are the automated abuse detection algorithms available for inspection? (Hopefully not, since that makes it easier to avoid them, but perhaps Musk should have considered that before making promises.)
Does that explain why Ol' Muskie gutted the moderation teams leaving one (1) moderator to look after all CSAM for Asia (60M+ users)?
https://www.wired.com/story/twitter-child-sexual-abuse-mater...
Seems to be working ...
@elizableu, cited in the article, has a history of false claims on this.
Claim: https://twitter.com/elizableu/status/1594158531015761920
> To those who aren’t aware yet, last week Twitter did add a direct reporting option for child sexual exploitation. (ONLY on tweets with content images/videos) this was not previously available and was a separate form that wasn’t easy to find. I’m grateful to see these changes.
Reality: https://twitter.com/ChronicBabak/status/1594762640357982208
When invited to help in a more direct fashion, she declined.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/major-companies-remove-advert...
> Bleu said following the meeting, they offered her a position on Twitter’s Trust and Safety Committee, but she declined because she refused to “work with or for abusers.”
Mr Musk, also, does not have a stellar history of accurate reporting either.
"As shown by the infographic summarizing the results of our analysis, Elon Musk is one of the subjects with whom Stroppa interacts most on Twitter, retweeting, replying and quoting several times what, according to the annual Forbes ranking, is the man. richest in the world." | https://www.breakinglatest.news/health/andrea-stroppa-the-go...
Stroppa lied via Reuters months ago when he claimed he and 5 researchers spent two weeks and found only 500 CSAM accounts (those of us adjacent to CSAM research could find 50k in an accidental sneeze). He's being dishonest again in this story by intentionally citing action taken Twitter 2.0 when that action happened (and concluded) two days prior to Musk's takeover. His "reports" have been taken apart by actual CSAM investigators like Carolina Christfoletti (who actually flags his statements as "misinformation) and researchers across several universities.
Eliza Bleu is QANon disinfo agent, daughter of a MAGA Republican, and fundraising partner of Felecia Killings, a literal child rapist. She works with Mike Cernovich, one of the guys behind the Pizzagate conspiracy and the person responsible for getting James Gun fired. The time period she claimed she was trafficked, she was the well known girlfriend of Gerard Way and an American Idol contestant.
Their ruses work on everyone not in Infosec or OSINT who are familiar with their backgrounds because they say the right sounding words. So you buy it, the same way boomers watch CSI and think hacking the internet can be stopped by two people mashing keys or unplugging the power cord of a monitor. People read their bullshit and think they're actually involved in child exploitation research because they "sound" right.
Stop being manipulated so easily.
My basic point is -- it's too goddamned early to draw any conclusions about Twitter. We're going to find data for one thing or against it, because this just happened, in effective terms, and nothing has shaken out yet.
Come on, you said:
> Seems to be working ...
Yeah, but so does every dumpster fire, or car wreck. Everyone is looking at those.
> The only negative was the haphazard release of Twitter Blue "verification,"
I'm not even sure how to respond to this. He's been firing people left and right, and everything points to the overall system being about to collapse under it's own stress (because there isn't the staff to support it).
I would love if there was actual evidence provided for this claim and its actual effectiveness because this seems to be the sort of "think of the children!" claim that is emotionally very satisfying but ultimately rings hollow.
Because if you're going to mark that as a measure of the new leadership's success the only way to judge that it is by having evidence that the claim matches the reality. Saying "the claim is about something I don't need verification that it's real" is a really strange stance to take. I'd argue that the most important claims are the ones that should require the best evidence.
Why do you believe this?
I'm taking it from sources I've found trustworthy
There are more people at a funeral than at a birthday.
Funny you should use that word, seeing how it has gotten more and more obvious that focusing on "engagement" is the reason why most social media is so awful.
I always looked at that label to see if it's a manual or a scheduled tweet.
Making a deal to pay 44 billion dollars for a 30 billion dollar company with no cancellation clause, and then spending 6 months desperately, and very loudly trying to back out of that deal is definitively a fiasco.
Whether or not his stewardship of it will turn a 30 billion dollar company into a... Much less valuable company... is, however, not a question that we can definitively answer - at this time.
Also, the macroeconomic conditions between April and July were entirely different. I can see why someone would go along with a bad deal in a world where interest rates are quite low, then get cold feet when interest rates spike up. Maybe that's not optimal deal-making, but it's hardly a "fiasco."
It doesn't, but I never said that I was talking about fiascos for the customers. Time will tell with Twitter on that subject.
That would be something alongside blatant lies like "FSD next year" and "Your tesla will taxi people around while you sleep", but if I pointed at that, someone would certainly come along, point at the Tesla stock price, and tell me that this is not actually a fiasco because he's the richest man in the world.
> I can see why someone would go along with a bad deal in a world where interest rates are quite low, then get cold feet when interest rates spike up.
I cannot see why they would go in to buy one of the sickest of the big tech firms, at a premium, in an economy built on funny money, with no escape hatch, and then proceed to piss on everyone within shouting distance when they get buyers' remorse.
Or rather, I can see why they would do that, but it doesn't reflect very well on them.
How does it not?
Revenue streams - ads, putting features behind a paywall, etc. - all affect UX.
How about the Nazis and far-right accounts he's given blanket pardon to, and who are now inciting violence against the LGBT community?
Elon has also been trying to upsell Twitter numbers, so that doesn't generate a lot of confidence.
Just Bluechecks and journalists angry that they’ll no longer be a special class of user on the site so they’re claiming it’s over and a disaster when really it hasn’t changed to the end user.
The guy has the same ratio of good:bad ideas as everybody else, he just has more money to burn on them.
For Musk that is more than $44 Billion.
I was recently there.
How insanely hilarious to me that they did all this work... And still use drivers and not automation. It's a loop. If they can't self-drive that with all their own vehicles everywhere, then it's not really coming to actual roads for a LONG time.
> Boring company
They built and released a product already. Oh wait, it's not a flamethrower.
(I’ve been in this stage before)
They see someone like musk, and it threatens their ego. So they attack him every chance they get. They project their own shortcomings and insecurities onto him.
But imagine the hubris of doing this. You can rest assured these are the ones who’ll be stuck in this stage, because they aren’t focused on growing they’re focused on protecting their egos.
And Musk is ego threat number 1.