I would mod this up if I had points at the moment.

We have endured over a decade of "XXX is going to eat Tesla's lunch just you watch" postings and it just never happened. Every argument in the vein showed up right here at /. Still does.

It was almost 10 years ago when Musk first started pointing out that designing the car was only 5% (his summation) of the R&D job. Their real IP and assets were the factories that made the cars, which in turn are designed to be built in those factories economically.

And it has paid off, not that you ever see any media mentioning that. They will obsess over this or that time period's margins and how much "competition" is appearing without considering whether that competition is profitable or not. In Ford's case, as reported here, it is clearly not. I am rooting for them to fix that but it is going to take time and investment.

Had Musk not performed his swan dive with Tesla over a decade back and committed his entire fortune to an enterprise that nearly every financial sector player predicted (and shorted) was guaranteed to fail, things would have looked a lot different.

Right up to 2024 and beyond, Auto makers world wide (not just U.S.) would still be sending out position statements to the effect: "Fully electric vehicles remain a interesting subject for more study, which shows they are simply not economically viable at the present level of technology." Then: "We are looking new Eco-friendly fuel sources that might cut carbon emissions by as much as 15%. "

That is where they would be. You know it. In 2024.

In the mean time, the command economy of China would be cranking out endless swarms of little crappy battery vehicles by the millions. Scooters, bikes, and little shit-boxes the U.S. market would sneer at. But they would fulfill their function and their consumers would know exactly what range they could get for how much money and nobody would be whining about panel gaps or microscopic paint bubbles or touch screens or whatever. Chinese workers would get to work reliably.

Somehow Musk seems to have little trouble selling Model 3/Y into China, and that while slamming it out toe-to-to with BYD. Anyone care to say how that happens? It seems pretty clear how it does but the real question is does the Dept of Commerce and their auto-maker clients know it?

Interesting that this project was awarded to BYD. Does anyone know if Tesla bid on the project and if so why BYD won?

In the past when looking into BYD sales numbers I always have had difficulty separating out the BEV sales numbers from their Plugin-Hybrids, Hybrids, and for that matter all the other vehicle that uses batteries for propulsion energy. BYD makes a lot of different models of vehicles. Maybe they have golf carts and e-bikes in their numbers. I have given up looking, so I'm hoping someone else has done the work.

With Tesla it is easy. They don't sell anything but BEVs so there is no post-processing work to do. However over the past several years each time I have seen a clickbait headline to the effect BYD OUTSELLS TESLA ZOMG it turns out when you take out the true BEV numbers from the BYD total it isn't so much.

That said BYD seems to be a very competent and capable manufacturer with some very worthy products. Even Musk has said good things about them. It is not outside the realm of possibility that they can surpass Tesla at some point, but I wish the numbers were more clear.

Anyway, if someone has a good reference link on this subject it is much appreciated.

I thought salting the soil was something hostile armies did to make some territory unlivable.

Nor should it be.

Here is a prime example of an obvious phenomenon which cause me to largely reject libertarian philosophy even from an early age when I would have been most susceptible. Reading Heinlein novels and such.

The theory is that consequences will cause businesses to do the "right thing" because otherwise society and the market will turn against them. They will die and be replaced by businesses that will behave knowing their reputation is at stake. It is in their self interest.

Exhibit Boeing. There is always and I mean always someone with wealth around that is not only willing but eager to trade your long term interests for their short term interests. Slash costs, disregard expensive safety procedures, build stockholder value. Hire lots of MBAs to justify everything. Get the cash. They hang on as for as long as they can because they also get the golden parachute as they are eased out the door.

Want to sue? Sure go ahead. Here's the number of their $2K/hour attorneys in Manhattan who will tie up the case in "discovery" for about 5 years and come to a settlement that will claw back maybe 15% of what they got. They might or might not notice, being occupied in Barbados with their cool cigarette boat and new trophy mistresses. So much for "self interest."

It seems we have gotten to the point that even Airbus execs are becoming alarmed.

I have heard that "once is chance, twice is a coincidence, and three times is enemy action." We are far beyond three times now.

So where does this end?

Why would someone want to develop coding skills when we are fast approaching the era where systems are programmed pretty much the way the computer on the Starship Enterpise is programmed? Just say what you want and it does the rest. Nobody will need "coding sense."

Already I rely on GPT (and there are better ones out there) to speed up my projects. Sure I can do Python/C/Java/Typescript/HTML/CSS (or whatever) by hand the same way I can still do long division by hand but this isn't a matter of aesthetics or spirituality anymore. It is about getting the job done and getting paid.

GPT makes plenty of mistakes and hallucinations (as they say in AI) so it doesn't relieve anyone from knowing what they are doing. Currently. But it is still a productivity enhancer and it is quite easy to see the future where you don't even need to look at the produced code any more than you need to look at the machine instruction output from a compiler.

The kind of software engineering that we knew of for my career -- more than 50 years now -- will soon be a part of the past. There will always be a need for and plenty of engineers around that can do low-level programming, but that will become a specialty. Or a hobby for some. All those popped-up "learn coding" schools will disappear. There will be some standard courses in public schools K-12 and then curriculum at the college level for the needs of the time.

By announcing plans for a $25,000 car and committing funds for a factory to build it. Makes sense.

Did you know you can buy a sub-$10,000 all-EV car already? Just look it up on alibaba. Why hasn't Tesla's sales in China (and BYD's for that matter) been destroyed by that? Maybe you need to think about how the sticker price is not the only parameter driving the market.

The Model Y is the top selling car in many market regions and the #1 car in more than one region. On top of that it is satisfactory to the German market. I think this speaks to the build quality far more than unsubstantiated claims. Repair records published by this or that magazine only tell part of the story. Consumers, of which I am one, are overwhelmingly satisfied with their cars. The complaints about build quality seem to come mostly from people who don't have one.

As for resources, Tesla has enough cash in the bank to sustain all operations (and payroll!) for years even if they had zero revenue. The manufacturing techniques they have invested in and have up and running are now being belatedly imitated by other auto manufacturers. It goes way beyond the Giga-press.

Yes there are more EV cars out there. But Tesla and BYD are the only ones so far that are making any money at it. GM and Ford are cancelling projects while Tesla is expanding. Just who is living on "borrowed time?"

I would agree with this. Musk is acting like a drooling idiot here.

Musk's contribution to SpaceX is that when he was driving it personally he set objectives and methods that absolutely no other top executive at any other aerospace company would tolerate. He took risks that were insane by modern corporate standards and it paid off. "Move fast and break things" is a culture that will be hated by some engineers and loved by others (depending on their own personalities) and there was nowhere else for that latter category to work.

The result -- the lowest cost per kg to LEO in all history. They are launching Falcon rockets on a schedule that exceeds some airlines. I doubt one civilian in a hundred has any idea what they have achieved

I saw this movie in Berkeley back in the day with friends. I always remembered it but never saw it again until I found a DVD in some store and bought it.

Astoundingly, that DVD copy did have the noted metaphysical discussion between the Lieutenant and The Bomb, but for some reason the earlier scene of a discussion between the ship computer and The Bomb was taken out. ("you are out of your bay again")

Now I have to wonder what else was edited out. Also if there is other media out there with the whole thing. Anyone here know?

Everything Trump touches dies.

I like how the article manages to subtly frame a corporation groaning under the twin afflictions of having find what to do with $110B in cash and the horrible nasty lib regulation of the Biden administration. I mean, just how do the Alphabet executives manage to drag themselves out of bed every morning with such a load of crippling depression?

It won't let you do anything dirty