Maybe they have to be as big a bunch of cunts as the cunts they go up against. Last time I checked cunts were ruling the world. We're seeing leaders with psychopathic characteristics, you're probably going to have to be a cunt just to go up against a more cunty set of cunts or the cunts will walk right over you.

They died as well, for workers rights and human right and were used and deceived by another bunch of cunts. Some here have fought against unionization without the consideration that maybe, just maybe, people in tech who wanted to try would see these flaws and find a better way to outsmart the cunts. If only for the cunts amongst us, they may have succeeded.

Kennedy once said "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable"
loosely translated
"Cunts that make you be a cunt makes everyone have to be a cunt."

"robotaxi" is Tesla-specific, Tesla is a company operated by a pathological liar and sociopath. Tesla has been caught creating fraudulent accident data.

Also, Tesla themselves report their crash rate is 1.5 times worse than human drivers. https://robotaxi-safety-tracke...
No reason to trust that data, though, it's from Tesla and Tesla lies.

Finally, how embarrassing that driverless cars experience all their crashes at LOW speeds where it is completely avoidable? If a Tesla cannot avoid backing into a pole, it should be illegal for a self-driving Tesla to operate in public. This company's license to operate should be revoked.

Oh look, more Tesla shilling.

"Clearly Wh/mile is a crucial metric to optimise on if you are in the passenger fleet business"
Already addressed in your previous shill post, it is clearly not.

"...they aren’t incentivised to optimise for Wh/mile for the same existential reasons as Tesla is..."
Tesla is not "incentivised" to optimize anything, nor is it. And the "existential reasons" at Tesla as all Elon Musk, energy consumption doesn't help that.

"...eg, new sodium-based small cars where range can be dramatically improved by better efficiency. "
Name dropping without the slightest clue what those terms even mean. Cars aren't "sodium-based", batteries are. And sodium batteries do NOT improve range, nor does range produce "better efficiency". You are a moron.

"This won’t completely erode the Tesla advantage in the cybertaxi market..."
There isn't a "cybertaxi market" and Tesla has no advantage in it, even if there were.

"...they have their own competitive edge on autonomy..."
LOL you're an idiot tech bro with a few shares of Tesla stock, doing your own lame version of what Elon Musk is doing.

"The libtarded fascists attacking and burning ownerless Teslas sitting on new car lots should shut the fuck up until they can grasp the mirror of accountability."

Brought to you by Grok.

"I’m certain Godwin himself is seriously regretting ever defining that vernacular habit that opened the door to mass ignorance."

That created Elon Musk.

"It does say “one of” rather than “the”, right there in the quote."
But it intends that you interpret it the way the OP interpreted it. Also, it is still wrong, it is neither the biggest nor "one of" the biggest.

"The key costs for a fleet operator are capex (purchase & depreciation), pay, and fuel costs."
Citation please. We need data for EV fleet operators, not ICE fleet operators.

"Efficiency helps with both 1 and 3, not just 3. "
False.

"Smaller vehicles, fewer stops for charging, smaller batteries etc, are all enabled by greater efficiency."
False. Smaller batteries conflict with "fewer stops for charging". And this "greater efficiency" enabler of yours is predicated on smaller vehicles and batteries, you're begging the question.

"That’s tens of millions of dollars a year saved."
False. You have only provided a PER VEHICLE estimate of 10Mw/year. That's a few thousand dollars per year per vehicle. At those usage rates the cost of purchasing, maintaining and insuring the vehicle would be MANY times that. Your "tens of millions" claim assumes a fleet of thousands of cars, your estimate is 3-4 ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE off.

"But the core benefit of greater efficiency is really clear for fleet operators"
To stupid Elon Musk fluffers it is. To fleet operators not so much, but fleet operators should understand that Elon Musk wants to put them out of business.

So true. Driving a Rivian truck is about as inefficient as there is in the EV world now, yet at MY current gas and electric prices it gets an equivalent of 66 mpg. Of course, gas prices are volatile but even at traditional prices the WORST EVs are economical in many areas of the country.

My sister pays 3.5x the electricity rate I do.

Nobody gives a shit about efficiency numbers, they care about range and charge rate.

False, only Tesla uses backwards units, yet Tesla often uses the inverse as well.

And there's nothing preventing scaling those numbers either. Tesla chose to popularize inverse efficiency numbers, another terrible decision from a terrible company.

"The article clearly meant most efficient small passenger vehicle that is a true car..."
Then why didn't it say that? Efficiency is not even defined here, that's the point. Musk wants to claim efficiency is the most important feature, yet none of the terms in this article have reliable meanings. Also, Aptera beats this, and it's a "small passenger vehicle that is a true car".

"...it’s worth thinking about what this development actually means and doesn’t mean."
It means absolutely nothing. Elon Musk is trying to pump his Tesla stock, there is no product and Tesla cannot do driverless. These are lies intended to draw attention back to Elon Musk.

"...which means that they are not going to incorporate all the trade-offs that Tesla have put into this vehicle. "
This isn't a vehicle and there are no "trade-offs" put into it. This is an Elon Musk lie, it is a fraud just like everything else Musk does.

"No Chinese EV is at this level of efficiency because no Chinese EV has needed to be. That’s not a matter of disrespecting Chinese OEMs, far from it."
We don't know any of this, because it's just a number without a product. And your post definitely intends disrespect.

"But not for US extra-urban settings..."
As though this imaginary Tesla product is intended for "extra-urban settings". Those rural, short range driverless cab rides.

"Tesla have made some genuine advance here... but this thing is real..."
LOL A spreadsheet advance. Than for the "dispassionate", "analytical" take. We'll see in 7 years when it costs $70K, get 300Kw/mi and still doesn't self-drive.

/. experiencing some anti-American racism for a change.

"So no Chinese EVs, which are the most advanced."

LOL, nice try comrade.

The Aptera is a two seat EV "car" closer to production than this Tesla is. It is infamously low in function yet more functional than the Tesla, yet its target (at a similar stage in development) was 100 Wh/mile. It doesn't deliver that, but it likely delivers what this Tesla will. That's with an off-the-shelf drivetrain.

It might be hard to compare real world vehicles to lies, but this isn't even a good lie. Elon Musk is a fraud and that's been plainly clear for a long time.

"When management leaves, the engineers become more efficient."

False, but more importantly Elon Musk isn't leaving. The absolute worst part of management remains in place.

'...which makes it "the most efficient electric vehicle ever produced — by a wide margin."'
Every e-bike ever produced is more efficient, and every e-bike is an electric vehicle. Playing games with terms, signifying nothing. The idea here is to exploit lack of function, then ignore that there are other products that do that even better than Tesla. Hell, even the Aptera is better than this, and the Aptera is as near "production" as this is. The Aptera has a steering wheel, and Aptera is likely to at least value human life.

"Where the 165 Wh/mi figure genuinely matters is in the economics of running a robotaxi fleet. Energy cost per mile is one of the biggest operating expenses for any ride-hailing service, and the Cybercab's efficiency gives Tesla a structural cost advantage over competitors..."
I doubt that's true. More than that, it's the incremental savings that would matter NOT the total consumption. And are customers willing to ride in a driverless Tesla? Absolutely not.

"The small battery pack also means faster charging times..."
False.

"The company still hasn't solved unsupervised autonomous driving — the first steering wheel-less unit rolled off the line in February, but Tesla's supervised robotaxi fleet currently crashes at roughly four times the rate of human drivers."
Finally, something not written by Elon Musk.

It is better to do without EV news than to read one sentence from Electrek. Electrek is a company of grifters.

...all bugs are shallow. Enough eyeballs and 10 years apparently. Open source proving its worth once again.