It does.
![Embarrassed :oops:](./images/smilies/icon/redface.gif)
Moderators: Bakhtosh, EvilHomer3k
Weren't paying attention during the cave diving fun, eh?
Remember the 'we are closing all our stores' week? Fun times.coopasonic wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 4:32 pm I am pretty sure Musk doesn't agree with all of Musk's decisions.
Why it Matters:Tesla Inc (NASDAQ: TSLA) has slashed the prices of the base models of its Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
What Happened: Previously, the Standard Range Plus Model 3 sold for $37,990 and is now priced $1,000 cheaper at $36,990.
The Model 3 Performance (AWD) will now sell for $55,990 and was previously priced at $54,990.
There is no change to the price of the Model 3 Long Range (AWD), which continues to be sold for $46,990.
As for the Model Y trims — the Model Y Standard Range sees its price drop by $2,000 to $39,990. There is no change in the price of the Model Y Long Range (AWD).
The Model Y Performance (AWD) will now cost $60,990 and was previously priced at $59,990, which is a price hike of $1,000.
Why it Matters: In January, Tesla cut prices of its European Model 3. In Germany, the Model 3 became cheaper up to EUR 4,000, and in France by as much as EUR 6,000.
At the end of last year, it was reported that the Elon Musk-led company is unlikely to cut Model 3 prices in China.
In China, Tesla made five price cuts between October 2019 and October 2020.
Price Action: Tesla shares closed nearly 0.2% higher at $798.15 on Wednesday and fell about 0.6% in the after-hours session.
Related Link: Tesla Denies Development Of $25,000 Model 2 Vehicle In China: cnEVpost
Click here to check out Benzinga’s EV Hub for the latest electric vehicles news.
Their paper gains in BTC are higher than their 2020 net profit. Or were when BTC was pushing $60K. I think 2020 earnings were around $750M.LordMortis wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:43 pm Heard this out of context bit in the background while working. Tesla is making more money off of bitcoin than they made selling cars in all of 2020. Not sure what the hard facts are. I didn't hear the whole thing that led to the conclusion.
I remember. I was the guy who originally brought this up and started the debate on the sustainability of the model and whether it was enough to warrant buying TSLA at around $250 a share a little over a year ago. Oh, to go back and time, and do more than find a $1000 to show my strong belief that TSLA was easily worth $300 - $400 a share based on the profitability of those credits and being first to the gate with reduced labor needs to build an EV. (Forget selling off from $600 - $800 because well, while it was a good model for value $400, not so much for $800, but whatdoIknowfromstupid?)LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:41 pm And remember that's not all from selling cars. A large part (most?) was from selling offsets and regulatory credits.
Not wildly different from the Model 3/Y interior (which I love) except for the yoke instead of a wheel. Seems to go with the exterior. I wasn't buying one anyway, but no complaints here.
I've been inside a Model 3. It doesn't look like someone designed it on an N64 like that picture did.coopasonic wrote: ↑Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:40 amNot wildly different from the Model 3/Y interior (which I love) except for the yoke instead of a wheel. Seems to go with the exterior. I wasn't buying one anyway, but no complaints here.
But it's cyber! And stuff! Hard angles!pr0ner wrote: ↑Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:41 amI've been inside a Model 3. It doesn't look like someone designed it on an N64 like that picture did.coopasonic wrote: ↑Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:40 amNot wildly different from the Model 3/Y interior (which I love) except for the yoke instead of a wheel. Seems to go with the exterior. I wasn't buying one anyway, but no complaints here.
Or maybe in Minecraft.pr0ner wrote: ↑Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:41 amI've been inside a Model 3. It doesn't look like someone designed it on an N64 like that picture did.coopasonic wrote: ↑Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:40 amNot wildly different from the Model 3/Y interior (which I love) except for the yoke instead of a wheel. Seems to go with the exterior. I wasn't buying one anyway, but no complaints here.
No forgiveness needed--of course we should have the data before jumping to conclusions. My point, as it often it with coverage relating to Tesla, is that 'journalists' should do the same but rarely do. Just taking the article linked above:LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 9:20 am Forgive me if I take Elon Musk's tweets with a massive grain of salt.
Headline leads to believe that this was an AP crash, without evidence. As disarm pointed out, the fact that there was no driver in the driver's seat is not an indication that AP was enabled (that's not the Occam's razor implication, at least).Feds investigating fatal Tesla crash where no one was in the driver seat
AP implicated, without evidence.The spokesperson did not respond to a follow-up question about whether that would include a recall of Tesla’s Autopilot feature that was likely involved in the crash.
The fire was out in 2-3 minutes.The duration of the fire, which lasted four hours and required 30,000 gallons of water to extinguish, is said to have made identification difficult.
Awesome.Minutes before the crash, the wives of the men were said to overhear them talking about the Autopilot feature of the vehicle
Highly likely it is not, as anyone with an even passing first-hand familiarity with AP could have told the author.This is also the latest incident to involve a driver using Autopilot crashing into a stationary object.
Absurd. Hands-on nag has been increased, and further increased at higher speeds; seat belt must be buckled or AP immediately disengages, 3/Y have driver-monitoring cams that code checks indicate will be enabled RSN, and a bunch of other small tweaks I could bore you with. Regardless of what Tesla does, people who determine to use AP in an unsafe way will succeed at using AP in an unsafe way (as they do with cruise control and vehicles in general on a daily-but-much-less-covered way).and Tesla has yet to address it in any meaningful way
The point (and really, it is the point) is that CR just went out and showed that it's 'easy' to 'trick' Autopilot, by doing the following:LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 2:03 pm No other manufacturer sells cruise control or seatbelt detection as "autopilot" or "full self driving".
Tesla is always pushing the limits of marketing and regulatory compliance. It's not a surprise that they constantly get heat like this, even when it's undeserved.
I don't think anyone is arguing this would happen by accident. But if people think the car is capable of driving itself, they may be more likely to decide to do this.Zaxxon wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 2:16 pm
It's something that literally will never happen unless the driver has decided beforehand that they want to drive in an unsafe manner, and something that any driver who has made that decision can do in any vehicle on the road, made by any manufacturer.
This is analogous to the 'we're already on the other side of the air-tight hatchway' vulnerability type in infosec--you've just shown that by intentionally doing something incredibly stupid that you have the ability to do, you can do something incredibly stupid.
Should Tesla use the driver camera? Yes (and they're working on it). That's also defeatable if the driver wants to do it. Should Tesla monitor the seat for weight after AP is engaged rather than just at the start? Yes. That's also defeatable if the driver wants to do it. And on and on. Once these things are in place, drivers will still do stupid things.
Common parlance says otherwise.Zaxxon wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 2:16 pm
And I know we've covered the naming over and over in the past, but you've got a point on FSD. AP, not so much. I know it's en vogue to crap on the name, but it's actually the most accurate name (unlike something like Ford's Co-Pilot, which also pulls from aviation terms but instead pulls the name of something that does actually drive the vehicle for you, without supervision, while their product does not do that).
I'm with you on Musk overselling FSD, but--while regrettable--that's a far cry from actual drivers in the seat of the vehicle actually turning it on.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 2:31 pm I don't think anyone is arguing this would happen by accident. But if people think the car is capable of driving itself, they may be more likely decide to do this.
Common parlance is no more relevant than actual meaning. I hear you, but again the word choice of Autopilot is accurate in the context of the names of technology that assists but does not replace the pilot. It's the most correct name for this sort of service.Common parlance says otherwise.
"I've been on autopilot all day" doesn't mean "Ive had thrust and attitude controls handled by a computer." It means "I haven't paid attention to anything and somehow ended up here."
"Jesus is my Co-pilot" doesn't mean "Jesus is there to handle things on the event I become incapacitated or need to take a leak.". It means, "Jesus provides support and guidance."
Pick any colloquial use of the terms. Ford legal department wins that one.
On both these fronts, you (and many others!) consistently want Tesla to dumb things down to the lowest common denominator. It's why we can't have nice things. Why not instead treat drivers as though they have a responsibility to themselves and others, and assume a baseline minimum competency to read words and follow basic instructions before piloting vehicles? (Just as we actually do treat drivers in every other scenario.)Wikipedia, summarizing an FAA description wrote:An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft, marine craft or spacecraft without requiring constant manual control by a human operator. Autopilots do not replace human operators. Instead, the autopilot assists the operator's control of the vehicle, allowing the operator to focus on broader aspects of operations (for example, monitoring the trajectory, weather and on-board systems).
I'm sure it's not an original thought. Just cracks me up for some reason.