No one mentioned veering. (Whatever that means in your lexicon.)

Please provide evidence (scientific, not anecdotal) of your claims, lest you erode your own credibility.

And to be specific. I'm asking that increased rates of centerline driving while still within the lane boundaries show an increase in safety compared to moving around within your own lane.

Thanks!

Common sense isn't enough to tell you that driving straight down the center of your lane is safer than weaving around within your lane?

If not, there's really no reason to debate anything with you.

Again, you are incorrectly reading the chart.

Please learn some rudimentary stats skills and reading skills, then please find some scientific evidence to support your view.

But hey, just personally attacking the other party is totally sufficient!

thank god AP is holding the middle of the lane while driving under the side of a truck

I never said anything about any chart. I was replying to your statement:

Please bear in mind that my reading skills aren't great, as you so kindly pointed out, but am I misreading the question above when I paraphrase it as follows?

"I'm specifically asking if regularly driving straight down the center of your lane is any safer than moving around within your lane?"

I therefore, perhaps mistakenly, took that to mean you believe that driving straight down the center of your lane is no safer than "moving around" or driving in any other part of your lane?

My assertion was I believe it to be common sense, at least amongst any experienced driver, that driving down the center of your lane is obviously safer. You're considerably less likely to encounter a hazard in the center of your lane as well as less likely to have difficulty controlling your vehicle when driving in a straight line vs. moving about within the lane. Do you disagree?

I'm sure we can all agree that running into the side of a truck has nothing to do with whether you regularly drive down the center of your lane or move around within your lane and everything to do with whether you, or the autopilot, didn't see it?

I apologize, though it seems to work for you

I'll admit to not really following this thread regularly so if you could point me to any of the scientific evidence you've provided to support you're view, or debunk mine, that would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Mihkel argues like he's still in high school. Sure, de captain, it's common sense that driving in the middle of your lane is generally safer than weaving or veering in your lane, but that's not even what I called him out on. The statement I called him out on was whether driving down the center of your lane was even related to safety. He won't even admit that.

Mikhel, you're dripping wet, and everyone can see it, and you still won't admit it.

He can't even take the tiniest step back and say he was being hyperbolic or something, just fights to the death on every hill no matter how comically in the wrong he is.

I'm still waiting for evidence of this.

PT Barnum Musk's space company with another flawless launch / payload delivery and success first stage landing.

Master Plan 2.0:
https://www.tesla.com/sv_SE/blog/mas...ux?redirect=no

Cliffs Musk version:
Cliffs Reddit version;
Tesla-like bus concept:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ls-155mph.html
Concept Tesla-pickup:
https://electrek.files.wordpress.com...1225&h=&crop=1

I think this will make the price go up today:
While they have been busy with developing Model 3, Gigafactory, Autopilot and fixing bugs in Model X they have started developing a Bus2.0 and a Tesla-truck.


This is a new concept right? Having a ride sharing service, but with your customers cars.

Master plan 2 is vacuous and a disaster. I'd say that even if I liked Musk.

I was hoping for a rip to clear out the shorts. Maybe if a breathless analyst or two gets involved. But it's pretty thin.

Tesla truck is irrelevant for their bottom line. Firstly because the volume is tiny compared to cars. Secondly because they won't be viable for a long time. Thirdly because it's a bizarre choice. A lot of knowhow goes into making trucks - separate from cars - and starting from scratch on a new product line when already stretched thin, over budget and running late seems insane.

The fleet thing and income thing seems interesting...

right now is sci fi

I really wonder how much income could a tesla generate if you implement uber and let it drive itself, perhaps tesla could also sell shares of the "fleet" and make you eligible for a dividend, without having to own a tesla.

then I wonder what's the depreciation and the cost of running the car...

I also wonder how long will it take to actually do this, imo at least 5 years...

I don't agree with the general sentiment here that these prices are unfounded. Actually I am pretty bullish on TSLA long term. All the equity is in the tail. If Tesla "wins" the autonomous vehicle race (and they are trying to), it could practically wipe out other car companies.

This is exactly why Musk talks about (end game) autonomous driving - to get the average Tesla bull hyped up and excited about fat tails, so that they don't value the business without these absurd fat tails.

Musk has ZERO chance of getting there first or even 10th. Tesla doesn't have the money or the reasearch teams to make this happen.

The data they're currently collecting with their current sensor set is worthless. Tesla could have 100 billion cars on the road driving trillions of miles a day, and the data they collect would be worthless. The current sensor set can't do object recognition (it can't even detect pedestrians a lot of time, or giant trucks, it's that bad) and isn't attempting to navigate city streets and traffic.

You're being conned.

Looks like the market doesn't like Musk's airheaded thinkpiece/weak attempt at justifying his SCTY cronyism.

I thought he meant transport trucks which makes a ton of sense to be electric because of the added torque and towing capacity, pickup trucks are something too I suppose.

Either way, everyone hates tsla now. A great entry point imo.

He announced the SMP2 was coming over the july 10th weekend when the stock was at $216. Plus a lot of negative press followed, so the market is still giving SMP2 a net boost in SP overall at this point. In the near term the gigafactory opening is positive but Q2 earnings wont be great, although that could be tempered by solid q3 guidance.

Unsure if the market believes their guidance anymore. He always sets guidance way too high and then falls short.

To be fair he is also often talking about current tech, tech coming this year and next year.

Tesla has plenty of money and their research team seems to be doing ok so far. They are using Mobileye tech today, nothing stops them from using Google tech in the future if that seems to be the best way forward.

How would you rank the competitors in this race?

This is simply not true. I work in the industry and have used a lot of data of both worse and better quality and almost all data is more or less useful and has value.

I am not sure what you mean but let me guess. Data is valuable for
1. Making maps for localization and lane keep assist
2. Training machine learning algorithms for object detection and lane keep assist
3. Finding interesting scenarios to train machine learning algorithms and to verify algorithms performance

The current Mobileye camera/radar with low precision GPS and IMU data, which I assume you refer to is useful for 1,2,3.

If you want me to clarify them just let me know. If you have other things your data needs to be valuable for please let me know.


Clearly this is incorrect. Just drive a Tesla and you will see the object in front of you being recognised by the sensors displayed in the driver display.

Any citation? It seems to be pretty good at detecting pedestrians. Here is one new case where AEB might have saved a life:
http://electrek.co/2016/07/21/tesla-...pedestrian-dc/

I think everyone doubting Tesla is failing to understand the paradigm shift that is electric cars and just how soon they will make up >50% of new cars sold in Europe and NA (<10 years, and that's my conservative estimate). Even Tesla backers know that Tesla will be running out of cash and will suffer share dilution many times in the future. Musk is trying to shift the paradigm as quickly as possible by investing massive capital without caring about turning a profit as he knows that if he focusses on being profitable it will turn heads and then the other companies will invest the massive amounts they have available and beat him long term.
Electric transport trucks seem like the most obvious thing ever, as trucks wouldn't be so damn slow.

I think there's a decent chance Tesla has the largest market cap in the world in <15 years and will be the 1st company to 2 trillion market cap. Of course if investors get fed up with all the cash he's burning then they will lose their ability to raise more in secondary offerings and Tesla will be bought out at a fraction of its value

You think market cap is going to 60x current market cap in less then 15 years? That's also a bigger market cap then the whole industry combined currently so I'm guessing you expect the market to expand as well and/or tesla to shift to other industries? Seems kinda like you're just making up numbers to me but maybe I'm ignorant

One can accept the paradigm shift that is EVs while accepting that Tesla is an objectively poor business headed by an objectively poor capital allocator/process manager. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

No

Musk has a history of setting insanely lofty goals to drive towards, ultimately falling short but still accomplishing a great deal along the way. Few thought Spacex or Tesla would make it this far. If he accomplishes half of what is in his SMP2 long term investors will be happy.

I don't think 2 trillion is doable in 15 years, I think they can challenge for the largest market cap (along with Amzn). They have a few different industries going for them, once the one is wildly successful (FEVs), their brand will be held in incredible regard. I can see them having to differentiate their own models from each other since they will be so far ahead of the other vehicles on the market (ala GM a while back)