Just assuming here, but I would think GM is aware the only way to make this work is to make their UX/OS competent.

I like having Android Auto since my car's built-in system is garbage, but if it worked like Tesla's does, I'd be pretty happy with that.

"We Tried".

That wasn't the case not long ago. Coal was as much as 50% of the total 15 years ago and it's now completely crashed.

Well it's not in production at the moment. What about in July when it is?

The ~15k Lightnings delivered so far is a good start, but 3 million pickups are sold every year in the US.

The fact that they've spun their EV operations to its own unit bodes well for them. This will help focus their efforts and hopefully avoid falling into bad habits of reusing too many legacy components/architecture, which seems to have kneecapped some of the other OEMs.

We're waiting to see their first fully dedicated EV, but the Mach-E and F-150L are really good considering they're parts bin cars made to get experience with EVs.

Burning billions is never fun, but it's got to be done sooner than later if they want to stay competitive.

What makes you think it wouldn't be?

Expect a delivery event July 1st for their 20th anniversary.

It's not as if we haven't seen multitudes of development vehicles and the factory build out.

Tesla completely opened their connector up last fall when they updated the spec. It can be used with the CCS protocol, so no need to license Tesla's proprietary one and it's rated to 1000V x 1000A.

LFP chemistry has been evolving pretty quickly, but generally speaking, they charge slower than a Nickel based pack.

One large enough for an F-series should be able to beat the current Lightning's 150kW rate though.

Tesla are rolling out the "Magic Dock" for cars that use CCS1, that should cover pretty much everybody even if the other OEMs admit defeat and switch connectors.

LFP are Cobalt free and are actually in production with at least 25% of EVs being so-equipped.

You don't even have to look at experimental technology for that.

Your math for annual consumption is wrong, since about 12% of cars sold were EVs in the EU last year, not 2%. If things stayed as is, which they won't, Co production would have to rise by about 5x, not 50.

Less than 10% of Co being mined is via artisanal mining and that number is dropping as demand rises and it becomes worthwhile for professional mining.

At the same time, Co is being eliminated from Nickel based battery chemistries and already a substantial proportion of lithium packs are LFP, which don't use Cobalt.

Recycling pack materials is a nascent industry for Li-ion batteries and is also accelerating quickly with considerable funding behind it.

>I'm sorry, no established industry in the history of anything has grown that fast.

Pretty much every established industry grows at this rate, this is how people have rather accurately predicted the sales numbers of EVs.

The percentage of sales has increased roughly 30-50% every year, depending on if someone has just ramped a factory or released a high volume model.

13% last year, 18 this year, 25 next year, 35% the year after, etc.

It goes quickly.

Not really. More than 80% of EVs on the road are Teslas already, so opening the chargers up to a small minority of other cars isn't going to affect usage very much.

That isn't going to change any time soon either, Tesla will likely sell as many EVs in the US this year as everyone else combined, so new Tesla buyers are going to be putting more pressure on the network than non-Teslas will.

On the flip side, this gives Tesla funding to accelerate their charging network roll out even faster than it is now.

>But once we start having every day people using their chargers, teens hanging out charging. Farmer Bob with pigs in the back of the truck etc.

Tesla owners are every day people. There's nothing more mainstream than a 5 seat CUV and the Model Y was the 4th best selling vehicle in the world last year.

That and the upgrade price to the 1TB isn't ludicrous either. IIRC, that SSD is in the 5-6GBps range.

It's also about 5x the total capacity of batteries they shipped last year. So quite a step, considering they have other battery factories and buy from external suppliers as well.

I guess I should've said "mid-end" more than higher, but iPods and early iPhones had decent DACs, at least compared to what most phones currently use and compared to most mainstream MP3 players.

Sony's flagship Walkmans were/are better than Apple, but the $200-500 offerings were comparable.

It's an odd article since all of Sony's music players have been called Walkman.

After Apple pulled out, Sony have been one of the only players in higher end portable music.

Oh definitely. It's more an issue of allocation and having to navigate the politics that they're bound to.

There's a bunch of different people vying for their own idea of what project/mission should be prioritized and there's the whole "pork barrel" thing with defense contractors and manufacturing.

NASA have been increasingly cozy with SpaceX as time goes on and they keep hitting targets though, whereas Boeing don't have the same luster they once had with politicians.

NASA funds SpaceX, they aren't in competition.

NASA should review the fact that they've thrown way too much cash at so-called "old Space" and perhaps increase their investment in the various start ups that are promising, but they should also get credit for supporting SpaceX from their early days.

NASA themselves fund research and they run missions, but they've never developed launchers themselves, they've always relied on the private sector for that.

Unfortunately, they've been giving ULA/Boeing most of the money and those guys have proven to be essentially useless.

The flip side is that they've also supported smaller companies like SpaceX from the get go and now we can all benefit from what SpaceX has accomplished over the last 15 years.

They were 10' Jersey Barriers, which weigh between 4000-5000lbs.

It's a 53" flatbed trailer.

You keep dodging the question as to what exactly you're not believing and you're accusing me of not arguing in good faith?

Tesla is the company that's making this truck, I'm just telling you to stop anthropomorphicizing it. We don't say GM is a her because Mary Barra runs it, or Ford is a he because Jim Farley's at the helm. Musk is repeating the official specs, just as they would do the same.

The specs are:

500 miles range Tri motors Less than 2kWh/mile efficiency 0-60 in 5s unladen/20s at full load 82k lb GVWR 1+ MW charging (10-80% in 30 mins) 1KV electrical architecture Able to maintain hwy speed up a 5% grade

Which are you disputing?

The only things left open ended are exact pricing, power and the weight of the tractor, which are things we'll know once they're thick on the ground. Pricing is irrelevant at the moment, since all of them are going to the large fleet operators that put orders in. It's also kind of vague since those fleet operators are buying Superchargers and Megapacks alongside the trucks in a package.

What stuff? They showed a fully laden truck in two separate videos, one running up Donner Pass, the other doing an SF-SD run to showcase its range. Is it the range, the acceleration, the efficiency that you're disputing?

Where are you getting your idea that only one was delivered when there were 5 of them at the event and several have been spotted in various places?

And why do you keep referring to Tesla as "he"?

I know you want to hate for the sake of hate, but if you're going to shout conspiracy, at least point out what exactly you think is wrong.

What part of the truck isn't easily verifiable when there's customer vehicles being delivered as we speak? You can read the tare weight off the trailer on any Semi you find on the road.

This isn't a Musk thing, it's Tesla, I don't know why people keep referring to a company as "he" here.

It is a game changer, hence the extremely high interest in the product, what specifically are you skeptical about?