Economy Last days of Tesla. Closing a dozen solar plants. Loses deal with Home Depot.

Jobs evolved a lot. I think you’re understating the significance of other inventions, like the first Mac pc, the first graphic based operating system, Microsoft windows before windows, the mouse, yeah the mouse, the MacBook Air.
Jobs didn't "evolve" or innovate that. He acquired it from Xerox when they had a finished product. It was more they didn't know what they had and he did than he came up with anything interesting. Fuck him.
 
Jobs didn't "evolve" or innovate that. He acquired it from Xerox when they had a finished product. It was more they didn't know what they had and he did than he came up with anything interesting. Fuck him.

Kind of like Max Planck didn't know what he had till Einstein showed him. That is a talent in itself. Richard Feynman and the rest of the world didn't know what he had either until others unified it with other theories. That is a key part of any progress. Anybody can look at something. Looking is easy. Seeing is another thing altogether. Can you name one piece of scientific or technological work that was not heavily based on previous thought and progress? On a model that already exists. When you apply this mindset to science, you realize how stupid it really is. Connecting previous ideas with your own spin is what creativity is you cretin.

Biggest company in the world. Fuck him? Fuck your mother.


Although quantization was a purely formal assumption in Planck’s work at this time and he never fully understood its radical implications (which had to await Albert Einstein’s interpretations in 1905), its discovery has come to be regarded as effectively the birth of quantum physics, and the greatest intellectual accomplishment of Planck's career. It was in recognition of this accomplishment that he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918.

shut up. Planck got their first but it took the creative thinking of Einstein to bring the idea to reality/fruition. Einstein crushes Planck.
 
Last edited:
Jobs didn't "evolve" or innovate that. He acquired it from Xerox when they had a finished product. It was more they didn't know what they had and he did than he came up with anything interesting. Fuck him.

"Acquired?".

None of that is true. Xerox showed him PARC and he went back and drew on a white board what he saw and told everyone to start working on a GUI type multiple window desktop environment.

Xerox did in fact know what they had, the people at PARC knew exactly what they had --- Xerox board and management just decided not to push it. Upper management decided to focus on their core business of duplicating documents. TBF to Xerox - other than Fairchild building chips, everyone else who had tried to innovate away from their core business had failed, so it's not like they weren't making decisions based on conventional wisdom.

The PARC system was actually available for sale. You could buy it.
 
Last edited:
Elon Musk got to sleep with a prime Tallulah Riley, so this was all worth it.
nice
image
 
"Acquired?".

None of that is true. Xerox showed him PARC and he went back and drew on a white board what he saw and told everyone to start working on a GUI type multiple window desktop environment.

Xerox did in fact know what they had, the people at PARC new exactly what they had --- Xerox board and management just decided not to push it. Upper management decided to focus on their core business of duplicating documents. TBF to Xerox - other than Fairchild building chips, everyone else who had tried to innovate away from their core business had failed, so it's not like they weren't making decisions based on conventional wisdom.

The PARC system was actually available for sale. You could buy it.

It is called the Innovater's dilemma and why Ford and other big companies have a hard time scaling down to compete with Tesla. Ford has tons of production power but has a hard time adjusting to a lower end production model. The originator of this theory recommends splitting the company in two. It is a very hard problem to overcome. Xerox is an example of it. They were disrupted by Apple because they couldnt reach down for the new product and hold the old one at the same time. It strains the entire model.

Toyotas started out as cheap cars and rose higher and compete with the Germans now. But they are being undercut by the Koreans at the bottom now. They can't reach down again either. It is like you are carrying/juggling all this stuff and drop something. If you reach down to pick it up, you could drop everything else. You have to keep moving.
 
Kind of like Max Planck didn't know what he had till Einstein showed him. That is a talent in itself. Richard Feynman and the rest of the world didn't know what he had either until others unified it with other theories. That is a key part of any progress. Anybody can look at something. Looking is easy. Seeing is another thing altogether. Can you name one piece of scientific or technological work that was not heavily based on previous thought and progress? On a model that already exists. When you apply this mindset to science, you realize how stupid it really is. Connecting previous ideas with your own spin is what creativity is you cretin.

Biggest company in the world. Fuck him? Fuck your mother.


Although quantization was a purely formal assumption in Planck’s work at this time and he never fully understood its radical implications (which had to await Albert Einstein’s interpretations in 1905), its discovery has come to be regarded as effectively the birth of quantum physics, and the greatest intellectual accomplishment of Planck's career. It was in recognition of this accomplishment that he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918.

shut up. Planck got their first but it took the creative thinking of Einstein to bring the idea to reality/fruition. Einstein crushes Planck.
That's quite the rant. Wrong though. Your comparison fails because the Xerox machine was a finished product. There was nothing to interpret. Parc just wasn't tasked with monetizing it.

So, shut your own damn self up. And yeah, I'm aware Eistein's Nobel was for the photoelectric effect. What of it?

It was cheaper to buy a new iPod than have an old one repaired, by design. So yeah, fuck that guy.
 
Quiet, commie.

I know him well, and don't expect a food fight over such an uncontroversial truth. I'm highlighting an inconvenient truth that demands perpetual perspective.
Liked based solely on the first two words.
 
"Enron" Musk (lol) has pushed electric vehicles forward. We are decades ahead of where we would have been without him. For that I am grateful.
If he didn't just leap, dick first, into bed with the worst oil barons in the world I would agree with you.
 

What is this supposed to mean? That car didn't push EVs into the mainstream like Tesla did. Tesla pushed so hard and broke the mold to the point that all auto manufacturers are going into electric. Musk pushed the schedule ahead by at least a decade if not two. EVs from niche to mass production and consumer adoption way earlier. Thanks Musk.
 
is there no video of this ny times interview where he allegedly was cryin and shit? i wanna see the tapes but i dont see anything out there
 
Now maybe we can stop paying attention to elon musk- a name which makes me think he has a strong odor
 
What is this supposed to mean? That car didn't push EVs into the mainstream like Tesla did. Tesla pushed so hard and broke the mold to the point that all auto manufacturers are going into electric. Musk pushed the schedule ahead by at least a decade if not two. EVs from niche to mass production and consumer adoption way earlier. Thanks Musk.

LOL @ this^^^. The "mold" was range, and as a transition platform the gas powered charging of the Chevy Volt still makes the most sense.

Number of Teslas sold: 300,000
Number of Prius sold: >6,000,000 (11,000,000 hybrids sold by Toyota).

Tesla founded: 2003
First Toyota hybrid sold: 1997

Average price for Model 3: $50,000
Average price for a chevy bolt: $38,000

And i have no love for Toyota but the idea that Musk-meister completely changed the paradigm of powering cars is flat out wrong. he did a great job in developing a great premium car. GM definitely was the innovator having reduced a bunch of R&D projects to an actual product with a practical battery.

On the topic of advancing technology decades, GM should be the first one mentioned for what they did to create video graphics cards (by way of Evan and Sutherland) and disk drives (by way of IBM).

Or how about what Ford created (in 1979) that powers every modern PET, and CT scanner in the world?
 
LOL @ this^^^. The "mold" was range, and as a transition platform the gas powered charging of the Chevy Volt still makes the most sense.

Number of Teslas sold: 300,000
Number of Prius sold: >6,000,000 (11,000,000 hybrids sold by Toyota).

Tesla founded: 2003
First Toyota hybrid sold: 1997

Average price for Model 3: $50,000
Average price for a chevy bolt: $38,000

And i have no love for Toyota but the idea that Musk-meister completely changed the paradigm of powering cars is flat out wrong. he did a great job in developing a great premium car. GM definitely was the innovator having reduced a bunch of R&D projects to an actual product with a practical battery.

On the topic of advancing technology decades, GM should be the first one mentioned for what they did to create video graphics cards (by way of Evan and Sutherland) and disk drives (by way of IBM).

Or how about what Ford created (in 1979) that powers every modern PET, and CT scanner in the world?

Tesla developed an EV that had long range AND was profitable. Now I know what you're going to say in that Tesla is bleeding money. But that's because they're spending too much on building their gigafactories, extending their supercharger infrastructure and increasing production capacity in their factory. Nevertheless, the profit margin on every unit sold is sizable.

GM doesn't make much on each Bolt sold. Dealerships also don't want to push the car because there is very little maintenance needed and dealers make 50% of their revenue from service. Not to mention there isn't an extensive supercharger infrastructure the likes that Tesla have and buyers are wary of buying a car if they have range anxiety.

Tesla was absolutely visionary in not only developing the technology (after all they were a startup company that made the first long range battery when all the industry Giants said they were 10-15 years away from such a feat) but they were also visionary in how to model their business so that it can remain profitable. Direct to consumer sales in the industry is unheard of due to the dealership model but it's the only way to market EV's.
 
Tesla developed an EV that had long range AND was profitable.

Stopped reading here.

Their annual debt has grown by $7b and $9b in teh last two years and they have $3.5b in cash with $2.3b in AP. Define profitable.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,234,816
Messages
55,309,557
Members
174,732
Latest member
herrsackbauer
Back
Top