Everytime Tesla is mentioned here the deluge of hate is overwhelming. I genuinely don't understand it. Here comes a company that is actually doing something fundamentally transformative and good for the planet and its inhabitants instead just another in the countless line of garbage apps that at best are a solution looking for a problem and at worst actively contributing to the destruction of our species (Facebook). Seperate the man from the accomplishments.
I think this is mostly good advice. However, the company does intentionally market him as the face of the company -- so it's hard to fault people for disliking the company due to the press he intentionally gets on the company's behalf. His twitter account antics are marketing, too. It's all part of the brand, for better or worse.
I will not argue that Tesla is doing things differently. I have one gripe with the absolute truth suggested by "good for the planet and its inhabitants" that so many EV manufacturers ride on. Are electric cars good for the planet? Nope. Are they less bad than gas cars? Maybe. It's like saying that Diet coke is good for you because it replaces normal coke that is bad for you. That's an erroneous and arguably dangerous dichotomy. Sorry if I'm being facetious but that kind of marketing bothers me and I believe is damaging (to the environment in this case) by making us more inclined to settle for non optimal solutions.
I understand your reasoning but this is a perfect example of the saying "Never let the perfect be the enemy of the good". I agree that there are better solutions in terms of environmental cost for mobility but given the constraints of human behavior and urgent need for massive immediate reduction of carbon emissions, EV's are currently our best shot.
Why? Why isn't more public transit, which in ever study is massively more greenhouse gas efficient than electric cars and is also already an existing and proven technology a better option?
Why aren't plugin hybrids a better option? Battery electric vehicles require massive emissions in assembling a Li+ battery of that size. Given that most trips for people are short distances that wouldn't end up using the fuel tank of a plugin hybrid, why is encouraging their adoption not a better solution.
There seems to be a belief that BEVs are the obvious and accepted solution to the climate crisis that I don't think meets muster.
Also, the idea that "electric cars the solution" is a specious claim. Buses, trains, etc, are still far more efficient in greenhouse emissions standards than a culture that encourages everyone to have a personal car. It's not clear that we should be incentivizing electric car ownership than disincentivizing car ownership at all.
Will your belief be different if knowing that there are those where owning a car is the only option -- where bikes nor public transportation can get us to our destination on a day to day basis?
There is no doubt in my mind that EVs are way better off because of the pushes Tesla has done. It's also very clear that Tesla wouldn't be where it is today without Musk.
The same can be said of SpaceX.
But when you mix in the weird shit he says, off kilter predictions about where Tesla will be, petty public bickering with public figures, his stupid stance on COVID, and just general oddity... he's just a difficult figure to appreciate without some cynicism. A lot of people have trouble with successful people in general, but you add in all the weird crap and it's easy to see why Musk is such a divisive person.
There is fact. You don't understand why is it happening... you argue against it. Not a scientific approach.
I would better start with facts and build hypothesis. Like it is about hype and false marketing claims and disillusioned people. Company underdevilers. There is a clean separation of
+ premium first
+ battery tech
± UI
− breaking fast
− autopilot
− support
Strange for you to mention "man", there is not much about him in the thread. His approach has a niche but is generally understood as a liability for a stable company. Megafactory, "production bottlenecks" and "production hell", no one cares.
> fundamentally transformative and good for the planet and its inhabitants instead
I think this is where the fundamental difference lies. A huge number of people see Tesla as wrapping itself in that cloth but not really achieving anything of the sort.
I'd say a number of Tesla's critics are strong environmentalists who feel like Tesla has just turned greenwashing into its product.
It has become extremely popular to "idea bash" anything and everything on the internet and in real life. It's not possible to do anything anymore without a crowd of haters.
People can't stand the idea that an idea they don't understand might actually work, and they get angry when it does.
