Kids really love these things and get very excited to see them on the road.
They are going to be very valued collectors items in 30 years once the kids of today have enough disposable income to buy whichever are left roadworthy by then.
Kids really love these things and get very excited to see them on the road.
They are going to be very valued collectors items in 30 years once the kids of today have enough disposable income to buy whichever are left roadworthy by then.
My experience is the opposite. My kids, and any friends of theirs riding with us, will boo whenever they see them on the road
Emotions from both ends of a spectrum are positive indicators of future's collection value.
Unless you’re Ferrari or Porsche, you don’t want to be in the situation where your vehicle has future collectors’ value. That usually just means it didn’t sell very well (rarity).
Let’s keep in mind that Tesla invested in this truck to be the next F-150, which is the best-selling vehicle in the USA for the past multiple decades.
You’re talking about different things. A failure from a manufacturer perspective can be a major success from a collector perspective (see also the DeLorean).
Even the hated Edsel is worth quite a bit today.
Of course it might be harder to keep a Cybertruck running for 50 years due to all the computerized components. Restorers will probably be relegated to rebuilding Cybertruck bodies with new components.
> Of course it might be harder to keep a Cybertruck running for 50 years due to all the computerized components. Restorers will probably be relegated to rebuilding Cybertruck bodies with new components.
Really no different than any classic car, really. GM isn't selling OEM parts for a '57 Chevy, for example. If you need replacement parts on those, nowadays, you're likely going to specialty manufacturers given there really aren't any "parts cars" around anymore.
For combustion engine parts all you need is metal work tools, not locked down proprietary software and electronics. My dad has a 1954 Citroen b11 that he’s kept alive and humming since he got it in the late 60s.
True, I just imagine that it will be harder for non-OEMs to make replacement electronics given how locked down Teslas are.
We'll have to wait and see. I honestly kind of doubt that will be true. There's all kinds of Tesla hacking that's been going on for years. It's possible to get a Tesla motor running without any external Tesla electronics through aftermarket solutions that carry support from the vendors.
I didn’t know that, that’s surprising, but I haven’t been following it that closely; I’ve just occasionally seen stories about Tesla shutting off service for DIYers. In that case maybe it won’t be so difficult.
I am talking about how value to collectors is irrelevant for most automakers.
Tesla’s corporate leadership would be much happier if the Cybertruck was selling 100,000 units a year and was not at all a collector’s item.
That’s not relevant to what the person you were responding to was talking about. They were talking about collectors.
And I’m talking about how their discussion of collectors is no consolation to the people at Tesla who were trying to make a mass-market profitable and successful vehicle.
I don’t have to talk about exactly what my comment parent is talking about in all facets. This isn’t a courtroom cross-examination.
Your comment is a non sequitur then. It reads like you’re just tacking on an irrelevant comment based on your personal feelings about the company.
If anything the original discussion of collectors was the non-sequitur. How this relates to the business of automobiles is far more relevant to the topic and article.
I guess I can’t really complain. They were making an interesting point about collectors that opened up a new line of discussion, in which I learned a couple of things. But that seemingly wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t responded to your comment, so somehow your non-sequitur response to his non-sequitur seems to have been necessary to generate that discussion. So thanks?
You’re welcome!
In its time, the Edsel was more meh than hated. Mainly people didn't buy them because they were essentially pricier Fords and it was a recession year, and Ford threw in the towel for Ford-internal political reasons. The looks were not as much of an issue as people think today. It certainly didn't have the same political associations.
Good book on the subject: https://www.sup.org/books/history/disaster-dearborn
Thanks for the clarification. My understanding was that the quality issues and exaggerated features drew a lot of mockery at the time. That’s not always enough to prevent something from succeeding (other polarizing vehicles like the Nissan Cube did OK) so the recession/internal politics angle makes sense.
> Of course it might be harder to keep a Cybertruck running for 50 years due to all the computerized components
And all the well-documented reliability and quality issues.
Considering the recent headlines about the decompilation and reverse engineering scenes, I doubt it!
If anything, the centralized control units of modern cars may make this sort of thing easier. A 2000’s car has more distributed pieces of vehicle control units (more similar to microcontrollers) while a modern EV built in the style of a Tesla has fewer compute components.
So in 50 years you’ll have some kind of recompilation scene where those computers get replaced, almost like how people replace their router software with OpenWRT or the people at vintage computer festivals who stand up reverse engineered AOL Instant Messenger services.
That’s not such a big issue for restorers, there were also extreme quality problems with the Edsel.
1990s F150s are selling for much more than their original new price, with low enough miles.
Best selling truck of all time. Not really about rarity.
Clearly this behavior is not original, but taught. Kids don't "boo" things out of nowhere. They are indifferent as hell to things on their own sure, but not a CB ...
>Kids don't "boo" things out of nowhere
Not all HNers are good parents
Very clearly behavior introduced and encouraged by the parents, driven by politics, and not the merits of the object itself. Though it is an interesting commentary on the extreme, enforced conformity and politicization-of-everything we see in the world today.
Absolutely. I am sad for these kids and their families. This is not how you raise curious, open-minded children.
What evidence do you see that "everything" is politicized? Elon was the largest single donor in the US midterm elections by far... Seems like he politicized things himself.
If the Nazi salute wasn't political enough. Children going through WWII in their history classes might dislike Cybertrucks independently of their parents.
It's always an excuse and everyone else's fault that things are politicized. The same people telling us to leave every social problem to the Invisible Hand get fussy when it actually manifests.
> The same people telling us to leave every social problem to the Invisible Hand get fussy when it actually manifests.
Yep. This is the world the Supreme Court handed us with Citizen's United. Now that money is speech, we all have to accept that when we buy things, our money can be used against us.
This is the world they wanted, and if you hate cancel culture, then you need to get on board with fixing the damage from Citizen's United... not raging against regular people who are doing exactly what they are supposed to do, and using their money as speech.
What you buy is your politics now. It fucking sucks, but look at it with clearer eyes.
[flagged]
Denying it will not stop it from being true.
You don't need to pretend any longer, you can openly embrace expressing your political opinions with your salutes. With the masked federal agents kidnapping and murdering citizens, even people who weren't paying attention previously have realized what MAGAs want for society.
Totally, what kid would boo something without being preconditioned to hate it? Humans can never separate concepts in there heads. Either you’re good or you’re evil. Have news for you all, we are all both. Not saying I support that guys behavior, but he’s done some impressive stuff to further mankind.
Quite something how many posts here seem to default to "Those children who do not share my opinion, they must have been brainwashed. It's the only explanation."
I mean, fair point. But it sure does smell like the original commenter's kids have been brainwashed. "Booing" a car or having a hateful attitude towards a car without any external influence? I actually don't think the Cybertruck looks good - at all. But all my kids are amazed by it. And we haven't spoken to them at all about Elon.
> and not the merits of the object itself
This is interesting to say given that by most objective measures of what constitutes a good truck, the cybertruck is a bad truck.
Edit: the stupid bed cover gets stuck when exposed to a not abnormal amount of dirt. In dry climates the thing shocks you every time you touch it. People regularly are slicing their hands open randomly on it. Body panels routinely fall off. Accelerator pedal getting stuck triggering recall. Shape of the bed making it impossible to actually carry anything normal and rectangular, 100 mile tow range when putting actual weight on it, bad visibility. I've seen some hilarious videos of them getting stuck in road conditions my Yaris could handle. I've even seen someone catastrophically damage the wheels by turning them left and right rapidly a few times.
A good truck can carry things in the bed and tow something a long way. It can drive on and off a dirty worksite without critical components failing or getting dug in or snapping an axle. Or ok fine, the Houston family truck special, it should at least be able to take the cooler and kids to the beach without getting stuck.
The cybertruck is not a good truck. It may be a good something else, status symbol or something, maybe it's comfortable to drive, I don't particularly care, it's simply not a good truck.
> objective measures of what constitutes a good truck
There is literally no such thing. But regardless, in this subthread, we are discussing the response of children to the pure aesthetics of the truck (or lack thereof) vs. the coached, politicized reaction to what it is claimed to represent.
There are plenty of objective measures of what makes a good truck. Payload capacity. Towing capacity. Towing range. Stopping distance when at GVWR. Stopping distance when towing at or Max Towing Capacity. Does standard lumber fit in the bed with or without the tailgate open. If it requires the tailgate to be open, does it provide factory installed tiedowns to be able to safely carry cargo with the tailgate open.
There are, of course, plenty of subjective measures such as NVH, amenability to modification through the aftermarket, total cost of ownership, offroad capabilities, etc.
From everything I've seen, some of which OP mentioned in an edit, points to the Cybertruck being a terrible truck seemingly designed by folks who have never owned/used a truck. And again, that is ignoring Elon's politics.
No there's not.
> Payload capacity.
Fighting against truck size, MPGs
> Towing capacity.
Fighting MPGs, possibly diesel prices
> Towing range.
Only matters on electrics, everyone else goes to the gas station.
> Stopping distance when at GVWR.
I don't max my truck out, and I don't really think others should, either.
Anyway, maybe you can see that objectively, I'd rather have a Nissan Hardbody than whatever Superduty Diesel you have in mind.
[flagged]
Or, it's just objectively ugly and cringe, which it is.
Nothing about design or looks is objective. Lots of people like the design. Dont assume your opinion is objectively 'right'.
No, it objectively failed. That's why they are not going to make it anymore. "Lots of people" do not like it.
[flagged]
We're talking about a parent who said their kids hate the cybertruck (like most people) with someone claiming that's because the parents influenced them. Occam's razor is that it's just an ugly vehicle, which it clearly is.
[flagged]
I may as well at least try to educate the ignorant!
N64 graphics vehicle.
Sure but kids don’t generally boo at ugly cars, they just don’t really notice them.
I think the cybertruck is orders of magnitude uglier than any other vehicle, so I think it's an expected response.
Old enough to be haters, I guess.
Mostly I've seen younger kids love it. I was at the park and a little girl saw a Cybertruck pull up -- "Look, Dad, it's from the future!"
I think Cybertruck is probably ultimately a failure, but the amount of hate it gets when they are at least trying to push things outside of the normal makes me sad. The amount of negativity towards anything new that's not perfect is insane.
Look, there is "trying to push things outside of the normal" and then there is "completely misunderstanding the purpose of a half-ton truck." I say this despite that fact that the Cybertruck, from a size perspective, it straddles the line between half-ton and 3/4-ton, and it is a complete utter non-starter as a 3/4 ton for several reasons.
If the CyberTruck were the size of a Honda Ridgeline or Ford Maverick, I think truck folks (who skew conservative) would look at it a lot less derisively. There are entire swathes of the half-ton truck market that the Cybertruck simply cannot compete in due to a seeming fundamental misunderstanding by the design team of what the vehicle needs to be capable of and amenable to. This is especially evident in the fleet/work truck market where the unibody design immediately shuts out folks who need to put an aftermarket bed replacement (think plumbers, welders, and other trades).
It straddles the 1/2 to 3/4 ton segment in terms of specs, but it is fundamentally impossible to tow a 5th wheel or gooseneck trailer with a Cybertruck.
Again, there is "think different" and there is "misunderstand the market."
Yeah, a swing and a miss for sure.
Not only was it not perfect, it was a total failure - they are stopping all production
There is so much you are hiding behind "not perfect" and I think you know that.
> the amount of hate it gets when they are at least trying to push things outside of the normal makes me sad. The amount of negativity towards anything new that's not perfect is insane.
A significant portion of the hate they get is for what they represent and who they’re from, not because they’re “new” or “different” or “not perfect”.
[flagged]
You guys are living in a different universe. I can get hating Elon, but mediocre? Really? Completely absurd.
I mean the things you acknowledge people hating him for probably overlap considerably with the things I'm thinking of when declaring him mediocre. To pick just one: Think of the boring CEOs who work hard to instill and drive an inclusive culture at their companies, and who make sure their people are treated as human beings. You haven't heard of any, because they're not out there trying to be an entertainment personality.
Outside of hoarding wealth, I haven't seen much evidence that Elon is particularly good at anything.
What wealth did he hoard? His wealth is all in his ownership of companies he lead to great success.
He just spend 400 million dollars on the election, half of this in texas alone.
Spending is the opposite of hoarding
He doesn't seem very politicallly...effective.
But anyway, I don't think it's fair to say he "hoarded" wealth. It's all from ownership in companies he led, or selling stock in said companies. It's not like, I don't know, post-soviet Russian oligarchs or Carlos Slim or something, who you could all reasonably say were hoarding wealth.
Doubt you had anything to do with that
I’m an ultra lib, despise Elon, hope he faces a jury of peers to answer for all he has done, but this seems like learned behavior. My toddler son thinks they look really good (wife and I think they look atrocious and our anti-Elon bias doesn’t help).
[flagged]
Also cut essential foreign aid, likely to result in thousands extra deaths, fired essential government workers for no reason that then had to be hired back at extra expense, while asking others to send him an email justifying their employment, accessed government records of citizens he should have no visibility into, likely misusing them, made up claims about 200+ year olds receiving pensions, made Grok available to assist in committing war crimes in Iran and Latin America, not to speak of Grok 'undressing' random people on the internet, spent millions on election interference etc. etc.
Otherwise you're of course right.
> Also cut essential foreign aid...
Why are my tax dollars going to foreign healthcare, education, and food banks when we could definitely use that here?
> claims about 200+ year olds recieving pensions Elon and a SSA inspector general investigation identified approximately $298 million paid to 24,000 deceased beneficiaries over a period spanning 1998–2019. Some of that money was recovered.
He did nothing. He was an advisor to the president, and his team made reccomendations. Also, there is a GAO that has reviewed all canceled contracts. All of the recipients had the right to protest... unfortunately, most of the NGO's simply had to show up to court to get the contracts back, but they didn't because it was obvious fraud.
And, that grok part? What is all that about? Any AI, can do all of those things? Spending on election interference? So all money donated to political orgs are election interference?
The reasons you seem to hate him, all seem like good things to me?
> Why are my tax dollars going to foreign healthcare, education, and food banks
Because the US wants to have influence around the world to maintain its empire. Mostly using hard power but also some soft power and this is seen as a relatively cheap way to maintain NGO presence in foreign countries that can be used for both.
> when we could definitely use that here?
Agreed, unfortunately that gets called socialism/communism in the US, which means a large chunk of the population will instantly reject it based on labels alone.
> He did nothing. He was an advisor to the president, and his team made reccomendations.
His team did a lot more than that[1][2][3].
"DOGE has gained access to sensitive data about immigrants and farm workers. [A] whistleblower at the National Labor Relations Board claims that staffers observed spikes in data leaving the agency after DOGE got access to its systems, with destinations unknown."
> And, that grok part? What is all that about? Any AI, can do all of those things?
There's a difference between potentially can do and is basically advertised as doing[4]. You can't easily get Claude to do the equivalent, for example. Note that what Grok did was not limited to adults either. But maybe you're fine with that too. Do you think a regular person would get away with that?
1 - https://www.wired.com/story/doge-is-just-getting-warmed-up-d...
2 - https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/20...
3 - https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/22/us/politics/elon-musk-ema...
4 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grok_sexual_deepfake_scandal
For what it's worth, I don't hate Musk specifically. What I hate is this sense that people with his wealth have that they are entitled to just disregard all rules they don't like because they're just so brilliant. Then you have people in jail for things Musk does 8 times a day.
If all he did was put his money towards some cool projects, (which is what I think his admirers think he limits himself to), then be my guest. It's the idea that he can get high as a kite, have some crackpot idea based off of a X post he just saw, pick up the phone and get a crackpot plan in motion, bypassing any kind of normal process or vetting.
I'd be seriously worried that Musk has all kinds of private info on regular Americans as a result of his DOGE scheme, which likely did the opposite of saving money[5][6].
5 - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doge-cuts-cost-135-billion-anal...
6 - https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/white-house-begs-hundred...
[dead]
> Why are my tax dollars going to foreign healthcare, education, and food banks when we could definitely use that here?
I somewhat agree. You vote for universal healthcare, or against it?
Either way, addressing communicable diseases in far away places also helps keep them from becoming nearby diseases. It's far cheaper to fund some vaccines in a far away land than deal with widespread disease domestically. And in the end, cutting these things did practically nothing for the deficit. It was a rounding error of spending to save so many lives around the world.
And they want to argue they're instituting a "Christian" nation. How about following His red text words?
Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received; freely give.
>universal healthcare
I'm 31, i was too young to vote last time the US tried to pass universal healthcare (Obamacare.) However, I don't like government if you can't tell. So no, i would not vote for universal healthcare. Our system has it's flaws, but it seems to be the best system i've witnessed. Medical debt can't effect your credit score, and they can't garnish you wages to pay it off... so technically it is free? I think what really needs to be done is we need to "decertify" doctors. There's no reason I need someone who went to school for 16 years when i break an arm or feel sick and want some over the counter drugs.
As for the aid thing:
"If the industrial nations really want to help the Africans, they should finally terminate this awful aid.”
Western governments sending enormous quantities of subsidized agricultural products into Africa, harms them more than it helps them. Kenyan Economists took note of when food aid arrived in Kenya, some was diverted by corrupt officials, while other shipments were sold on local markets at extremely low prices. Kenyan farmers couldn't compete with these prices, so their businesses suffered. As local agricultural production declined, the country became increasingly dependent on outside assistance. During the next drought, Kenya would have fewer domestic food reserves, creating another cycle of dependency and killing thousands.
> but it seems to be the best system i've witnessed
How many systems have you actually witnessed firsthand? Have you spent life uninsured with medical issues before? Have you ever actually had significant medical debt?
> Medical debt can't effect your credit score, and they can't garnish you wages to pay it off
This isn't true across most of the country. It really makes me question your idea "the best system i've witnessed", as you're repeating commonly held beliefs which are not based on reality.
https://www.moneylion.com/learn/debt/medical-debt/can-medica...
This then only really applies for emergency healthcare, and even then only really to stabilize you enough to send you out the door. Sure seems like the worst way to administer kinda-sorta-not-really-free healthcare. Wouldn't it be better to just provide solutions to remediate and manage issues before they end up in the most expensive form of healthcare, probably over and over?
> There's no reason I need someone who went to school for 16 years when i break an arm or feel sick and want some over the counter drugs.
This is already a thing and is rapidly growing. Urgent care centers largely staff NP/PAs, which can write prescriptions. Its becoming more common for these providers to have many shifts with only NP/PAs as the highest clinical position instead of having an MD/DO as well. PA's didn't go to school for 16 years.
That said, if I break my arm I'm definitely going to want to go to an ortho if I've had even a slightly significant break. Not healing right will mess you up for life.
Once again, are you sure you understand this system you're claiming is the "best system"? If you don't even begin to understand the basics of the claims you're making, how are you so confident this system is the best? Random internet memes tell you it is so? Yeah, sure, you're more likely to survive some uber rare cancer. You're more likely to die in child birth or due to some random disease, all while spending more to subsidize some billionaires yacht habits.
> sending enormous quantities of subsidized agricultural products into Africa
I can get behind winding down enormous amounts of food aid when there aren't active famines happening. If we're really wanting to help, it would be far better to give aid to help jump start their own food production, enable them to be self-sufficient instead of the corporate farm welfare we had. Defined road maps to taper aid when good infrastructure is in place and well supported would be important.
Its still not exactly wise policy to suddenly one day completely cut it all off. Its also not the only thing that was suddenly slashed. Tons of people reliant on medications to live were suddenly cut off without any possible supplier in the area, among many other things.
You're then also so worried about how expensive these programs were. Its like worrying about how much crushing debt you're in financing luxury cars so you decide to cut back on buying a candy bar every other week. Problem solved guys! We did it! Good job! Applause all around! Just ignore how we've actually increased spending after all these rounds of government efficiency cuts!
Sure seems like the last time we had someone focusing on getting in and cutting wasteful budgets, focusing on actually getting consensus on what was wasteful, we actually managed to have a budget surplus. Who was that guy again? Which party was that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Partnership_for_Reinv...
Maybe Musk should have learned from history instead of assuming he knows everything already. Maybe he would have actually been successful.
I mean, surely you know already the responses to these?
1. Elon didn't "create jobs," he profited off other's labor by having his name on some pieces of paper. Furthermore it's often reported that rather than an innovative force in a company, usually people have to work hard to keep him as uninvolved as possible, because he's mostly incompetent.
2. He's the richest man in the world. I don't care the volume of tax he paid, I care what percentage of his spending power it is, because that's how my taxes and my neighbor's taxes are calculated, and it's only fair his should be as well. By that measure, he pays functionally no taxes. My taxes impact my purchasing power and I have to budget for it. His should as well. After all, his money only has value because of the existence of this government.
3. SpaceX sucks the air out of the room the same way his fake drill company killed California HSR. Stop letting crony capitalists suck government contracts dry and then have their buddies sell the "more efficient private solution" that also doesn't get delivered. It's frankly absurd to not nationalize something as critical to sovereignty as a space program.
>Elon didn't "create jobs," he profited off other's labor by having his name on some pieces of paper. Furthermore it's often reported that rather than an innovative force in a company, usually people have to work hard to keep him as uninvolved as possible, because he's mostly incompetent.
I worked at Tesla for two years on the capital expenditure team... He literally goes around the factory making hundreds of changes. Sometimes those changes are bad, and are reverted but in my experience, he's right 95% of the time, and the other 5% he'll revert when shown evidence of why it's a bad idea. I'm sure he does the same thing at SpaceX. He is literally the HEAD ENGINEER. He approves the factory layouts, he is responsible for tak time personally, he is constantly on the factory floor.
>"Furthermore it's often reported that rather than an innovative force in a company, usually people have to work hard to keep him as uninvolved as possible, because he's mostly incompetent."
WTF are you talking about? Who could possible keep him from being uninvoled? he is on the factory floor bi weekly making adjustments and negotiating equipment delivery. No one has the power to try and "Keep him uninvoled" and if so, they would be quickly fired.
>It's frankly absurd to not nationalize something as critical to sovereignty as a space program.
Uhh... we tried that. it'd called NASA, and it's been behind the soviet union since the early 2000's.
What happens when you nationalize it? You realise you can't force people to innovate, right? Do you think Gavin Newsom will be a better CEO of SpaceX? Do you think we have any chance of reaching mars after nationaliztion?
Why do you feel the right to be able to take what someone else has built?
Damage control at SpaceX https://www.theinformation.com/articles/elon-musks-no-2-at-s...
Damage control at Tesla https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-tesla-life-inside-giga...
Twitter finally distracting him away from his meddling https://www.yahoo.com/news/spacex-employees-relieved-elon-mu...
> Uhh... we tried that. it'd called NASA, and it's been behind the soviet union since the early 2000's.
Fascinating. You know what, actually, this part of the conversation is far more interesting to me. I concede that Musk is a super genius that definitely didn't do a Nazi salute on live television. I'd rather explore this with you.
So, you said it right there... NASA, which functioned as a government sponsored project manager distributing out contracts to businesses from a government budget... Failed to keep up with the Soviet Union space program, which was, well you know the answer! Fully nationalized.
I'm not surprised that American half measures at nationalization fail, just like I'm not surprised that the HSR failed through crony capitalism. There in the name. I'm arguing for something a little more dramatic than NASA. Something provably effective. Speaking of HSR, I'm reminded of another modern nationalized infrastructure project that is unparalleled in scale or success, somewhere in the East ;)
> Why do you feel the right to be able to take what someone else has built?
Musk's money has value only because of the society we all together create. It's silly to draw some lines around and say "actually the country's national space program should move to the whims of this one guy that signed investment paperwork and occasionally yells at people on a factory floor." A deeply unserious way of managing something critical to national sovereignty. The Soviets understood this which is why they got to space first. The Americans could only come close when they got a little commie about it; they surpassed the Soviets only when they centralized even more than the Soviets did, which is why Ayn Rand got upset enough to write about it: https://courses.aynrand.org/works/apollo-11/
I don't know if we are talking past eachother, or you are proving my points here? NASA would be nowhere without spaceX. In a centralized system, they never would have developed reusability, because economics are not a consideration. And when you try and produce an end good where economics are not part of the consideration, even with success, you achieve failure.
If SpaceX was nationalized, Starship development would of never happened. Catching the boosters with giant chopsticks, would have never happened. We would probably spend $100B to get to a human to mars and we'd say "Done". However, keeping a profit incentive ensure proper allocation of resources and goals with economic fucundity instead of dumping 60 years to build a death trap with no meaningful payload capacity to the moon. SpaceX has only 20 years, and has rapidly advanced past any agency or company on the planet. SpaceX has the capacity and access that Governments wish they could create, but inside a government system the incintives can never exist to create those in the first place.
edit: Those three links you provided... The last one, a "Calmer work enviroment" because His [Elons] demands have sometimes led to staff reworking the product again for its functionality."
Don't you think these articles kinda of disprove your original statement that he's not intimately involved in the design details? Yes, definitely Elon is not known to be subtle with his employees and he definitely yells alot I can tell you that from first hand experience. Shotwell is definitely the more level headed of the two, with a much higher EQ, so of course, when Elon comes in and fires the entire Starlink team, comes in and redesigns it from scratch, she picks up the pieces of those in his way. At Tesla, however, there is no equivelent to shotwell.
> In a centralized system, they never would have developed reusability, because economics are not a consideration. And when you try and produce an end good where economics are not part of the consideration, even with success, you achieve failure.
You'd need evidence for this claim, because it's evidently false given the nationalized space program of the soviet union and the nationalized HSR program of the PRC both had cost optimizations built in. Also, the Soviet Union's wasn't entirely centralized, different design departments competed.
> they never would have developed reusability,
Space shuttle.
> However, keeping a profit incentive ensure proper allocation of resources and goals with economic fucundity
What's the profit incentive of a nuclear weapons program? Access to space is an assurance of sovereignty. There's no room for inefficient resource allocation mechanisms like profit incentive. See: Ukraine losing starlink internet because it made Elon mad somehow. In Taiwan we saw the writing on the wall for this when the digital minister briefly flirted with Starlink, which is why seeking a private option for non-submarine cable internet was abandoned in favor of investigating a nationalized one.
[flagged]
https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-wisconsin-election-mill...
[flagged]
Don't worry, there's plenty to choose from. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawsuits_involving_the_Departm...
What specific crime(s) do you believe were committed?
[flagged]
His efforts with DOGE should be further investigated for corruption. Musk might have had a "mandate", laughable as it is, from the Executive, but sure was mighty convenient how many programs that had stood in the way of his companies got the axe, and how much data ended up in places it shouldn't.
>My kids, and any friends of theirs riding with us, will boo whenever they see them on the road
Because adults around them groomed them for those actions. Kids don't just start booing at objects out of the blue, they parrot the learned behavior of the adults around them.
Yeah we did
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for, and we've already asked you once.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
>unsubstantive comments
Teaching kids to boo at cars is unsubstantive?
> and flamebait?
You missed the anti-Tesla-booing child-grooming flamebait I was replying to. But I guess if you're also anti-Elon you don't notice that as being flamebait.
> You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly.
Point me to where the repetitiveness is. Thanks.
>If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
If you could be objective with your moderation and interpretation of flamebait and not take sides in political discussions, I'd also be grateful. Either ban all political comments or none and let freedom of speech work, but don't take sides while pretend you're upholding the spirit of the rules. Thanks.
kids do live in a society
And the leaves move when the wind blows.
[flagged]
Booing a car isn't bullying.
Real question: If the person's window is down and you boo it to their face, is it? If everyone in the city boo's it to their face, is it? There are many fashion related items I think are absurd looking, from clothing to cars to haircuts. I'll hate on it with my disgruntled friends. But... I genuinely can't imagine booing any of them in front of the person' who demonstrably likes them.
Yeah if you're getting their face it would be bullying, but usually a kid booing in a car isn't pulling up to the other car and shouting out the window I imagine.
Still, a good teaching experience for how to have a thick skin around unpleasant people. Unfortunately (?) there aren’t people like that where I live.
Im crying laughing imaging a full adult thinking children not liking their car is bullying. Nooo you dont understand my consumer choice is my entirely personality nooo
[flagged]
[flagged]
Sounds like they have pretty good taste to me! We're talking about a failed product, very few people found this thing attractive.
My kids and their friends play a game where when you see certain cars, you do certain actions. Like "punch buggy" with VW bugs but with a bunch of different cars. Cybertruck is "cyberslap" and you get to slap someone when you see one.
I live in Dubai. There is no lack of super cars on the streets. The other day a cybertruck was parked outside my window and this group of teenagers spend a long time posing in front of it taking group pictures and individual pictures.
You don’t see that with a Ferrari or Rolls Royce.
It is definitely going to be a collectors items, if it isn’t already.
That’s not gonna pay the bills for Tesla, but I guess it’s something.
You know what else you don't see with Ferraris? People lining up to spit on them.
https://youtu.be/L3oO510dyVI
The real deal in case anyone prefers literal spitting.
https://youtu.be/txb79zMKFv4
Kind of like a delorean
I think this is exactly it. They are different and unlike anything else on the road.
It’s certainly not exactly it because the Delorean has an indelible association with a classic film that’s beloved by many. It’s iconic without ever seeing one on the road (and most people have not)
The Cybertruck does not have that quality.
And before that movie, the DeLorean actually had a very similar story - an expensive low-quality car that nobody wanted to buy, founder embroiled in controversy. The reason Doc Brown had the car in the movie was because it fit his image as an untrustworthy mad scientist.
Without BTTF it would absolutely be a minor footnote instead of a major one.
If any movie character gets a a Cybertruck in the next 20 years, it will be a villain, not a sympathetic hero.
Except one looks like a sports car and the other looks like a garbage truck/can.
s/cocaine/ketamine/
There is absolutely no chance these will function in 30 years.
It certainly could, but likely very Ship of Theseus'd. I feel like enough of the parts are DRM'd hard by Tesla you'd need to Frankenstein the thing to do it.
The firmware will be a problem
De Lorean status in the future.
Definitely not, not only is the De Lorean a cooler car (by far) it wouldn't even be a collectors item if it wasn't in one of the most popular movies ever made. The cybertruck has the exact opposite associations, instead of being in a cool movie it's the pet project of one of the most hated humans alive.
Maybe there needs to be a new Back to the Future that uses them instead of a DeLorean:)
I know a teenager who got a Fisker Karma. Maybe he bought the dip.
no one is going to care about this in 30 years.
no way the batteries last that long
I mean the 4680 cells are used in the model Y and the pack assembly isn't that complicated. I don't expect it to be financially ruinous to replace over time.
The software of a smartphone on wheels might be a bit harder to replace.
I mean if LLMs can do now what they do now, I doubt software will be much of a barrier for anything in the far future.
Will they work in 30 years?
I can’t imagine why not. EV’s are generally more reliable than gas/diesel vehicles, and Tesla makes the most reliable EV’s.
I grew up on Big Trak, Kitt, and the Landmaster from "Damnation Alley". The kids are right.
That's because adults taught them that behavior
I think if you were to compare the cybertruck with other things kids like, you'd see that it looks like a hot pile of garbage. There's nothing about it that would attract a kid, it looks like a refrigerator.
I think there's a lot of kids (and parents) being influenced by politics more than pure ascetics.
The classroom of kids Ive seen (my kids attend 3 different schools), all of them are amazed by them - age ranges: 3, 7, 9 all their classrooms loved them. Same with some of the older kids I've been around. They're all boys, I do imagine it's a very boy-friendly car.
I personally don't have a cyber truck, not big on it personally, but never put my own opinions into my kids. The kids may not "like it", but they are amazed by it.
I'm in an area that doesn't really hate Musk, so I think that does have an impact.
I've never met or known a person IRL who cares about Tesla's ownership. I know people who hate Teslas cause they drive in the carpool lane or because they had bad experiences owning one, that's about it.
You must have different kids than I do. Mine point at them and observe that they spotted another dumpster.
I suspect you influenced them to feel this way.
I have two girls; never mentioned Elon, Tesla, nor CT to them.
Both think it looks ugly.
No need to influence most people, IMO. Vehicles are shaped the way they are because the designs have broad appeal in general (familiarity? proportions? trends?). Most of us would find a normal, well-tailored black suit to be appealing and be baffled by avant garde, high fasion men's clothing.
Why should anyone be surprised that a completely novel design isn't appealing to most?
> Vehicles are shaped the way they are because the designs have broad appeal in general (familiarity? proportions? trends?).
Isn’t it mostly fuel efficiency standards and manufacturability? You’ve got a chassis that’s used for like five different models for five years between refreshes, not a lot of room to innovate without driving up all the costs so only the luxury cars can afford to look different.
Most cars are and have been roughly the same shape for decades now. Rare innovations here and there, but largely still hold the same basic shapes across manufacturers and markets.
But that's part of it. Cars look the way they do because that is an efficient shape for something doing the job of "Car"
People who want cars to look different for it's own sake are saying they want worse cars.
Why? Why do those people need their cars to be shittier cars just to look different? What are they after? I bought a car as a toy, but it's average looking and not really special, and that doesn't have to actually impact how much I enjoy it. My previous shitty car was also very much enjoyed.
I don't understand the insistence that it looks "different" as if there is any virtue to a car design that was randomly generated to look different.
That's just good parenting. :)
Do you think so? I'm not arguing here, I genuinely don't know.
My kids are too young for this, but surely there's a tradeoff here. Should you override some of your child's natural wonder because of adult aesthetics (or worse political concerns)? Yes. But how often? I'm not sure the line should be drawn at a truck design. (Although, maybe you're teaching your kid taste, again I'm not sure.)
I was admittedly being a little facetious. It's not surprising to me that kids, especially kids who are at that age where monster trucks, construction equipment, the Batmobile etc. are the coolest things in the world would be drawn to the Cybertruck because it certainly does stand out and look larger than life in a way, like it was ripped from the pages of a comic book. I don't think there's any real harm in that, setting my own feelings about Elon and what he has come to represent aside for a moment. Let them enjoy the weird shiny thing while they're still too young to understand why it sucks. ;)
I wouldn't use disliking Cybertrucks as a proxy for good parenting. You can hate everything a symbol represents and still find the symbol cool, like I think motorcycle clubs are awesome but despise the toxic masculinity stereotype many reproduce.
[dead]
I suspect you're right. :) I think it's ghastly and poorly engineered/ designed.
14yo probably influenced -me- more than the other direction, though. That one has strong opinions.
This is the same 14yo who when she was younger would delightedly point out every Tesla (then, mostly model S's) she saw on the road. Probably still responding to both aesthetics and politics but it was interesting to see the shift.
Gonna let you in on a little secret:
Every parent influences their children. It's called parenting.
Eh, even a 11 year old kid can see this thing is what a 5 year old kid thinks is "cool".
Same. Mine like calling out "cyber-yuck!"
Yeah. The kids I coach (1st-4th grade) generally call them 'stupidtrucks'.
My toddler saw one and got really excited "Look, Mama, a barn is driving!"
yeah, my kids will call out, look another "Cyberbarf"
[flagged]
You can't post like this here. Since you've been doing it repeatedly, I've banned the account.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
You don't actually need to post this kind of comment in the first place, or insult people. This isn't 4chan.
This theory backs up my opinion that every rich person who drives an exotic car is just an eight year old who had a Lamborghini poster on their wall growing up
I own a exotic car for the same reason I own mechanical watches. I love the engineering and craftsmanship. (But yes, I had several Lamborghini posters growing up) ;-)
Yeah my 5yo falls in this camp and is resistant to nuanced political discussions about it FOR SOME REASON
I suspect we’re going to discover a depressing future for today’s era of cars. 40 years from now will the Cybertruck software even let you turn it on? When will the last update have been? What servers does it communicate with that’ll end up long since decommissioned?
(FWIW my kids giggle at the Cybertruck and say it looks silly. In a sense they do love them but I’m not convinced they’ll long for one in years to come)
> Kids really love these things and get very excited to see them on the road
Unsurprising, as they look like they were designed by an 8 year old.
> They are going to be very valued collectors items in 30 years
There's going to be 3 owners perpetually going to Cars and Coffee with theirs, rotating with their pristine Pontiac Aztec.
And that's all they'll do with it because there is no way a CyberTruck is going to last 30 years otherwise.
You’re right kids really do love these things: that’s the entire target market.
maybe small kids i guess? teens in my experience mock them gleefully
Every kid I've ever met hates Elon Musk, so I'm 100% sure that this failed product will not be a "collectors item".
> Kids really love these things and get very excited to see them on the road.
Do you have anything empirical to back this up? This feels like someone kind of hoping something is true. It's like the Harley rider sure that everyone thinks they're super cool with their super loud bike.
The Harley example is ironic because little boys are exactly the ones to find that cool
Little kids think crotch rockets are cool. Only the children of Harley owners think Harleys are cool. I mean, you understand there is a whole meme about this right?
In the same way that I'm entirely certain kids don't look at a monstrous mobile trash bin and say "wow, cool!". But the owners of those ugly abominations sure think they look cool.
Every kid I know hates the cybertruck, they literally call it a boomer-mobile.
I'm sure they will hold value as Hitler's paintings do