SPACE

[Muttley]

But hey, I reckon Tesla cars shouldn't have ever been allowed on the road either, so I can't say I'm coming at this from a very objective place.

WTF?! What kind of ridiculous reason do you have for that?

Not a car fan in general but I know they're necessary to some degree in this day/age. However, high horsepower/speed cars, especially ones that are largely silent, have no place sharing public roads.

Electric Cars are not silent, especially at speed due to the noise created by the interactions between the tyres and the road surface. The biggest "risk" (or should I say, "Imagined Risk") is at very low speeds, and at those speeds electric cars are required to make an artificial noise, despite the fact that some petrol cars are just as quiet at low speeds and they're not required to do this.

[Dio]

Crazy argument. Follow that logic and pedestrians and bikes are more dangerous than cars, and deaf people can't legally use roads.

[WiteWulf]

I'm certainly not saying that EVs shouldn't be allowed on the road, but when I'm dropping off at school in the morning there's an i3 parks up and it's damned near silent. I've nearly walked in front of it a few times.

It's not dangerous, I need to be more careful, but not everyone's as self-aware....

[Rhythm]

Crazy argument. Follow that logic and pedestrians and bikes are more dangerous than cars, and deaf people can't legally use roads.

A Model S is close to 2000kg and at worst, can get to 100kph in under 6 seconds with little more than tyre noise at play. To claim any equivalence of danger with bicycles/peds is mental.

To be clear, I'm dead set against (noisy) dinosaur-chewers too, but Tesla's steadfast focus on performance/speed over everything else makes me seriously dislike the aim of that firm. When I saw them issue a software switch that increased the range of cars in/around hurricanes in the States last year.... fucking urgh.

Anyway, apologies for derailing your thread, I'll step out.

[Dio]

You've never actually heard one, I presume? I have. It's not silent.

[Yak]

My EV makes an artificial "engine noise" any time it's below 20mph precisely so it can be heard in car park/low speed situations. Above that you'd still hear the noise of tyres on road etc, so it's not as if it wafts along in some kind of unnatural spooky silence as if it were levitating or somesuch.

Tesla prioritised performance and speed highly at first because they entered the market at the top end hoping to win converts amongst rich people who would otherwise have bought normally fuelled supercars. Successive model ranges have targeted more realistically oriented users, still offering pretty good performance but in a more affordable package and with enough range to be practical. Largely due to Tesla leading the way other less exotic car manufacturers like Nissan and Renault got in on the EV act too, enabling even someone like me without a lot of money to get into an EV.

also if Tesla did push out an update enabling users in areas where the charging infrastructure had been damaged to squeeze extra range out of their vehicles, isn't that actually a non-evil thing? Can't see how the response to doing that is "OMG THOSE FUCKING BASTARDS".

[Rhythm]

Rolling tyre noise is noise, I'll grant you, but it's hardly the same as a petrol engine gunning at you.

The bigger issue I have is the performance, frankly. There were claims of "he's aiming at luxury lovers then he'll use that to bring the cost down for normal folks" yet the "cheap/everyday" Model 3 still goes 0-100 in under 5 seconds, is no safer if you're unlucky enough to be hit by one and in the meantime he's making and selling personal flamethrowers. I just do not get the constant adulation for the guy.

Everything I'm watching him do is somehow unquestionably loved by the geek crowd as "good for humanity" but his sole focus seems to be mopping up additional billions. He's doing it all under the guise of "environmentalism" but it's just gadgets for gadget lovers with no real result except a larger market share for Tesla. A humanitarian billionaire.... wouldn't be a billionaire.

If it carries on we'll have an Apple-like situation only it won't just affect luxury phones and niche computers - it'll hit every day life in unprecedented ways. The idea that he's being permitted to almost single-handedly restore power to Puerto Rico is genuinely chilling. It's like someone crossed Branson with Jobs/Cook in all the worst possible ways.

also if Tesla did push out an update enabling users in areas where the charging infrastructure had been damaged to squeeze extra range out of their vehicles, isn't that actually a non-evil thing? Can't see how the response to doing that is "OMG THOSE FUCKING BASTARDS".

Can't say I'm a huge fan of people hiding features behind artificial locks. Saving a feature only to flick a switch in times of disaster with a reveal of "only joking, it could've been doing 400 miles rather than 300 all along!"... just feels totally rotten to me.

[Yak]

I'm sure the Tesla already has a "range optimisation" mode. Even my humble Zoe has an "eco" button which you can engage if you want the car to assist you in milking the most out of the range. I suspect what they will have done is created an "extreme emergency" extension of that mode, shutting down all nonessential systems like AC, nav etc so as to optimise most fully for range. It's likely not a mode you would ever want to engage outside of an emergency, since driving the car wouldn't be particularly pleasant in such a mode, but as a buff to be used in extreme circumstances it seems like a good thing to have offered.

The stuff they are doing in Puerto Rico is actually important stuff in terms of smoothing out the uneven delivery of power typical of natural energy sources such as wind and solar - wind doesn't blow all the time, sun doesn't shine at night, so having some kind of storage system that can smooth that out makes such sources much more usable without having to rely on conventional backup power sources to fill in the gaps. Something that'll become pretty universally useful to everyone the more we move over to natural power.

I just don't see the Muskatron as some kind of supervillain in the making. Sure, he's a business dude and he's not doing it for nothing, but at least he is doing some stuff that is actually interesting and useful. There's plenty of other people making far dirtier money than he is who would be far more appropriate targets for criticism IMO.

[Dio]

No, Tesla does actually fit the same battery to all models and configures how much of it will charge in software. You can buy a battery upgrade over the phone.

But this is hardly news. Most computer chips you can buy have capabilities artificially fused off at the factory. It's often actually cheaper overall to do it that way, whether because of part redundancy or SKU reduction or whatever, and madly, there are angles by which you can portray it as good for the consumer: the more expensive product is always waaay overpriced so the people who pay more for the expensive products subsidise the ones who buy the cheaper products. (See also Apple internal flash prices).

[F-ZeroOne]

I do have misgivings about some of Musks other ventures - to me, his ideas on public transport are a very American idea of public transport - but I can't help but admire SpaceXs achievements so far.

[Barney]

in the meantime he's making and selling personal flamethrowers.

Dude, they're blow torches, not flame throwers. You can buy those pretty much anywhere.

And don't forget that he made and sold hats.

[rowan]

Anyone seen this video of the booster landing?


Wow..

[Firefox]

That's just jaw-dropping...

[RedOktober]

I still don't understand why electric cars don't all have solar panels plastered all over them.

[Muttley]

I still don't understand why electric cars don't all have solar panels plastered all over them.

Not enough available surface area to be particularly useful. Also it adds additional weight which then means more battery power is required to move the car, meaning it's even less useful.