Split Thread Musk, SpaceX and future of Tesla

Status
Not open for further replies.
SpaceX have apparently stolen their logo from a Scottish football team.

Amateur side Haddington Town AFC, based in East Lothian, took to Twitter to demand that the billionaire tech mogul “give back” their badge.

The badge, which features the white outline of goat within a circle on a black background, is almost identical to the new SpaceX logo, which appears in a photo shared by Musk on his social media platform X, previously known as Twitter.
Click to expand...
 
zooterkin said:
SpaceX have apparently stolen their logo from a Scottish football team.
Click to expand...

The funny thing about this is that the non story is obviously explained by both parties purchasing the same art from a stock site like iStock or Shutterstock. I had a quick search to prove the point, but couldn't find the logo among hundreds of similar logos for sale. Then I realised this is the world's richest man we're talking about and instead searched for "goat logo free vector art" and it's right there on the first page of results.
 
Last edited:
Disbelief said:
Must have struck a nerve, because I never specified that there were people here who were acting in such a manner. I was making a general statement about how Tesla seems to polarize people...
Click to expand...
...out of the blue for no reason, right. But we all saw what you did.

You do realize that we can look up the recalls and your downplaying of the recalls as being software driven is pretty much ********. They have one for loose fasteners on the steering wheel, possibility of it disconnecting. They have one for loose seat frames. They have a couple for loose fasteners on the front suspension.

As for the software, there's one for FSD that allows the car to drive through intersections and make unsafe turns. There's one for potential loss of power steering when driving over rough terrain.

Your downplaying of the severity of the recalls is enlightening.
Click to expand...
Whatboutism, and moving the goalposts. Want to try for some more?

Did you not even read where I said that that problems are expected when a new inexperienced business is innovating? My point is that the old established companies are also having problems - and arguably more severe than Tesla. Yet somebody is singling out Tesla for 'recalls' that don't even rise to the level of a physical recall.

You say I am downplaying Tesla's problems. That is a lie. But many people are doing the opposite. Every day I see another attempt to show that electric cars (especially Teslas) are no good for 'reasons'. Headlines breathlessly announce that yet another electric car burned up, 'showing how dangerous they are' (actual quote from a headline yesterday), yet statistics show the opposite. And when you investigate, half the time you find it wasn't even an EV!

Nobody talks about all the accidents and potential deaths that self driving cars have prevented, or the huge improvement this technology is making in vehicle safety. Only one company is making a serious investment in such innovation - Tesla. They are taking the hits so that we can finally have what we desperately need, a way to prevent the carnage on our roads. It's incredibly difficult, so difficult that most other car makers only dabble in it at best. And your response - to join the naysayers. With an attitude like that it's no wonder we can't have nice things.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
...out of the blue for no reason, right. But we all saw what you did.

Whatboutism, and moving the goalposts. Want to try for some more?

Did you not even read where I said that that problems are expected when a new inexperienced business is innovating? My point is that the old established companies are also having problems - and arguably more severe than Tesla. Yet somebody is singling out Tesla for 'recalls' that don't even rise to the level of a physical recall.

You say I am downplaying Tesla's problems. That is a lie. But many people are doing the opposite. Every day I see another attempt to show that electric cars (especially Teslas) are no good for 'reasons'. Headlines breathlessly announce that yet another electric car burned up, 'showing how dangerous they are' (actual quote from a headline yesterday), yet statistics show the opposite. And when you investigate, half the time you find it wasn't even an EV!

Nobody talks about all the accidents and potential deaths that self driving cars have prevented, or the huge improvement this technology is making in vehicle safety. Only one company is making a serious investment in such innovation - Tesla. They are taking the hits so that we can finally have what we desperately need, a way to prevent the carnage on our roads. It's incredibly difficult, so difficult that most other car makers only dabble in it at best. And your response - to join the naysayers. With an attitude like that it's no wonder we can't have nice things.
Click to expand...

Listen, a lot of the criticisms of Tesla are unfair or over wrought. Some of the evidence presented here in this thread isn't of high quality. Some conclusions are drawn that are more than the data supports.

That said, yes, Tesla really does have major issues including being less reliable overall than other car makers, including other maker's fully electric vehicles. Testing in Germany showed they have nearly double the rate of defects as the next worst electric car tested. (Of four, so not a fleetwide test, because in fleetwide tests of all consumer vehicles, Tesla's fell to the bottom third.) Consumer Reports complied a twenty year data sheet comparing car brands, and Tesla was 27th of 28th for reliability. (NBC article link bc I don't pay for Consumer Reports and I doubt any of you do either.)

It's wrong to downplay or ignore the real issues Tesla has, but I'd put their vehicle built quality far below their OSHA violations, the idiotic advertising of their cars as self-driving (which many of their own engineers resigned over by the way), their non-union low paying dangerous plants, their abuse of government subsidies (both US and Chinese), and probably a whole lot of things I'm forgetting.

Are these things worst than in other car companies? Yup. None of them are 'good' or even 'meaningfully innocent', but it's wrong to pretend that the rot of the entire industry means Tesla's **** doesn't especially stink in several areas.
 
Shrinker said:
The funny thing about this is that the non story is obviously explained by both parties purchasing the same art from a stock site like iStock or Shutterstock. I had a quick search to prove the point, but couldn't find the logo among hundreds of similar logos for sale. Then I realised this is the world's richest man we're talking about and instead searched for "goat logo free vector art" and it's right there on the first page of results.
Click to expand...

That's really funny, so I tried it myself. Google didn't give it to me on the first page, but Bing and Duckduckgo both did. Brought me here:
https://www.clipartkey.com/view/oRTmbb_goat-logo-png/

I suspect this isn't an official SpaceX logo, though. Still amusing.
 
tyr_13 said:
Tesla really does have major issues including being less reliable... but I'd put their vehicle built quality far below their OSHA violations, the idiotic advertising of their cars as self-driving (which many of their own engineers resigned over by the way), their non-union low paying dangerous plants, their abuse of government subsidies (both US and Chinese)...
Click to expand...
More goalpost moving. Their 'abuse' of government subsidies? Where do you get this stuff from?

...and probably a whole lot of things I'm forgetting.
Click to expand...
Right. "and a whole bunch of imaginary stuff I can't even think of but I'll add it to the pile anyway".

tyr_13 said:
Consumer Reports complied a twenty year data sheet comparing car brands, and Tesla was 27th of 28th for reliability.
Click to expand...

Consumer Reports put the Model 3 in the middle of the pack and still recommends it...
Domestic brands such as Chrysler, Chevrolet and Ford had average reliability, while others such as Ram, GMC and Jeep were below average. Ford’s luxury Lincoln brand ranked last at 28th, behind Tesla...

The Tesla Model X and Audi E-tron ranked dead last in this segment for reliability... High-end electric SUVs were among the least reliable vehicles in the survey overall.

Electric drivetrains weren’t the problem. Instead, Fisher blamed unnecessary high-tech bells and whistles.

The reliability rankings stand in stark contrast with Consumer Reports’ satisfaction survey, where Tesla topped the 2020 list...

Older models typically fare better in reliability,as companies tend to make tweaks and redesigns to solve known problems, while sticking with the same parts and suppliers.
Click to expand...
As usual, the truth is a lot more nuanced than your polemic implies.

Consumer Reports rated Lexus as the best 'model' for reliability, yet in 2021 the only fully electric EV Toyota had was the BZ4X, which were all recalled because the wheels were falling off. Perhaps they were so new at the time that fault reports were very low (the cars were not recalled until 2022). Similarly it appears that Ford's self-combusting hybrids didn't move the needle either - which makes sense because the quantity that had actually burned up by that time were very low.

This illustrates an apparent flaw in the survey - faults were not graded according to seriousness. An issue with an 'unnecessary high-tech feature' that affected many but was quickly fixed over the air is lumped in with more serious faults that most customers were probably not even aware of.

According to Consumer Reports the reliability issues with electric cars stem not from the drive trains, but 'unnecessary' high-tech bells and whistles. This is exactly what you would expect to have more issues, and perhaps explains why Tesla managed to top the satisfaction list despite some of its cars being 'less reliable' than lower-tech models. It may also explain why Ford's Lincoln and Audi's E-Tron joined the Tesla Model X at the bottom of the list.

IOW, it doesn't mean what you say it does. Even if Tesla was consistently at the bottom of the list (which they weren't), it wouldn't invalidate my point - which was that established car companies also had problems with their EVs. This is what that article said too!

As for the other things you introduced into the discussion, this just shows your bias against Tesla. Not content with addressing the subject at hand you had to do a pile on, using emotive words like 'idiotic' and 'abuse' to sway your audience. But even that wasn't enough. You also had to tell us about all the supposed faults Tesla has that you can't even remember!
 
Roger Ramjets said:
More goalpost moving. Their 'abuse' of government subsidies? Where do you get this stuff from?
Click to expand...

Goalpost moving huh? More on that later.

But their well publicized abuses of government programs. They took tax credits from California by creating a battery swap program, that was never released to the public. They released a 'base model' with 'no frills' one dollar below a credit program's cut off...and then didn't really offer the car. Something like 100 of them were 'sold' (apparently to employees). Tesla has taken a billion dollars from New York with inflated promises and little delivery. Tesla owned SolarCity out lied with massive inflation of project abilities and sizes (often double what they could do).

I'm not sure what has put your blinders on for this one, but damn, this isn't secret.

Right. "and a whole bunch of imaginary stuff I can't even think of but I'll add it to the pile anyway".
Click to expand...

LMAO, no. There are just too many to keep track of.


As usual, the truth is a lot more nuanced than your polemic implies.
Click to expand...

This is sad. You're really going to cite that one of Ford's brands rated lower? That's nothing. Saying that 'second to last' doesn't mean especially unreliable is just wrong. Yes it does. 27th of 28 is bad.

Consumer Reports rated Lexus as the best 'model' for reliability, yet in 2021 the only fully electric EV Toyota had was the BZ4X, which were all recalled because the wheels were falling off. Perhaps they were so new at the time that fault reports were very low (the cars were not recalled until 2022). Similarly it appears that Ford's self-combusting hybrids didn't move the needle either - which makes sense because the quantity that had actually burned up by that time were very low.

This illustrates an apparent flaw in the survey - faults were not graded according to seriousness. An issue with an 'unnecessary high-tech feature' that affected many but was quickly fixed over the air is lumped in with more serious faults that most customers were probably not even aware of.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?

According to Consumer Reports the reliability issues with electric cars stem not from the drive trains, but 'unnecessary' high-tech bells and whistles. This is exactly what you would expect to have more issues, and perhaps explains why Tesla managed to top the satisfaction list despite some of its cars being 'less reliable' than lower-tech models. It may also explain why Ford's Lincoln and Audi's E-Tron joined the Tesla Model X at the bottom of the list.

IOW, it doesn't mean what you say it does. Even if Tesla was consistently at the bottom of the list (which they weren't), it wouldn't invalidate my point - which was that established car companies also had problems with their EVs. This is what that article said too!

As for the other things you introduced into the discussion, this just shows your bias against Tesla. Not content with addressing the subject at hand you had to do a pile on, using emotive words like 'idiotic' and 'abuse' to sway your audience. But even that wasn't enough. You also had to tell us about all the supposed faults Tesla has that you can't even remember!
Click to expand...

Your handwaving and goalpost moving is really bad here. You're saying that being near the bottom in reliability doesn't count because satisfaction was high? No, just no.

Other EV weren't as unreliable. And again, others having problems doesn't mean Tesla's weren't especially bad. 'The other companies had bells and whistles fail too!' doesn't mean Tesla's didn't fail more. That Tesla also had bells and whistles fail doesn't mean they didn't also have important failures, such as brake failures, wheels falling off (suspension failure), uncontrolled sudden acceleration, autopilot crashes, etc. That the drive trains should be the most reliable doesn't mean they are in actual implementation right now. Well, I mean they are for some companies.

Tesla has (had) a lot going for it, but it's still especially bad in a lot of regards, and no, 'bells and whistles' don't mitigate that.
 
Last edited:
Roger Ramjets said:
...out of the blue for no reason, right. But we all saw what you did.
Click to expand...

Mind reader now too? Apparently I did strike a nerve, though not what I was doing.

Whatboutism, and moving the goalposts. Want to try for some more?
Click to expand...

How is it whataboutism when we were specifically talking about Tesla recalls? You're downplaying of the severity and the desire to change the definition so they don't look bad is pretty ridiculous. You don't get to decide what is defined as a recall and I showed how your claim of not being very bad was a lie.

Did you not even read where I said that that problems are expected when a new inexperienced business is innovating? My point is that the old established companies are also having problems - and arguably more severe than Tesla. Yet somebody is singling out Tesla for 'recalls' that don't even rise to the level of a physical recall.
Click to expand...

So they get a pass on problems when they try something new, but legacy carmakers do not? Do you think that no new innovations are being tried with new models and new technologies?

Once again, you do not get to decide what is a recall or not, that is done by the government. If you don't like it, take it up with them. Until then, all the manufacturers are playing by the same rules.

You say I am downplaying Tesla's problems. That is a lie. But many people are doing the opposite. Every day I see another attempt to show that electric cars (especially Teslas) are no good for 'reasons'. Headlines breathlessly announce that yet another electric car burned up, 'showing how dangerous they are' (actual quote from a headline yesterday), yet statistics show the opposite. And when you investigate, half the time you find it wasn't even an EV!
Click to expand...

You 100% are downplaying their problems when you try and decide if something warrants a recall or not. Just because you don't think they're a big deal, it doesn't make it so.

I see what you're doing there, or is this a general statement like mine was. As for the meat of your comment, I 100% agree (and said it earlier) that there are too many who don't understand electric vehicles and make outrageous claims. I work with electric cars and I have heard a ton of these types of comments when people find out. While there are some issues exclusive to electric vehicles, they get blown out of proportion too often.

Nobody talks about all the accidents and potential deaths that self driving cars have prevented, or the huge improvement this technology is making in vehicle safety. Only one company is making a serious investment in such innovation - Tesla. They are taking the hits so that we can finally have what we desperately need, a way to prevent the carnage on our roads. It's incredibly difficult, so difficult that most other car makers only dabble in it at best. And your response - to join the naysayers. With an attitude like that it's no wonder we can't have nice things.
Click to expand...

This is also an untrue statement. Cruise automation has autonomous cars on the road and have been investing heavily. GM has supercruise and ultracruise, which are much more than your typical cruise control. Ford has bluecruise which is the also self driving technology. Every large manufacturer is investing in this technology or they will be left behind.
 
tyr_13 said:
Goalpost moving huh? More on that later.

But they're well publicized abuses of government programs. They took tax credits from California by creating a battery swap program, that was never released to the public. They released a 'base model' with 'no frills' one dollar below a credit program's cut off...and then didn't really offer the car. Something like 100 of them were 'sold' (apparently to employees). Tesla has taken a billion dollars from New York with inflated promises and little delivery. Tesla owned SolarCity out lied with massive inflation of project abilities and sizes (often double what they could do).
Click to expand...
To be fair, the lying was mostly done before Tesla bought Solar City in order to make Tesla buy Solar City which was on the edge of bankruptcy. Musk misrepresented the then current state of Solar City products in order to make Tesla splash the cash. In my opinion it amounted to fraud.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bogative said:
More sad news for the ****libs.
Click to expand...
It's strange, but for some reason the same people who will tell you they are all for combating global warming also have the knives out for Tesla at every turn. Why is that? It's almost like partisanship overrides common sense. "We need to get the World off fossil fuels!", they cry "But not by employing evil capitalism! Not if poopyheads like Elon Musk are involved! Not if people are enjoying the products they produce!".
 
Roger Ramjets said:
It's strange, but for some reason the same people who will tell you they are all for combating global warming also have the knives out for Tesla at every turn. Why is that? It's almost like partisanship overrides common sense. "We need to get the World off fossil fuels!", they cry "But not by employing evil capitalism! Not if poopyheads like Elon Musk are involved! Not if people are enjoying the products they produce!".
Click to expand...

For all the actual reasons listed, which has yet to be 'he's a capitalist!'

Do you think the people criticizing Tesla's unsafe, racist run, non-union factories by comparing them unfavorably to Ford are just being anti-capitalism? Really? If you can't engage with the actual criticisms that's your failing, and not 'partisanship'.

I for one am not arguing that people are wrong to want or be happy with a Tesla. I, and others, have valid criticisms that don't go away with 'BUT GLOBAL WARMING!' no more than they go away with 'THINK OF THE CHILDREN YOU GROOMER!'

Speaking of getting off of fossil fuels; if that's your overriding concern to the point you'd deride others for any and all criticisms of Musk and Tesla, then you must really hate the things that Musk has done to stop projects that can more seriously reduce the need for them. Like subways and light rail. Or does making electric cars mean it's ok to lie in order to stop light rail expansion? Does making electric cars make supporting authoritarianism ok? Or is that too 'partisan'?
 
Roger Ramjets said:
It's strange, but for some reason the same people who will tell you they are all for combating global warming also have the knives out for Tesla at every turn. Why is that? It's almost like partisanship overrides common sense. "We need to get the World off fossil fuels!", they cry "But not by employing evil capitalism! Not if poopyheads like Elon Musk are involved! Not if people are enjoying the products they produce!".
Click to expand...

The criticism of Musk's running of Tesla has almost always been about his attaching dumb and dangerous ideas to what was otherwise a pretty straightforward and unobjectionable business of selling electric cars.

It's noteworthy that the normal ass sedan is the best selling vehicle rather than any of Tesla's dumb vanity projects. There's quite clearly a lot of demand for ordinary commuter vehicles that are electric, and Tesla has certainly benefited from being first on the scene to offer a product.

The criticisms of Tesla and Musk have not been about the core business model, but rather the stupid crap that has been attached at the periphery. Things like offering a self-driving feature that is obviously extremely dangerous and not ready for public use is a good example. Musk's contribution to the company has largely been as a weird leader of a personality cult, which as the benefit of attracting lots of press and investment, but also has the downside of him saying outrageously dumb things and interfering with the people at Tesla who actually know what they're doing.

Musk's habit of being a serial liar and exaggerator has also earned him some well due criticism. Musk repeatedly demonstrates that he's untrustworthy and not nearly as clever as he thinks he is, but because of the fortune he has amassed mostly through dumb luck, he has been able to deeply embed himself into large projects like Tesla and influence them, often for the worse.

Tesla should cash in as much as they can, because the torrent of EVs from normal car companies is coming very soon, and Tesla's near monopoly on this market will soon come crashing to an end. I very much suspect it will find competing with competent car manufacturers very difficult.
 
Last edited:
Roger Ramjets said:
It's strange, but for some reason the same people who will tell you they are all for combating global warming also have the knives out for Tesla at every turn. Why is that? It's almost like partisanship overrides common sense. "We need to get the World off fossil fuels!", they cry "But not by employing evil capitalism! Not if poopyheads like Elon Musk are involved! Not if people are enjoying the products they produce!".
Click to expand...

Electric cars are not the answer for combatting global warming but the fanbois think everybody buying one will make everything fine.

Also Elon Musk only cares about global warming because it helps him sell more cars. This was made obvious by his decision that Tesla would invest in Bitcoin and accept Bitcoin from people buying cars off them. That was a peculiarly bad step from a man who is an alleged genius.
 
jeremyp said:
Electric cars are not the answer for combatting global warming but the fanbois think everybody buying one will make everything fine.

[snip]
Click to expand...


You are correct. They are not "the" answer. However, they are 'an' answer.

As is solar power. Not "the" answer. But 'an' answer.

Also wind power.

And consumer conservation.

Etc., etc..

Obviously there is no one "the" answer. And those who feel the need to disparage anything that isn't because it is not a perfect "the" answer can only have questionable motives for doing so.
 
jeremyp said:
It's strange, but for some reason the same people who will tell you they are all for combating global warming also have the knives out for Tesla at every turn. Why is that? It's almost like partisanship overrides common sense. "We need to get the World off fossil fuels!", they cry "But not by employing evil capitalism! Not if poopyheads like Elon Musk are involved! Not if people are enjoying the products they produce!".
Click to expand...
Also Elon Musk only cares about global warming because it helps him sell more cars. This was made obvious by his decision that Tesla would invest in Bitcoin and accept Bitcoin from people buying cars off them. That was a peculiarly bad step from a man who is an alleged genius.
Click to expand...
To anyone unfamiliar with the issue, Bitcoin is controversial to some because the energy required to maintain bitcoin (mine the coins, generate the blockchain, etc.) is significant.

It also doesn't help that Musk seems to be a supporter of the republican party, the group who's answer to everything is "Drill baby drill", and who's current leader considers global warming to be a chinese hoax.

"Buy a tesla and save the planet. And afterwards vote republican so they can ensure even more fossil fuel usage" makes him sound like a bit of an opportunist when he is trying to sell EVs.
 
quadraginta said:
You are correct. They are not "the" answer. However, they are 'an' answer.

As is solar power. Not "the" answer. But 'an' answer.

Also wind power.

And consumer conservation.

Etc., etc..

Obviously there is no one "the" answer. And those who feel the need to disparage anything that isn't because it is not a perfect "the" answer can only have questionable motives for doing so.
Click to expand...

That's fine in abstract, but you have to consider the context of Musk selling the ridiculous idea of underground traffic lanes as some cure for congestion as an alternative to the proven technology of mass transit like subways. When you have early prototypes of a narrow underground tunnel that moves small numbers of people in individual Tesla cars very slowly being seriously considered when the obvious answer is a subway train, it's fair to criticize Tesla's vision.

He's taken a very clear anti mass transit stance, which invites the criticism that a 1:1 substitution of every ICE car to EV is not a solution to society's transportation woes, which includes but is not limited to climate change.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom