davidrm

I'm trying my hardest to somehow summarize this story as a net positive, but to no avail. To me this reads like a badly written propaganda piece.

supervisory board of VW has 20 members, state of Lower Saxony appoints 2 (as a minority shareholder), workforce elects 7 among themselves, and 3 are trade union representatives also elected by the workforce.

no one is denying it's a for profit company, but its governance model doesn't really scream "neoliberalism". assuming you're from the US, (German) enterprises like VW are vastly different from what exists in the US, not just in the terms of their structure but also their influence on Germany and EU.

My favorite impact that I've had on my organization was the "no agenda, no meeting". It became a meme, minutes before the agenda-less meeting was supposed to take place someone would send it to a meeting chat or email, usually followed with ":)", especially if I were one of the attendees. In the rare cases I forgot to follow my own stubborn rule then it was a whole show, in hindsight, probably should've broken it at least once a quarter along with some penance to really help cement it.

However, I managed to "bully" everyone into following this simple rule because I had some influence in the organization; I was a manager of a large department. Unfortunately, interns will probably get an eye-roll for such suggestions, even if they reference their superior's rule.

My point is, don't send you colleagues this link, you will come off as rude. You'll get further by e.g. feigning surprise to the lack of agenda, and maybe you get to use that opportunity to spark a conversation about the importance of an agenda. If you're a manager and above, then by all means, use your influence to force it, it will make everyone's job easier in the long run.

Oh, as for the messages that contain only "hello", just ignore them, they will either solve their own problem or quickly jump to the point once they tire of waiting for your equally pointless response. Or just have a chat with your colleagues every once in a while, maybe they genuinely care about you and your cat.

(I'm going to assume you're serious). Only in the tech bubble could a hobby which is challenging and probably gruesome at certain points, be held against you. In any normal conversation a person who climbs literal mountains would be looked at in a positive light. Not saying it's the one defining quality you'd need to successfully run a company, but you somehow managed to place it at the completely wrong side of the proverbial scale. Of course, it's probably completely insignificant and uncorrelated, but I wouldn't be surprised to read that someone who plays a piano is also incompetent to run a company because ...I don't know, I guess I'll have to wait to read that one here soon.

4680 is a cylindrical cell format, the number you quoted refers to the cell itself, when packaged into a battery with busbars, cooling, etc., the gravimetric density on pack level for model 3 is around 125Wh/kg. the number listed by BYD is 150Wh/kg pack level density. the cells themselves are probably around 200-250, but they require less packaging effort due to the fact that the cell housing for prismatic cells already incorporates various mechanical and safety features.

i haven’t checked any of the numbers nor have i seen 3rd party analyses, but it definitely follows the trend: prismatics keep getting better and they might ultimately win the race once we get to solid state and thermal management “solves itself”

One would expect that a site dedicated to clean energy would know the difference between watts and watthours (i.e. power and capacity), on several occasions it claims that the capacity is X gigawatts instead of gigawatthours (GWh). It's hard to figure out what exactly is getting installed as the relation between the two is often different depending on the spec of the system.

have you read the article you linked? this literally repeats the same points I made, I don’t understand what you were trying to say.

That may be true for its fit and finish (panel alignments etc.), but the fact that they mastered vertical integration and supply chain management in less than 10 years is beyond amazing. Their powertrain (battery, motors, other hv components like charger etc) are first class and unparalleled in performance (and cost). We’ll see what Lucid will achieve in the next couple of years, their claimed (and validated) numbers such as range are very impressive, but for now, but Tesla has proven that it is a hardcore engineering company in a few important areas, there are others that need to catch up.

I don't know where you get your information, but you've completely missed what automotive software development looks like. The amount of verification and validation, and the number of standards (most of them are self-imposed, not a legal or homologation requirement) is absurdly high.

Here's a scenario. You're nominated to be an ECU supplier or a software sub-supplier for a VW brand, first thing they hit you with is requirements which span 1000 pages for a simple system (door, seat, HVAC), or 10x more for a more complex one (infotainment, engine ECU, "main" vehicle ECU etc.). 1 of those requirements is "SW shall comply with VW 8xxxxx norm" which is one of many VW norms that they deliver to you. The other requirement is "SW shall comply with KGAS", KGAS stands for "Konzerngrundanforderungen Software" which translates to "Group Basic Software Requirements", (group is VW), and both, you guessed it, are thousands upon thousands of requirements.

Then there's Functional Safety, or FUSA, which is a reference to ISO26262 (based on IEC 61508). Then there's also ASPICE (ISO/IEC 15504). New thing is UNECE R155 (cybersecurity). These three prescribe a very detailed development process commonly known as the "V model" for system and software development, which means you need to elicit requirements, define system requirements, system architecture, software requirements, software architecture and software detailed design. After that, you get to coding. For each of those there's a validation method: unit tests, software integration, software qualification, system integration and system qualification. ASPICE 4.0 has expanded to cover Embedded Hardware and Mechanical design as well. Other than the engineering processes they also cover other areas such as project management, configuration management, supplier monitoring, problem & change management etc.

Then come the external and internal audits, pardon, assessments. Your internal Quality department needs to monitor all engineering activities and report them to the customer, customer's Quality dept. will do their own audits, you and them will also hire an independent company to audit/assess you so that there's no bias.

BUT guess what - almost none of this is required for non mission critical software, so your infotainment is actually the only thing developed in a way you've described it. Brakes, ABS, ESP, Engine ECU or the EV powertrain (BMS, inverter etc.) are all written according to what I described above. There's no need for more bureaucracy, the automotive industry (especially German one) is very good at self-regulating and would make an average web developer throw up on his first day. Failures of the UX/UI in modern vehicles is just a business problem - guys who spent decades building and selling options like leather seats, and checking spreadsheets at the end of a fiscal period are still at the helm or their business processes still live on in those companies.

Rimac Technology | Embedded Software Engineer | Onsite or Remote (Croatia/UK or Europe)

Rimac Technology is an electric vehicle powerhouse, the Tier 1 supplier behind the world's most advanced and most powerful, record-breaking hypercar - Rimac Nevera. A part of Rimac Group, Rimac Technology and its sister company Bugatti Rimac are on a mission to electrify the exciting world of super-sport cars and help our customers electrify their fleet through our portfolio of battery packs, e-axles, infotainment and connectivity solutions.

We are hiring embedded software engineers to work on various products and projects for world renowned OEMs and our group's next hypercar - the successor to Bugatti Chiron.

We are looking for:

- passionate engineers with good communication skills

- experience with real-time embedded systems

- automotive experience _not_ a prerequisite

You can contact me or send me a CV @ david.romic@rimac-technology.com

More info & other job positions: https://www.rimac-group.com/careers/

I'm in automotive, but we have similar requirements to medical.

There's no "100% fail proof" solution, it's about determining the modes of failure and addressing them individually and combined, minimizing the risk and defining an acceptable level of it. If you accept that failures are inevitable, which they are, some are likely, some vary rare, you can prepare for them via redundancies, fault tolerant design, etc.. It's also about doing proper system design and performing certain methodologies such as "Failure modes, effects, and diagnostic analysis" (FMEDA)[1], "Fault Tree Analysis" (FTA)[2] and accounting for those.

There are standards like IEC 61508[3], or its automotive adaption ISO 26262, with which certain engineering disciplines and fields must be audited against in order to pass certifications and be able to market the product. In case of ISO 26262 it's not mandatory (will be soon), but good luck explaining any judge or jury why are you the only company in the existence not applying it in your vehicle design.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failure_modes,_effects,_and_di...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fault_tree_analysis

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_61508

> Chips also go out of production suddenly (with only a couple years warning...)

No they don't, automotive semiconductors suppliers have an "obligation" to manufacture the component for at least 15 years, which makes managing the production output planning, spare parts etc. much easier. It's not like walking into your supermarket and finding out that your favorite brand of chocolate is no longer available. There are minor exceptions, and sudden changes in the demand might affect the immediate availability, but at the very least the part is almost guaranteed to be produced for 15 years with defined notice policies. Microcontrollers don't have a pin-compatible drop in replacement when they get discounted, but many different ICs do, like power supplies, transistors etc., so discounting them is not a big deal.

e.g.: https://www.nxp.com/products/product-information/nxp-product...

> Participating products are available for a minimum of 10 years from product launch (15 years from product launch for many products developed for the automotive, telecom and medical segments), and are supported by standard end-of-life notification policies.

Yes, but that's not the e2e efficiency of the hydrogen powertrain, a 120kW hydrogen stack found in Hyundai Nexo is as big as an average petrol engine and its energy efficiency is somewhere around 45%, so it's not only the hydrogen tanks and the hydrogen inside it. If we're going to analyze the volumetric and mass efficiency and compare it to a BEV, then we need to take everything into the account.

Majority of hydrogen produced is made from processing oil, the energy efficiency of "green" hydrogen (electrolysis) is very poor and thus expensive.

I believe there's a strong chance of using hydrogen for long haul type of transportation, however, there are a lot of misconceptions about the technology and its general practicality.

I'm sure this article only tells 10% of the story from both sides, but the fact remains that some people entrusted him with his money and that his behavior made them uncomfortable, which ultimately made them remove him from the position. I find all of this unsurprising.

I partially agree with your comment, the math is fuzzy, and I'd say that saving 5 minutes per day is absolutely worthless, I don't care about that time, it's a rounding error. There's a cliff when doing this kind of math.

But I prefer to invert this thought experiment - my time isn't worth $x because I intend to use that time for something I can invoice, it's the amount you'd _have_ to pay for my time in order to incentivize me not to spend it walking around the park, watching a movie or whatever but rather do some marketable work.

So yes, I kind of know the value of my time, I'm willing to pay $x not to be bothered with some things, e.g. a washing machine. I don't care about spending +10 minutes when buying some item.

there's one in my hometown (Zagreb) as well!

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

Here's some blogpost with nice pictures

https://punkufer.dnevnik.hr/galerija/gdje-se-u-zagrebu-nalaz...

Porsche increases stake in Rimac Automobili to 24 per cent

https://newsroom.porsche.com/en/2021/company/porsche-increas...

It’s not a concern, the more powerful the charger, the better.

The devices that are being powered are the ones controlling the charging, the charging brick will derate itself if devices demand more than it can handle. It might hurt the brick, it will get hot or perhaps noisy if it’s a cheaper one.

It’s like openning every single faucet at your house, as long as the pressure and flow at the source are ok, the faucets will output the same as in any other case, otherwise each faucet will “slow down”.

OEMs use codenames because they're often sending/receiving parts to/from external suppliers, e.g. when driveshafts go around random warehouses and logistics companies they have the codenames on the boxes and stickers. they impose the same rules on tier 1 suppliers in order to maintain secrecy and streamline communication, that way everyone is referring to the same project using the same naming convention while preventing incidental leaks

Not only that! The story behind their newly founded N division is very interesting. They poached a long-time BMW executive Albert Biermann who headed multiple vehicle developments and the BMW M group, and tasked him with bringing up the N high performance divison within Hyundai (N as in Namyang R&D, but he says also Nurburgring). Since then he's been promoted to President & Head of R&D. As my most recent comment history says, I've spent several weeks in Namyang and I've never heard of an executive's name being (positively) invoked so many times inside the garage :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4iV4NeDABc

You could put me in charge and assuming I really go 100%, I doubt I'd pull it off. Point is, it also takes someone who really wants to and can do it.

Also, I'm just a guy on the internet, I really hope Cook sees this and decides to spite me and build an awesome car, I'm also a dreamer.

I work for a tier 1 EV supplier, I've spent 2 months in Hyundai's Namyang R&D center, several weeks at Aston Martin's facilities, and some others, you undersold it by A LOT. Ford, GM and other veterans on the industry have long lost their original spirit, just like any other company, but what they have is established processes and supply chain management, and that takes decades to do right. You can ship a 1st gen iPhone without a working camera, vehicle recalls hit you much harder.

Apple has been in and out of the car game for a few years now, with executives coming and going. What I'm about to say will be as meaningful as this hear-say article, but I feel that Apple management, and its shareholders, have no idea what it means to build a car. Things like this need 100% commitment from the management, Cook just doesn't seem like the guy to do it.

That reminds me of the foreword in the High Output Management, written by Ben Horowitz and Andy Grover's words "only the paranoid survive":

“CEOs always act on leading indicators of good news, but only act on lagging indicators of bad news.”

“Why?” I asked him. He answered in the style resonant of his entire book: “In order to build anything great, you have to be an optimist, because by definition you are trying to do something that most people would consider impossible. Optimists most certainly do not listen to leading indicators of bad news.”

But this insight won’t be in any book. When I suggested he write something on the topic, his response was: “Why would I do that? It would be a waste of time to write about how to not follow human nature. It would be like trying to stop the Peter Principle.* CEOs must be optimists and all in all that’s a good thing.”

sole definitions of avoid and evade are completely irrelevant, "tax avoidance" and "tax evasions" are well understood syntagms, former meaning utilizing any legal means in order to reduce the amount of taxes paid. simply put, tax avoidance is good accounting. tax evasion is illegal and is an action in which you're directly breaking a law.

what tech companies were doing in europe was utilizing every possible loophole in order to reduce the amount of taxes paid. of course, that angered sovereign nations which (rightly) felt cheated and they acted by applying pressures to ireland and others. some (france) even fined some of the companies, those fines were most likely in a grey area, but tech firms knew very well what they were doing, understood the motivations behind those fines and generally concluded that it's a bad idea angering a nation in whose market you're operating. realpolitik.

> What happens after 1000 charges?

Usually the end-of-life for traction batteries is specified at 80% of original charge (80% state of health), after that they're recycled as industrial energy storage for grids etc.

But with articles such as these, claiming breakthroughs and whatnot, it's always good to be extra suspicious and verify that they're using the same assumptions.

depending on the region it could be something like Mišo Kovač (Dalmatia)[1] or any tamburaši band (Slavonia)[2]. Istria and Zagorje have their own horses in the race, but I cannot name any.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUiA1zP3tU4

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4AYnl2TVKg&list=PL_YB4oZW18...

The entire team is within a 2 meter radius :)

There are other teams within the department which are distributed in a total of 4 cities inside the same country (a sort of "hub and spoke") and with SOME of these teams, because they collaborate and communicate often, this candid communication works well.

> Ask, don’t tell. (“What do you think about trying…?” rather than “Don’t do…”)

When I led a team of 6 people, I did the opposite. The guideline was to always use the imperative form if you knew there was a better way, especially if there's a precedent or it's a written rule in a guideline, but even for opinionated things.

It resulted in clear debate in PRs, ZERO personal conflicts, everything was very civil and productive.

I'm just mentioning this as a personal anecdote, not suggesting that there's a right or wrong way. The reason this worked in my team is because we were, and still are - a team. They're still doing it like that even though I'm no longer involved in day to day.

What was the turnover rate at that place? This would have me quit within a week.