Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Maybe next time the reporter rides along and Tesla does the driving
Other than the charging issues (which were directly cause by Broder's intentional misuse), the car performed just fine.
And, really, that's not the real issue at all: the real issue is that Broder LIED ABOUT HIS TREATMENT OF THE CAR.
Let me repeat that: BRODER LIED.
If someone accused you of driving your car into the ocean, when in fact a semi pushed you into the ocean, you would do EVERYTHING in your power to defend yourself. If someone accused you of knocking off a 7-11, you'd do the same thing, and vigorously.
If ######I###### were in Broder's shoes, I would not only report on everything EXACTLY as it occurred; I would also disclaimer the fuck out of the conclusions, because they were done under less-than-ideal conditions, and under improper operation of the vehicle. Of course, being the type of person I am, when the car died, I would find some way to get to a receptacle somewhere, and plug an extension cord in and get enough charge to get to the next station, even if it meant taking a nap or (GASP!) spending the night somewhere.
Which Broder DID NOT DO. I do believe that falls under the "slander" label.
I would then ask Tesla, very nicely, for even more time in the car, to repeat the test, and repeat it properly. And then write an article about THAT.
See?? It's called "journalistic integrity".
Broder has demonstrated he doesn't have it.
NYT, who should have made sure an accurate article was written, has demonstrated they don't have it, either.
But it WAS a deliberate hatchet job, especially after it was PROVEN that the car not only did NOT need to be "babied", it also did a long trip in almost the same time a "normal" car could.
Broder lied, got caught, he and NYT refuse to admit bias and guilt.
I honestly don't blame Musk for overreacting; and his data logs are quite enough to prove his point.
And now it comes out that Broder is an oil company shill?? Even worse, for the NYT, Broder, and their apologists.
If I had the $$$, I'd buy one NOW. My electricity here is cheap, my truck gets 12mpg (and requires super-unleaded), and I do a 45 mile round trip daily, the Tesla would be a perfect car for me.
The problem Boeing is having is overheating batteries (from a combination of under- and over- charging), and them getting damaged and outgassing withing the cases. Which, akin to a cellphone battery, means the envelope or case is blowing up like a balloon, full of toxic and flammable gases, which is a MASSIVELY dangerous situation--especially to an aircraft that's mostly plastic.
Some Formula One's KERS systems do basically the same thing; but they do it intentionally in order to generate the MAXIMUM amount of power in the shortest possible time, or generate the maximum amount of recharging in the shortest amount of time. And that destroys the batteries. Otoh, tho, they get to toss them after every race.
Do you actually own a car?? When you're talking about 85% heat rejection rates, it's ALWAYS too much; otherwise, they would just put a radiator inside the cabin, instead of one that's a fraction the size of the main one.
Well, way up there where the north wind blows, they have houses with passive baseboard or radiant floor heating, which runs more efficiently when it's pretty much always hot, so they'll crack windows to blend up the air temps, instead of trying to vary the the heating in the slab.
See my post, above: a fuel stop isn't all that quick, and on long trips can (and usually does) take alot longer.
My truck gets about 270-300 miles on a tank, so how is that any better than a Tesla? My wife's Focus gets around 350 or so--again, not to significantly different, ESPECIALLY when you do the sensible thing and stop for fuel WELL BEFORE you hit empty.
And after 4-odd hours of driving, a break is critical, unless you're using a catheter or a NASA diaper.
The Tesla has made a car that meets minimum range standards that are based on the realistic ranges of regular gas cara. So how is that "not ready for prime-time"??
Re: Re: Re: Maybe next time the reporter rides along and Tesla does the driving
I think you're incorrect, or at least being disingenuous.
Driving a Prius takes alot of adjustment from a "traditional" car, too; especially when the batteries go totally flat, and you're on engine only, you're barely crawling in some cases, and trying to hopefully not get run over by a semi while recharging the batteries (which you canNOT do with a plug).
The CNN guy drove the Tesla like a regular car, except for the stops for charging. The only real drawback is the length of time it took to fully charge (60 and 90 minutes), which turns out to have been the ONLY real difference between a gas car and the Tesla: a gas car, I can get in and out of a station in about 20 minutes, maybe 15; but when one is making a long trip, after 270 miles at 70mph, you've spent nearly 4 hours on your butt, and you likely need to use the restroom (10 minutes at most), get a drink and a snack (10min), or a meal (30-45min).
So plugging in, hitting the head, sitting down for a meal or a drink and snack, and then hitting the road again isn't too far beyond what we already do with gas burners.
When a "journalist" flat-out LIES about his trip, driving style, activities, and other critical items (only a "partial charge" isn't important enough to include in the story? WTF?), it calls the integrity of the reporter AND his editors into complete question.
Did Musk overreact? Maybe, when he started screaming "lawsuit"; but the data supported his assertions (the "journalist" lied about and omitted important facts) enough to pretty much prove his point.
We've aleready seen, on this site alone, legions of "media outlets" that are significantly biased and unreliable; and NYT/Broder have just become a part of that legion.
Funny how an anonymous coward doesn't have the balls to identify himself, and yet calls the guy with a real name a "nobody". :tard:
"academics" have been wrong before; and they are usually a bunch of pompous asses who will twist everything to fit their own view of the world. At least I call it like I see it, right :tard;?
In fact, gas gauges are like the rest in the instrument panel: "normalized", which means that within a certain operating range, under certain parameters, the needle will point at a place that doesn't necessarily reflect the actual data received.
Case in point: your water temperature gauge. Back in the sixties, even the fifties, neighbors would buy two of the same model cars; they would race, and at some point, one would be consistently slower than the other. The "slower" car would be exactly identical, except the temp gauge (which wasn't all that accurate to begin with, or even properly zeroed or calibrated) would be reading a few degrees less, or more. Result: a rash of warranty repairs and returns, because the car was "defective".
Of course, owners don't want to hear the truth: every car is slightly different, and cannot be any other way. So manufacturers in the late '60s normalized the gauges, which means when they get to operating range, they will point at dead-center on the gauge.
Fuel gauges are similar: this is why you see them, when they get toward about an eighth of a tank, the light turns on, and they drop FAST. This is done to let the driver know they best get gas AND FAST. They do mention the "reserve" in the tank, but they even minimize that, because of variability within the sender unit in the tank, electrics, and gauge setups.
So: batteries can be judged more accurately, based in voltage levels, current flows, etc; but, it's still something of a guessing game, and an inexact science at best.
I think Musk's real issue was that the writer embellished portions of the story, to make the problems seem worse than they were, and to cover for his own failure to do what was necessary to operate the vehicle properly. Had Broder admitted, up front, that he had shorted the second charge, driven faster with the heat set higher, and tried to burn the batteries down by trying to do donuts in the parking lot (and there. Is no WAY it was anything BUT that!), then Musk would've kept his trap shut, and we wouldn't have a story.
I think the central issue here, is that a member of the media changed significant and important parts of the story to support a mediocre or bad review of the car, which brings his credibility and bias in question.
As far as I'm concerned, NYT and Broder screwed this one up; Musk merely defended his product, and with actual data (even if he misinterpreted it, himself). And I agree with his decision to record all logs on cars loaned to media people, for this very reason.
Nope, because they are not interested in doing the best thing FOR THE PEOPLE; they are only interested in doing what puts more money in their pockets, no matter the source of the bribes. And they are being bribed to do this.
As said in "History of the World, Part 1": "FUCK THE POOR!"
In other words, we're talking about a bunch of budding CEOs that are practicing doing nothing for obscene amounts of cash, while destroying the very thing that supposedly keeps them employed?
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Re: Re: Still Digging
In fact, it COULD have been a trap.. Set in order to keep everyone else honest... {_{ }_}
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Maybe next time the reporter rides along and Tesla does the driving
And, really, that's not the real issue at all: the real issue is that Broder LIED ABOUT HIS TREATMENT OF THE CAR.
Let me repeat that: BRODER LIED.
If someone accused you of driving your car into the ocean, when in fact a semi pushed you into the ocean, you would do EVERYTHING in your power to defend yourself. If someone accused you of knocking off a 7-11, you'd do the same thing, and vigorously.
If ######I###### were in Broder's shoes, I would not only report on everything EXACTLY as it occurred; I would also disclaimer the fuck out of the conclusions, because they were done under less-than-ideal conditions, and under improper operation of the vehicle. Of course, being the type of person I am, when the car died, I would find some way to get to a receptacle somewhere, and plug an extension cord in and get enough charge to get to the next station, even if it meant taking a nap or (GASP!) spending the night somewhere.
Which Broder DID NOT DO. I do believe that falls under the "slander" label.
I would then ask Tesla, very nicely, for even more time in the car, to repeat the test, and repeat it properly. And then write an article about THAT.
See?? It's called "journalistic integrity".
Broder has demonstrated he doesn't have it.
NYT, who should have made sure an accurate article was written, has demonstrated they don't have it, either.
And yes: I should've done that review. ;-)
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Still Digging
Broder lied, got caught, he and NYT refuse to admit bias and guilt.
I honestly don't blame Musk for overreacting; and his data logs are quite enough to prove his point.
And now it comes out that Broder is an oil company shill?? Even worse, for the NYT, Broder, and their apologists.
If I had the $$$, I'd buy one NOW. My electricity here is cheap, my truck gets 12mpg (and requires super-unleaded), and I do a 45 mile round trip daily, the Tesla would be a perfect car for me.
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Re: Re: Re: climate
Some Formula One's KERS systems do basically the same thing; but they do it intentionally in order to generate the MAXIMUM amount of power in the shortest possible time, or generate the maximum amount of recharging in the shortest amount of time. And that destroys the batteries. Otoh, tho, they get to toss them after every race.
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Re: Re:
Do you actually own a car?? When you're talking about 85% heat rejection rates, it's ALWAYS too much; otherwise, they would just put a radiator inside the cabin, instead of one that's a fraction the size of the main one.
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Re:
So, yeah: they'll do just that.
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Both have egg on their faces
My truck gets about 270-300 miles on a tank, so how is that any better than a Tesla? My wife's Focus gets around 350 or so--again, not to significantly different, ESPECIALLY when you do the sensible thing and stop for fuel WELL BEFORE you hit empty.
And after 4-odd hours of driving, a break is critical, unless you're using a catheter or a NASA diaper.
The Tesla has made a car that meets minimum range standards that are based on the realistic ranges of regular gas cara. So how is that "not ready for prime-time"??
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Re: Re: Maybe next time the reporter rides along and Tesla does the driving
Driving a Prius takes alot of adjustment from a "traditional" car, too; especially when the batteries go totally flat, and you're on engine only, you're barely crawling in some cases, and trying to hopefully not get run over by a semi while recharging the batteries (which you canNOT do with a plug).
The CNN guy drove the Tesla like a regular car, except for the stops for charging. The only real drawback is the length of time it took to fully charge (60 and 90 minutes), which turns out to have been the ONLY real difference between a gas car and the Tesla: a gas car, I can get in and out of a station in about 20 minutes, maybe 15; but when one is making a long trip, after 270 miles at 70mph, you've spent nearly 4 hours on your butt, and you likely need to use the restroom (10 minutes at most), get a drink and a snack (10min), or a meal (30-45min).
So plugging in, hitting the head, sitting down for a meal or a drink and snack, and then hitting the road again isn't too far beyond what we already do with gas burners.
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Re:
When a "journalist" flat-out LIES about his trip, driving style, activities, and other critical items (only a "partial charge" isn't important enough to include in the story? WTF?), it calls the integrity of the reporter AND his editors into complete question.
Did Musk overreact? Maybe, when he started screaming "lawsuit"; but the data supported his assertions (the "journalist" lied about and omitted important facts) enough to pretty much prove his point.
We've aleready seen, on this site alone, legions of "media outlets" that are significantly biased and unreliable; and NYT/Broder have just become a part of that legion.
On the post: Breaking: Countries Act In Their Own Interests In Spite Of What's Best For Everyone Else
Re: Re: Re: Nature vs Idealists
"academics" have been wrong before; and they are usually a bunch of pompous asses who will twist everything to fit their own view of the world. At least I call it like I see it, right :tard;?
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re: Re: The Accuracy of Battery Life
Case in point: your water temperature gauge. Back in the sixties, even the fifties, neighbors would buy two of the same model cars; they would race, and at some point, one would be consistently slower than the other. The "slower" car would be exactly identical, except the temp gauge (which wasn't all that accurate to begin with, or even properly zeroed or calibrated) would be reading a few degrees less, or more. Result: a rash of warranty repairs and returns, because the car was "defective".
Of course, owners don't want to hear the truth: every car is slightly different, and cannot be any other way. So manufacturers in the late '60s normalized the gauges, which means when they get to operating range, they will point at dead-center on the gauge.
Fuel gauges are similar: this is why you see them, when they get toward about an eighth of a tank, the light turns on, and they drop FAST. This is done to let the driver know they best get gas AND FAST. They do mention the "reserve" in the tank, but they even minimize that, because of variability within the sender unit in the tank, electrics, and gauge setups.
So: batteries can be judged more accurately, based in voltage levels, current flows, etc; but, it's still something of a guessing game, and an inexact science at best.
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
Re:
You don't want much, do you? :tard:
On the post: What The Tesla / NY Times Fight Teaches Us About The Media
I think the central issue here, is that a member of the media changed significant and important parts of the story to support a mediocre or bad review of the car, which brings his credibility and bias in question.
As far as I'm concerned, NYT and Broder screwed this one up; Musk merely defended his product, and with actual data (even if he misinterpreted it, himself). And I agree with his decision to record all logs on cars loaned to media people, for this very reason.
On the post: DailyDirt: Cheaters Sometimes Prosper...
Humans gonna be hypocrites.
We are doomed.
On the post: Breaking: Countries Act In Their Own Interests In Spite Of What's Best For Everyone Else
Wrong title...
On the post: Breaking: Countries Act In Their Own Interests In Spite Of What's Best For Everyone Else
Re: Nature vs Idealists
Most basic human instincts (programming, drives, whatever):
1) Procreation;
2) Food;
3) Clothing/shelter.
And that's where it aaaaallllll begins...
On the post: CISPA Wouldn't Actually Solve The Reasons Congress Is Giving For Why We Need CISPA
Re:
As said in "History of the World, Part 1": "FUCK THE POOR!"
On the post: FBI 'Stops' Yet Another Of Its Own Terrorist Threats
Re: Re:
I guess that FBI virus is real...
On the post: Canada Denies Patent For Drug, So US Pharma Company Demands $100 Million As Compensation For 'Expropriation'
Wow, a new term!
Since the corporation is a citizen, why can't it be a nation, too? While we're at it, let's let the, elevate themselves to the position of "deity"!!
Oh, wait: the catholic church has already managed that...
On the post: Teri Buhl Responds To Our Story; Still Confused About The Internet And The Law
Re: Re: Re: Re: Error
Next >>