[TimTheTinker]

> Thinking that by having engineers go "hardcore" you're automatically going to have a better product is like if a pizza delivery company decided to invest in better cars because people criticized their pizzas.

Bingo. Hard-core engineering has been the lynchpin of Tesla and SpaceX's success -- they literally won via designing and manufacturing superior physical things.

It makes sense that EM would blunder by attempting to reproduce that type of success at Twitter. And it will be a blunder, unless: (a) he plans to build one or more new products (or drastically change the nature of the existing product), and (b) those new or drastically changed products will somehow "win" in a big way that Twitter isn't winning now.

But at least to me, (a) doesn't seem likely and (b) seems even less likely.

[safog]

(a) seems very likely to me. Didn't he already speak about making Twitter a "super-app"? super-apps are a bit new to the American audience but in China / India they are surprisingly commonplace.

I won't be surprised if he churns through a bunch of different ideas: Subscriptions, Deals with news companies, short form videos + creator tools, different kinds of ad experiences, the edit button, better spam filtering etc.

There's a lot of potential things Twitter could be doing if they didn't limit themselves to their core product.

I don't think (b) is unlikely. Their current product is already highly valuable. You don't need their short form video product to succeed in a way TikTok did but there's enough of an audience to capture there to improve the company's valuation.

[md_]

Maybe I'm living in a filter bubble, but I think it's going to be hard to build a "super app" that relies on the presence and active participation of reputable brands--publishers, if it's a news platform; businesses, if it's a b2c communications platform--when those brands are currently freaked out by the seemingly erratic behavior of the new CEO.

Even if Musk somehow learns to stop live-tweeting his trial-by-fire, the damage might be done: natural iterations on business plans and features will play into a by now near-universal stereotype of Musk as some sort of shoot-from-the-hip madman, which will deter business partners from committing.

(Like, if I'm Fox News or the NY Times, do I want to commit to publish on Musk's new platform when tomorrow he might get stoned and decide to offer hosting to the Daily Stormer? Or, if I'm Bank of America, do I want to commit to consumer payments when tomorrow Musk might pivot his "super app" to offering video shorts instead?)

Again, maybe I'm living in a bubble, but Musk's reputation seems like a huge impediment to, like, doing this. At all. Ever.

[bart_spoon]

He has. But doesn’t the concept of a super app fly in direct opposition with some of his stated goals and issues regarding Twitter? He has ranted about bloat, both in terms of features, engineering, and employment at Twitter, and all his seemingly disastrous moves since taking over have been aimed at reducing bloat. And yet creating a “super app” sounds like it will be adding back in bloat orders of magnitude larger than whatever currently exists at Twitter.

I’m not sure anything Elon says about the current or future state of Twitter has any credibility. It seems like the company is now being directed via stream of consciousness at this point.

[digitailor]

Good point you raise. Without broaching speculative argument as to the general state of Mr Musk’s consciousness-stream:

Giant, bloated organizations (and projects, and other things) can often be helped by reduced-size, highly-directed streams of consciousness suddenly making unilateral changes to them.

One way to term it— and there are many— is crisis restructuring. Whether Twitter was actually in crisis, and whether the unilateral stream of consciousness doing the restructuring is ”divinely inspired,” remains to be seen.

Certainly paid enough for the privilege

[class4behavior]

Twitter's cost was based on its market value. Expanding the portfolio, however, isn't as expensive, especially not when your new boss has all the money. That combined with its pull factors is why some people bet on Twitter coming around eventually.

On the other hand, exactly that development towards super-apps makes it even more important that we push for decentralization.

Not to mention that the US is already reigned by mono- and oligopolies in many markets, it is also a privacy disaster.

Many nations, especially in Asia, have little awareness of the concept of privacy. and thus its consequences, so it isn't surprising such offers took off so swiftly there.

[Yhippa]

You are correct, he did mention (a) as his intent in buying Twitter. Makes me think that he acquired Twitter for the users and wants to introduce those super-app features ASAP.

[pencilguin]

My bet is he bought it for the political power controlling it brings. It was cheap, if it works for that, at any loss rate.

[BerislavLopac]

I can't speak about SpaceX, but there is really nothing superior about Tesla's engineering.

[davidrm]

That may be true for its fit and finish (panel alignments etc.), but the fact that they mastered vertical integration and supply chain management in less than 10 years is beyond amazing. Their powertrain (battery, motors, other hv components like charger etc) are first class and unparalleled in performance (and cost). We’ll see what Lucid will achieve in the next couple of years, their claimed (and validated) numbers such as range are very impressive, but for now, but Tesla has proven that it is a hardcore engineering company in a few important areas, there are others that need to catch up.

[mseidl]

Tesla is the WORSE manufacturer.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...

[davidrm]

have you read the article you linked? this literally repeats the same points I made, I don’t understand what you were trying to say.

[nikisweeting]

Tesla's manufacturing process engineering is unparalleled in the automotive space, but the final products are often buggy because when you reinvent manufacturing overnight and don't nail it 100% all people see are the bugs.

I personally don't like Teslas that much, I think they got a lot of things wrong, but the manufacturing process engineering really is leading the whole car industry by quite a ways.

Check out MunroLive's teardown videos on YouTube where they talk about the changes to part counts, castings, fasteners, and all the internal details that consumers don't notice.

[bamboozled]

So they’re leading the industry by building “buggy” products ?

I’d prefer to buy a Toyota

[brookst]

Are you familiar with the innovation diffusion curve[0]? It is very normal for industry leaders to build buggy products, because early adopters value innovation more than perfection. That’s how the whole tech industry works.

Tesla may or may not succeed in appealing to the late majority and laggards, but if they don’t, the Toyota you buy in 15 years will still have benefitted from the industry changes Tesla is leading today.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations

[Kye]

What is Tesla doing in 2022 that every other car maker hasn't started doing? It seems like they're still building buggy products long after this excuse could work.

[_ea1k]

Well, its hard when you say things like "every other car maker". Other car makers are starting to do some of the same things, but sometimes these are things Tesla did first.

For example, both Lucid and Rivian use round cells for batteries. BMW is exploring the 4680 form factor. Most other manufacturers still do not use round cells.

Tesla is using large castings for major parts of the frame. I think Volvo is starting to do this? Its not entirely a new trend, but again, Tesla was the first in the auto industry to do it this way.

The way Tesla does the structural pack for the 4680 is unique as well at the moment.

Having said that, I think Tesla people overstate the customer significance of all of these things. The real impact is technically interesting, but isn't really making a big difference in the outcome of the vehicles.

There are other EVs that charge faster and are significantly cheaper too, now that Tesla keeps raising prices.

[brookst]

If you find yourself characterizing something as an "excuse", it's a pretty good sign that you're looking for confirmation of bias rather than new information to form an opinion about.

But sure, how about:

- Model years. Have you seen the 2022 Tesla Model 3? No, because it doesn't exist. Teslas evolve over time. Other manufacturers still have days where the next model year starts being produced and the cars are very different than the previous day.

- Greatly simplified cabin. I hate this, but I think it's the future.

- OTA software updates. Some other makers are doing small updates a bit, but nobody (let alone everybody) is doing what Tesla is here

-

[bamboozled]

I thought the exact same thing, there's really absolutely nothing special about Tesla anymore.

I appreciate the direction they pushed the industry towards, but I feel like the innovation has finished and I'd expect a lot of the problems to be ironed out.

Toyota on the other hand have produced a car which runs on hydrogen, it is in production and for sale in the USA right now. They also do hybrids and I'm sure if they wanted to, they'd do electric no problems.

[prmoustache]

That do not make the tesla better products though.

[tmn]

The object in question is the engineering process

[shadowgovt]

Actually, yes, they are.

American automotive manufacturing became hyper-conservative over time. A willingness to let (non-safety-critical (1)) bugs get to market with the tradeoff of making products you otherwise wouldn't is a market-distinguishing tradeoff.

(1) But my larger concern is that I can't say about Tesla that only non-safety-critical bugs are making it out the door, so I also won't buy one. Because unlike a buggy phone or buggy smart watch, a buggy car with safety-critical bugs can kill other people, so there's wisdom in disallowing it.

[hef19898]

Which says a lot, US cars a notorious for their overall bad quality and build standards over here.

[phpisthebest]

Which doubles the ironic nature because most of the Japanese cars sold in the US are built in the US, and many (most) of the "US Cars" that are sold in the US are built in Mexico and Canada.

Why... unions. Japanese Manufacturers have evaded the UAW problem, where Ford and GM have had to flee the nation to get out from under decades of sunk costs

[varjag]

Some of this is due to hindsight. Tesla S absolutely rocked when the pinnacle of competition was Nissan Leaf.

[root_axis]

It still absolutely rocks if acceleration speed is your most important metric (which I personally find quite compelling), but in pretty much every other aspect they're janky cars compared to similar vehicles in the same price range and even some cheaper ones. Very fun to drive though.

[bell-cot]

THIS. "Extremely powerful & fast, fun to drive, and the company making 'em is run by an alpha macho guy who also builds space rockets"...yeah, that has huge emotional appeal to a large number of well-to-do males - who would not want to be seen in a Nissan Leaf, Toyota Prius, etc.

[saiya-jin]

Sounds more like cargo-culting boys rather than adult males... I've personally know noone who decides car buys based on this, and this counts also 2 tesla owners. Car sale tax discounts, free charging, plenty of charging spots were the actual reasons for those 2 (myself I am still happily on petrol for next decade at least, thank you)

[eastendguy]

So, what other car (that I can buy now) gives me the same range?

[cjrp]

Tesla Model 3 - 374 miles

BMW i4 - 365 miles

Ford Mustang Mach-E - 379 miles

BMW iX - 380 miles

Mercedes EQE - 384 miles

[MrMan]

make sure to researched tested vs claimed range, Teslas have good range but fall short from claimed range by large %, there are cars that end up having the same or better range like the Taycan even though the claimed range from Porsche is less! do your own research, correlation is not your coin, etc

[ulfw]

A Mercedes EQS has more range than even the best Tesla S Dual Motor. A Lucid Air too.

[listenallyall]

> huge emotional appeal to a large number of well-to-do males

and yet I know more female Tesla owners than male

[_ea1k]

I can't agree with that. They are certainly not janky compared to the Leaf or Bolt and up until fairly recently the 3 was price competitive with the Bolt.

Beyond that, comparisons get more complicated, but there are still perks to the 3/Y. For example, the Ioniq 5 and EV6 charge faster but have less real world range at highway speeds. In practice, this negates most of their charging advantage.

If you want the best EV sedan for road tripping in the US right now, there is nothing lower price and also better than the 3 LR.

[BerislavLopac]

Only if we look at the only competition of Tesla being other electric cars, which has never been the case. It was just its most distinguishing feature, but ultimately it's an implementation detail.

[Strom]

> ultimately it's an implementation detail

Impressive engineering is always about details.

If you want to argue that there is really nothing superior about Tesla's engineering that's fine, but you can't shove implementation details under the rug when it suits you. For there to be nothing superior in their engineering there must also be no implementation detail that is superior.

[BerislavLopac]

My "implementation detail" comment above does not refer to the quality of engineering overall, but specifically in the context of competition. Yes, when comparing electric cars, the quality of the electric engine is a very large element; but it is much smaller if we're comparing all the elements that matter to someone buying a car (quality of body construction, interior finishing, steering etc).

[varjag]

The gap was worse with fossil vehicles. None of the competition in that price class had a chance racing model S off a traffic light.

[coldtea]

That's just due to how the different engine types (internal combustion vs electric) works. The first needs a ramp-up time when starting...

[varjag]

Sure. Perhaps Audi, Benz and the gang should of thought of that before Tesla.

[cbm-vic-20]

Tesla showed that there is a viable market for electric cars if the look and work like "regular" cars, not tiny spaceships, and if the supporting infrastructure is in place (Superchargers).

Tesla was not the first EV sold in the US. Earlier attempts by the established manufacturers were curiosities at best. And now that Tesla proved that EVs can actually be good, and can be made profitable, those established manufacturers are willing to move into that market.

So, no, it's not about engineering, it's about taking the risk and committing to expanding the market.

[_ea1k]

Exactly, Tesla also pushed the envelope with charging speeds, at a time when a lot of people in the industry were limiting things to 50kw and treating EVs as little purely city cars.

[prmoustache]

Only in the USA.

The iMiev preceded the Tesla and sold better in many part of the world because it was a more decent proposal.

What Tesla did was making greenwashing and wasting energy with electricity dfast and cool. It is probably better than wasting with ICE in nuclear powered countries but that is not what the world need right now or ever.

[Adrox]

Not sure about engineering. But they build a electric-car factory from scratch in Berlin in 2 years during the pandemic. Check how many years other companies take to build ICE or electric car factories…

[martin8412]

You mean the Brandenburg factory that still isn't completed and by EMs own words is a money furnace?

[Adrox]

Not sure how “completed” it is, but it already produced Model Y, right?

Compare that with VW, how many electric cars they are making, and how long did the biggest auto-manufacter in Germany (not a bad country for Engineering standards) took to get factories ready for EVs?

[ekianjo]

Oh you can speak about SpaceX because even a layman can see that nobody else has reusable rockets.

[benj111]

Not compared to manufacturers with decades of experience no. But making cars is hard. Starting Tesla from a clean sheet is impressive.

Think about all the Chinese manufacturers, that for years were churning out the butts of jokes. How many of those would have survived in an actual competitive market?

[talideon]

Except Musk didn't start Tesla, he bought it. Yes, he gets referred to as a "founder", but that's a whole other sordid story.

[benj111]

No. But he took it from the proverbial garden shed to a global company.

I'm not a musk fan boy, but what he did with Tesla is impressive.

Compared to the company they were buying chassis from (lotus). If someone took lotus to the size of Tesla in less than 2 decades, would you not say that's impressive?

Starting a boutique sports car manufacturer is 'relatively' easy. Making a global car company, not so much.

[talideon]

Yeah, his skill is in hucksterism. That can be used for good (Tesla), but it can also be used for ill (all the hyperloop nonsense). But he's still a huckster.

[moron4hire]

Can we stop parroting the term "hardcore engineering"? It makes never-ending crunch sound virtuous, rather than dumb. "Dumbcore engineering".

[TimTheTinker]

When I use the term "hard-core engineering", I'm not referring to how "hard" people work. I'm referring to how advanced the required engineering is to accomplish a goal.

[threatofrain]

On (a) Musk has announced that he's going to go full steam on Vine. We'll see if he can take on TikTok.

[fallingknife]

I think this is a really interesting move, that, if Elon hadn't fucked things up so badly, could actually have a chance of making the acquisition work. I think that TikTok is a political issue and the government would like to (and IMO should) kill it because of the Chinese issue, but won't because they fear the user backlash. If Vine could gain enough of a user base to be a credible fallback option, then banning TikTok from the US market would be politically feasible, and Vine would be worth a fortune.

[121789]

I do not think twitter has the ML capabilities you need to built a TT competitor, and they aren’t just competing with TT anymore. YouTube, IG, and FB are already getting pretty close. Elon would have to something pretty different than just copying them

[Gravityloss]

SpaceX did some good standard mainstream solutions. Sometimes success is not about some exotic innovation but doing your normal job well. A standard lox kerosene gas generator rocket engine. Flat aluminum panel construction. Only the interstage is composite. Started small with Falcon 1. The Merlin engine had heritage from NASA's FASTRAC program.

If you look at Ariane V, Atlas V or Delta IV, they all have some peculiarities and operational warts. Large solid rockets, Russian engine, hydrogen. In some sense, Falcon 9 is the most "ordinary" of the launchers available now.

[bookaway]

>It makes sense that EM would blunder by attempting to reproduce that type of success at Twitter. And it will be a blunder, unless...

But he actually did change the narrative today. Yesterday, he had to make Twitter better.

Now, if Twitter doesn't crash and the World Cup goes by without a hitch, it's going to be the biggest win ever for him, is it not?

EDIT: fixed tone.