Hacker News Reader

Comment by sidcool | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

It is and so is the sum of nonsensical replies to the entire thread.

It makes sense though, with the experience of the average app/website these days. Those devs come here and you can pick them out with ease.

I called this event years ago, it has been obvious in foresight.

Lol yeah Tesla is doing so great they just got rid of two flagship models.

Government rebates have ended. Sentiment towards EV has shifted negatively in consumer eyes. Manufacturers are sticking to gasoline. Even Jeep just got rid of all their electric stuff.

Maybe they'll be good for self driving robot taxis over in California with "FSD."

Past performance does not indicate future success.

Nop. The S and X were always meant low volume high priced. And it's a great strategy. Didn't Tesla repay loans before it was due?

Challenge is that even that good past performance was shat upon by people. I hate Elon. But I don't think Tesla is doing bad at all. GM is shitting itself on EVs.

There is no evidence of unsupervised robotaxis actually rolling out. These are just the same promises Elon has wrongfully done since literally 10 years and some publicity stunts.

People have taken rides in unsupervised Teslas. Please check news.

Yes, privy influencers. And it was supervised from the car behind it. No one else was able to find such a ride. Tesla cars also autonomously self-delivered. Which also turned out to be a one-off publicity stunt. Up until now, nothing points to that this is something different this time.

So first it was "it needs attention". Then "it has a navigator". Then "it has a following car". You see?

Yes and nothing points to them having solved unsupervised driving. Which you seem to conclude from publicity stunts.

Like I said. No amount of proof is enough.

Yes and like I said, nothing about this is proof that they are close to actual unsupervised driving.

Why the denial? Go check the news man. And they are expanding.

Most of the people are bashing Tesla because they 1) Overpromised and underdelivered 2) They claimed/acted like they're so ahead that nobody can touch them.

Now, other automakers are closing the gap fast, and their overpromise of camera-only FSD is reaching Duke Nukem Forever levels, while other automakers use a diversified sensor set with more conservative autonomy levels because they value human lives more than playing fast and loose (plus, they are scrutinized way more heavily for various right and wrong reasons).

For me, it's not hatred, but I saw that they were hyped a bit too much and need some correction, and this correction is coming hard for them.

Valuations means nothing except investor trust. We have seen some spectacular collapses under unbelievable valuations. Theranos had a valuation of $9 billion. Tesla is not a scam or balloon per se, but they were a bit too overconfident of their moat.

FSD has been maturing for ~an entire decade now. Their latest stunt with moving the supervisor to chaser cars has made a lot of people understandably angry anew: Musk has to hit his robotaxi milestones to get more billions, so he's forcing the programme ahead with smoke and mirrors to get his stock option grants.

Their profit is decreasing, revenue growth is negative. Their autonomy programme is always "just one more update" away. Humanoid robotics is already full of competition from hundreds of other startups and larger companies (even Amazon, an AI sceptic, has a significant robotics programme).

I wouldn't call them a failure, but they certainly seem to have lost their way, and you have to really drink the kool aid to be able to justify the valuation in any sense.

I agree that Tesla over promised. I strongly feel they'll deliver, albeit late. That does not make it a failure though.

This is the same argument people made with Bernie Madoff before the ponzi collapsed.

Seriously? This comment cant be serious.

It really was the argument there; that he'd been in business so long with such great returns that everyone assumed it had to have been looked into by everyone else.

> If a company was overvalued for a couple of years, it's ok to be sceptical. Tesla has been at such high valuations for many years now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Madoff

"Madoff said that he began the Ponzi scheme in the early 1990s, but an ex-trader admitted in court to faking records for Madoff since the early 1970s."

The SEC stuff rhymes a bit, too:

"The SEC's inspector general, Kotz, found that since 1992, there had been six investigations of Madoff by the SEC, which were botched either through incompetent staff work or by neglecting allegations of financial experts and whistle-blowers. At least some of the SEC investigators doubted whether Madoff was even trading."

Now, Tesla actually makes stuff; it's not a ponzi. But it's a wildly inflated stock that looks entirely divorced from the business metrics available to us.

Your last paragraph is the only thing I agree with. Inflated stock != Ponzi

Of course it's not about Tesla at all. Yeah, there's been overpromising and underdelivering on self-driving (is anyone doing better yet, though?), but in reality the hate is entirely about Elon and his politics.

How would I even know what Elon’s politics are? He’s too busy running the worlds biggest companies to get involved with politics.

Why can’t it be both? And, besides, it’s not like criticism of the latter is utterly invalid.

Elon Musk doing Nazi salutes and calling people "retarded" on Twitter all the time has absolutely nothing to do with my stance on Tesla or how I feel about them.

I just don't like Tesla's vehicles, how they look, or the interiors of them. Nothing to do with the individual.

Did he actually do Nazi salute? Come on. People moved on from that when Mamdani did the same gesture.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com