162 karma · joined October 29, 2016
By the way, by portraying Tesla as worse than the others, I didn't mean it explicitly in the article. More like the fact that Porsche, Hyundai, etc. didn't get the same treatment from the media for facing the exact same problem which then they couldn't even fix. (And also not mentioning this tiny detail that the icon-problem is not unique to Tesla.)
I know this is only one piece of news. However, I see this as an overarching pattern. I saw so many low-quality articles about Tesla that I even stopped reading the news completely for a while! I can show you many. If you are interested, here's a recent one: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-07/tesla-sol.... This, again, while technically true, is awfully misleading. Tesla had one car sale in South Korea in January 2022, 2023 and now 2024. This is because there are no incentives for EVs in January, which is why people wait until February to buy in the country. It is paywalled, but I am sure the truth, which invalidates the article's very reason for existence, is buried deep somewhere at the end. Or is it?
Tesla is clearly better here than the others, but the media portrays it as if it was worse.
The media is so biased against Tesla it is not even funny. This is a problem. This is why the "Tesla vs. others" frame is worth discussing. The fact that others had the same problem but couldn't fix it is indeed a very important detail.
Also, instead of discussing the processes at Tesla, don't you think we should be discussing the processes in the media? Because this article is so misleading, it makes people believe the opposite of the truth. What about the quality of the other articles about other things? Are they any better?
1. You said this icon problem suggests bad process control. Turns out Tesla's process control isn't worse than Porsche's process control, and Porsche produces the highest quality cars. In fact, it is better because Tesla fixed the problem and Porsche couldn't.
2. You said Tesla was forced. Turns out no manufacturer was forced to fix this.
End of debate.
Only Tesla could fix it. GM, Porsche, Kia/Hyundai and Ford couldn't. Their cars remain "dAngErOUs".
Source: https://youtu.be/480yxR_kmIg?si=dThdJD2_QceCyF_E&t=161
Source: https://youtu.be/480yxR_kmIg?si=dThdJD2_QceCyF_E&t=161
Dangerous defect my ass...
If they wanted to write an article about it anyway, it should be about how Tesla managed to fix an issue no other automaker could fix.
How old is the Model S? More than a decade.
Which one managed to fix the icon problem? The Model S.
What did Porsche do about this "safety problem"? Nothing.
What did the media suggest? That Teslas are unsafe.
Why did I spam the comment section? Because I want more people to see an objective comparison instead of just the sensationalism of these articles.
Why am I shilling for Tesla? Because I think it is a good company.
Explain not being forced -- I think you understand. They could have filed that petition like all the others. Conclude that it doesn't pose risk and just not fix it. (Btw I think the old icons were better.)
Regarding the old vs. new tech analogy -- exactly! Tesla can (and does) remotely make their cars safer. And not just icons but crash safety as well (see the linked video). This is a huge safety benefit.
I think only Tesla and BYD have the level of vertical integration that makes it possible to improve the drive/crash characteristics over the air. Others rely too much on suppliers. Car manufacturers usually don't have access to the proprietary firmware running on parts that they get from suppliers.
# pizza --cheese
Ordering...
Success.
#
Source: https://youtu.be/480yxR_kmIg?si=dThdJD2_QceCyF_E&t=161
Source: https://youtu.be/480yxR_kmIg?si=dThdJD2_QceCyF_E&t=161
Source: https://youtu.be/480yxR_kmIg?si=dThdJD2_QceCyF_E&t=161
Incorrect Font Size on Warning Lights/FMVSS 105: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2024/RCAK-24V051-8380.pdf