I think brokerages are already cooling it on selling short positions. It's amazing to me they didn't when it first hit 100. They're at too much risk now. We're in the end-game and 10k is exactly what we're hoping we see before this is over.

You still don't understand. They haven't covered in earnest yet. They covered at lower levels but they keep doubling down. Not one of my 15 shares was bought under 300. I'm expecting to break even when I sell one share at some point in the next two weeks. VW shot up to 1000 Euros in '08 when something similar happened. Guessing that's like 6k+ USD. In that scenario the shorts weren't anywhere near as in over their heads as these tools are and they just can't help themselves.

Stop being lazy. This is all over the news.

They're on the hook to cover the shorts if the hedges go bankrupt.

Motor-per-wheel is a great idea. Motor-IN-wheel not so much unless you'll be on a flat surface 99% of the time.. I suspect that's why it's limited to 80mph. Don't want to wreck motors hitting small rocks on the highway.

I'll be content to buy a $200 bed adapter on the rare occasion I need to haul large sheets of construction material. I prefer Rivian keep its off-road focus and not mess with the breakover angles because some people think the only acceptable role for a pickup truck is drywall trolleying.

Only a Tesla superfan would doubt that. Rivian's targeting more of a Range Rover market. Tesla's more of a Hummer, IMO.

I think Fisker is the first EV startup I've seen start with a below 40k model. The prevailing theory seems to be high-margins to build a brand while you ramp up production, then build more affordable low-margin stuff when you're prepared to scale up. They might be unveiling a compact pickup soon. They "leaked" it a while back. The Alaska.

More like (more like) $55k pre-tax rebate now. $69k is a well-equipped mid-range with one of those electro-chromic roofs now)

It's a fleet-focused truck. Minimum pre-order of 5. It's also hub motor (motor-in-wheel) which is design suicide and probably the reason it's software-limited to 80mph. So it doesn't wreck motors on very small rocks. Also, not really very friendly to EV-focused press and not a lot of show-me so far.

Correction/details:

FD: I have a Rivian preorder.

Since the January price-drop (Electrek has a piece on it) $69k has been the price of a well-equipped mid-range R1T with an electrochromic roof. We don't know where it starts, but not $69k. I'd guess maybe 55k short-range base trim. Before the tax break. All tiers have 4-motors and kinetic suspensions. They are unique in this regard and are leveraging the 4-motor factor in a big way.

The Tesla trucks aren't even remotely competitive on towing and power until you compare the long-range vs the $69k tri-motor so it's kind of lame to list the lowest price only for the CT on pricing. The $69k tri-motor is supposed to get 100 miles more than the LR Rivian (speculating - 75-80k for the base trim) and 3k lbs more towing capacity. They have comparable acceleration. Doesn't mean they're BS necessarily, but the Teslas specs were quoted at its unveil at a time when they were still 5 months away from patenting the new battery they need for it.

The hummer's on-demand 0 to 60 is 4 seconds. To get 3 you have to (I think) park it, engage "WTF mode" (Watts To Freedom - no joke) and give it a minute to get ready for you to hit the accelerator while it conditions the battery an lowers the suspension.

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for anybody other than Rivian to ship in 2021. They're currently building QC validation models off of their first production lines as of early September, when they finished crash-testing/pilot builds. They're post-covid target date is June. Tesla has batteries they need to be able to mass produce but can't until (their estimate) ? in 2022, very little news since unveil last November other than Musk design churn tweets, 1 prototype seen so far, and a factory that doesn't have walls yet. GM has a prototype and lots of CG and its 2nd run won't be for a whole year after the first, making me wonder if maybe that date doesn't have more to do with other people's preorders.

Watch for the Rivian's R2T between now and 2025 and for Fisker to maybe announce the Alaska soon. But you've got years before a compact hits either way.

That belief is such a sad waste of time and energy. I've been on both sides of the interview table for over a decade now and I've never encountered anything in that time that suggests you might be on to something.

For starters, high-stress interviews can very easily out your organization as a bad place to work to the candidate and filter out the people you actually want while filtering in people who are only proving they're good at your interview process.

I think about 7-8 years ago, Facebook wanted me to write a freaking calendar app just for the opportunity to stand before wave after wave of teams of climbers looking to filter out anybody who wasn't a Stanford comp. sci grad. Meanwhile, FB the site at the time, was having mad cross-browser issues and had been for over a year and there was a huge shortage of developers with a ton of skill/knowledge on the front end at the level that I was at. That told me a story about Facebook behind the scenes that I didn't like. Even if I got through the live-fire exercises and they only happened to hit the on the algos that I was aware of (and have never used in a production environment before or since), I didn't love the idea of what I was going to find on the other side of that rainbow. So I had a choice. Play the FB lottery ticket for what sounded like a dubious-at-best work experience with great compensation/benefits or talk to like 7 reasonable companies in the same time frame with a lot less stress and fatigue incurred.

And who would put up with this process? A minority might be people who don't actually have any other choices but somehow ended up getting picked up by a recruiter and will just waste your time. But most likely, people who are so in love with the idea of working for Facebook, they'd eat shit for Facebook. Young people who spend their nights honing all of those interview skills that often have no correlation with practical experience skills. That's what you want? A bunch of shit-eating badge-earners rather than than people who love what they do enough that quality of work environment trumps the best possible compensation/benefits and brand-recognition? How many "people who actually quit Google" articles do you need to read to figure out what you're doing to yourselves?

So...

* Whiteboard? Huge nope. I've been typing like a pro for 33 years because I couldn't handwrite for shit. It's not even possible. It would take me like a minute to write a legible line. I've stopped asking people to accommodate me on that because even when they grudgingly accept they still end up being pricks about it at the interview. You want it on a whiteboard, you're probably being an asshole. Completely unnecessary. Also we're not REALLY engineers. Get over it.

* 8-10 hour "test" projects that will actually take the better part of a week to complete because you have to polish every last bit to avoid being filtered based on somebody's favorite linter preferences? Big nope. Also, WTF do you need 8-10 hours of work for, even if that was realistic timeframe? What are you telling the candidate about how much respect you have for people's time? Can they probably expect the same of you in the workplace? From what I've heard, yes. If you're convinced this is such a great idea, at least tally the number of candidates who reject you when they find out what's on the menu and ask yourself who those people probably are. False negatives are worth it for the best candidates, my eye. You're shooting yourself in the ass and you're probably too silly to know it because the same process put YOU there.

* Gauntlet of pass/fail test interviews. People will find the dumbest reasons to filter out candidates when you handle things this way. Stop filtering. This is a matching process. Establish the base line of competence/experience that you need and then cut it out with the code-marathon stuff. It's ridiculous.

* Non-trivial pair-programming. Oh my god nope. I've actually warmed to pair programming recently but don't force candidates to code as you watch. You're a stranger to them. No trust to make the occasional quickly-discovered derp without getting judged has been established.

It's just not that hard. Give them something small to write or refactor or the option of bringing in recent work to show so you can discuss. OR have them bring in something old they might be proud of but would do very differently now for discussion. Have them solve very typical day-to-day problems in person that should fall within the realm of the experience they're supposed to have. Ask them about challenging problems they've had to solve and how they went about solving them. Most importantly, ask questions with an aim of establishing whether they actually enjoy the work. Because if they don't, they might not suck today but they will most likely suck within 3 years when they drag their feet every new thing they have to learn.

Also, what's with all the posts with the character entity issues? Are you guys typing your responses up in Word 2003 or something?

What it translates to is, "I'm not going to acknowledge that black people have been everything up to and including murdered for sport by cops in recent years often for violations very minor or imagined and I can't hear you/don't see all the video evidence! la-la-la-la-la!!"

Like Jesus H guys. How hard is it to stop imagining you're being oppressed to actually pay attention and stop being an asshole for 5 seconds?

Whether you knowingly hate black people or not, your indifference in light of the facts is most definitely racist.

Or we could just say, "Wow they're bothered by that. Actually not that hard to change." And then knock it off. What's your follow-up to that? "Give them an inch and they'll take a mile" maybe?