Tesla Is Last In the Driverless Vehicle Race, Report Says (usnews.com) 163
Navigant Research has compiled a new report on 19 companies working on automated driving systems, and surprisingly, Tesla came in last place. U.S. News & World Report: Navigant ranked the 19 major companies developing AV technology based on 10 criteria, including vision, market strategy, partnerships, production strategy, technology, product quality and staying power. According to the report, General Motors Co. and Waymo, the auto unit of Alphabet, are the top two AV investment opportunities in the market today. Tesla and Apple are the two biggest laggards in the AV race, according to Navigant's rankings.
Investors are acutely aware of Tesla's production and distribution disadvantages compared to legacy automakers like GM, but Navigant is also highly critical of Tesla's technology. "The autopilot system on current products has stagnated and, in many respects, regressed since it was first launched in late 2015," Navigant says in the report, according to Ars Technica. "More than one year after launching V2, Autopilot still lacks some of the functionality of the original, and there are many anecdotal reports from owners of unpredictable behavior."
Investors are acutely aware of Tesla's production and distribution disadvantages compared to legacy automakers like GM, but Navigant is also highly critical of Tesla's technology. "The autopilot system on current products has stagnated and, in many respects, regressed since it was first launched in late 2015," Navigant says in the report, according to Ars Technica. "More than one year after launching V2, Autopilot still lacks some of the functionality of the original, and there are many anecdotal reports from owners of unpredictable behavior."
I thought this is about technology (Score:1)
Why is marketing strategies even listed?
Re:I thought this is about technology (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is marketing strategies even listed?
Really. Since "marketing" and "staying power" count for more than "working and deployed technology", Tesla should be proud to be last on the list.
This is one of those articles where it is clear that the journalist made the list first, putting Tesla last to get more clicks, and then made up BS numbers to justify it.
the thing about teslas autopilot... (Score:1, Interesting)
tesla is last due to technology though.
the thing about why they got it so early and why they stagnated now, is that as you might remember if you read slashdot and wasnt a total fanboi, tesla bought the lane warning camera technology from a 3rd party provider(that provides many makers) and then against the wishes of said provider hacked the lane warning system to work as autopilot - which, if you think about it, is basically a grad project - just wire the logic to the values you get out of that system. it w
Re: (Score:2)
tesla is last due to technology though.
the thing about why they got it so early and why they stagnated now, is that as you might remember if you read slashdot and wasnt a total fanboi, you can't make a technology company if you can't make things either cheaper or better and preferably both.
I had no idea that Tesla was going to be the world leader in Driverless vehicles. Well as last in this race, time to shut them down, sell the proceeds forj the bankruptcy sale and open some coal mines.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, as things are going now, the "traditional" automakers will build and sell the electric cars but, Tesla will sell them the batteries and rent them the supercharger stations.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean Panasonic will sell them the batteries? Or China?
Re:the thing about teslas autopilot... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not just about appearances. It's about cost, drag, and power consumption. Lidar is a pain on all three of those (in addition to looks). You simply can't sell cars with big $10k domes bulging out of the top upping your drag coefficient by 10-20% and consuming a couple kilowatts of power. That would be a disaster to your range, and make your vehicle totally uncompetitive.
Funny how you don't get anecdotal reports concerning the others, given that most of them don't have owners to make said anecdotal reports. And of most of the competitors' systems, they're comically bad [thedrive.com]. And they have the gall to actually market the car as currently "self-driving" (unlike Tesla which markets self-driving as an additional package which you can buy but won't be active for years).
Some of my favorite quotes from the test drive comparison:
Re: (Score:3)
You simply can't sell cars with big $10k domes bulging out of the top upping your drag coefficient by 10-20% and consuming a couple kilowatts of power.
That's why people who know about this stuff are predicting 2020 or later for self driving, because that's when lidar will become cheap and compact enough to make it practical. The tech is already working in the lab, but it takes time to commercialize and the characterise to understand the differences between the larger units.
The breakthrough has been to find electrical ways of directing the emitted light, rather than needing to have a spinning mirror.
Re: (Score:2)
Since you wrote "serious question" - not at all. I just have an interest in EVs, and Tesla is the unambiguous leader in this front, so obviously they get most of my interest in this regard. And "spamming" is not a synonym for writing about a topic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Really. Since "marketing" and "staying power" count for more than "working and deployed technology", Tesla should be proud to be last on the list.
This is one of those articles where it is clear that the journalist made the list first, putting Tesla last to get more clicks, and then made up BS numbers to justify it.
Hell, I didn't even know there was a race! How many laps?
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair Tesla's "marketing" strategy of selling cars with full self-driving capability since September 2016:
https://electrek.files.wordpre... [wordpress.com]
At the rate they are going a lot of people's leases will expire before they deliver the feature. Even Musk is saying 2020 now.
Selling technology that doesn't even exist and which you have no realistic prospect of delivering in the next few years is not a great marketing strategy. It's a recipe for lawsuits when people realize the paid $3000 for nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
Really. Since "marketing" and "staying power" count for more than "working and deployed technology"
Research reports like this one are usually prepared for marketing purposes -- or with an intended audience of investors.
Marketing and Staying power are among the information potential investors looking into these companies would ask for.
Re: I thought this is about technology (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It says market strategy, not marketing strategy. As in, do they have an actual, realistic plan for bringing the technology to market. And since it is info for investors, it makes sense to include it.
Re: (Score:3)
Are your federal and state taxes ensuing the correct painted lines are been used?
Wont someone think of the algorithm that expected a painted road edge?
Re: (Score:2)
The technology needs the road painted correctly. Does your state paint the roads correctly? Is your state EV ready with the edges of its roads painted? Are your federal and state taxes ensuing the correct painted lines are been used? Wont someone think of the algorithm that expected a painted road edge?
So much for the future being summarized as "Roads? Where we're going we don't need roads"
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, so what happens when it snows? Or when road salt has turned the entire surface into a featureless write plane? I guess that why most of these driverless pilot programs are in Arizona or California.
Re: (Score:2)
Conflicting niches (Score:3, Insightful)
Tesla was biting off more than they could chew with auto-drive. Besides, if you want auto-drive, then you probably don't want a sports car. Sports cars are usually for people who like to drive.
Re: (Score:3)
Tesla was biting off more than they could chew with auto-drive.
I agree. They should have spent their energy on their manufacturing capabilities before looking at features that target different markets. Instead now they have buggy self-driving cars with constant production delays.
Re:Conflicting niches (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe, but unlike anyone else, they actually do have self-driving cars on the roads. Not in a research facility, not on paper, not in simulations, not in various stages of development, but on the actual roads.
Re:Conflicting niches (Score:5, Insightful)
There are already cars out there with auto-cruise control and lane assist.
They're not much different than a Tesla with Autopilot.
They both do highway driving, but you'll be dead in both if a truck crosses in front of you and you're not paying attention.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla AP can confidently navigate curves and most other lane assists ping-pong between lines all the time.
Re: (Score:2)
You must have a Model S with the original (MobileEye) autopilot (AP1). AP2.5 ping-pongs between lines all the time, and struggles with any curve tight enough to have a yellow curve sign before it (even if it isn't actually tight enough to make most drivers slow down). When they lost that technology, their capabilities got a lot worse, and they're still not back to where they were before.
Re: (Score:3)
I've driven several cars with ACC and lane assist. They are miles away from something that would deserve the name autopilot or self-driving. They would happily drive over a red traffic light, for starters. More importantly, they have no tie-in with the navigation system.
These are drive-assist systems, a completely different class of thing.
Re: (Score:2)
The Tesla Autopilot is a drive-assist system too, currently.
Have a look at their website
https://www.tesla.com/en_NZ/au... [tesla.com]
It extols the virtues of their full self-driving capable hardware.
Then they say
Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction. It is not possible to know exactly when each element of the functionality described above will be available, as this is highly dependent on local regulatory approval.
So basically they aren't confident in their own software and it's approved for use no-where. They have no idea when it will be ready.
Re: (Score:3)
Audi has level 3, which is hands and eyes off. It only works up to 60 kph, designed for traffic jams, but if a truck did cross in front of you it is supposed to be able to handle that by itself and not require immediate driver intervention.
The current A8 has the system installed but not active as they are waiting for regulatory approval.
Re: (Score:2)
Which proves the point of the article. Tesla is way behind the 8 ball on this. They're just the only ones to be overly public about promising what their technology can't do yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Their cars are not self driving. They are Level 2 automation, which means that the driver has to keep their hands on the wheel and their eyes on the road. It's basically unreliably auto-steering and reliable traffic-aware cruise control.
The early version didn't force the user to pay attention, and then that guy was killed and they made it more strict. If you go back and watch the original videos made about the feature on YouTube there are a lot of people not touching the wheel at all for minutes at a time.
Re: (Score:2)
Their cars are not self driving. They are Level 2 automation, which means that the driver has to keep their hands on the wheel and their eyes on the road. It's basically unreliably auto-steering and reliable traffic-aware cruise control.
The early version didn't force the user to pay attention, and then that guy was killed and they made it more strict. If you go back and watch the original videos made about the feature on YouTube there are a lot of people not touching the wheel at all for minutes at a time.
Tesla is Level 2 approved; but I suspect they're using Level 3/4 tech to do it, and simply using a lower level approval to get the tech out there and tested.
Re: (Score:2)
There is extensive discussion of this on the Tesla forums, including information from guys who dissect the firmware and extract images from the cameras.
Currently they are not using all the cameras. They don't use the side ones, there is no blind spot detection. They don't do any sign recognition yet. They seem to have some level of detection of motorbikes, but it's not consistent enough to show on the instrument cluster.
They only process a single frame of video at a time. They do road marking detection and
Re: Conflicting niches (Score:2)
Is anyoneâ(TM)s autopilot as good as Teslaâ(TM)s? The feature on the Model S/X has a great interface.
I am a Tesla hater. But I donâ(TM)t think anyone does autopilot better right now.
Re: (Score:2)
I am a Tesla hater. But I don't think anyone does autopilot better right now.
instead of rushing things out, they could have left the auto-pilot for a next phase. Start by mass-producing high quality electric cars and batteries. Just that would be a huge win. Now they have to fight on multiple fronts; complaints and lawsuits about auto-pilot, various regulators to deal with, production line issues, charging stations, freeloaders, etc. They're like Hitler attacking Russia before he had the rest of his campaigns under control. Ambitious, and ultimately a disaster.
Re: (Score:2)
Not enabled in production cars.
Tesla does automatic lane changes, can drive 10s of miles without any input on dual carriageway roads / divided highways, works with minimal input in stop-and-go traffic and on undivided highways.
Audi does one of these things better, but the feature is not enabled yet, and are far behind or are missing features to do the rest. Mercedes is no where near feature parity yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Conflicting niches (Score:5, Insightful)
Sports cars are usually for people who like to drive.
Driving a Tesla on Hwy 1 from Carmel to Big Sur is fun. Commuting at 15 mph in stop-and-go traffic on 101 from San Jose to Mountain View is not. It feels great to just click on Autopilot and zone out.
Re: (Score:3)
It feels great to just click on Autopilot and zone out.
It's also incredibly dangerous. You could kill someone.
Autopilot requires you to keep your hands on the wheel and pay attention at all times. It can and does do stupid things sometimes. Wondering over centre lines, "truck lust" where it moves dangerously close to large vehicles, taking the wrong path when the road splits or there is an exit ramp...
It's not safe to zone out.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also incredibly dangerous. You could kill someone.
Statistically, it is more dangerous to have a human in control.
I drive the same route several times per week. If Autopilot got it right yesterday, it will get it right today.
In stop-and-go traffic, the worst that will happen is a fender scrape, and that is LESS likely to happen with the software in control.
Re: (Score:2)
Statistically, it is more dangerous to have a human in control.
The stats that Tesla have shown are for Autopilot with a human ready to take over at a moment's notice. Do you have stats for Autopilot with a zoned out human behind the wheel?
If Autopilot got it right yesterday, it will get it right today.
That is an incorrect assumption. Weather conditions change, the behaviour of other drivers changes, one day there might be roadworks or some debris in the road.
There was a fatal accident in China where the car drive into the back of a road sweeper that was partially occupying the lane. There have been instances in the US where the car
Re: (Score:2)
Weather conditions change
Not in San Jose. Well, it does rain once or twice in the winter, but I just stay home on those days, so I don't have to bother to learn how to drive on wet roads.
Re:Conflicting niches (Score:5, Interesting)
The feature is available in more than just their sports car, you know. It's also in their sedan, their crossover SUV, etc.
I don't think it has anything to do with conflicting niches so much as having to spend time reinventing the wheel. After they lost MobileEye, they had to spend time redoing what MobileEye provided, plus everything they were planning to do going forward.
IMO, the big open question is whether the current AutoSteer tech is actually the basis for their self-driving tech, or just a temporary band-aid intended to replace the AP1 MobileEye functionality in the interim until their self-driving tech is ready.
Right now, I've seen the following problems (consistently) with AutoSteer:
All in all, it isn't a beta so much as a pre-alpha. It is good enough for some freeways (the ones without significant turns), but it has trouble even on some four-lane, divided highways in the greater Bay Area, where presumably Tesla should have copious amounts of training data. I would have no faith in it on arbitrary roads. It isn't the edge cases that are wrong, but rather that the base case behavior is barely even adequate. It feels like they trained their model with drunk drivers and 15-year-old student drivers.
So I really hope that AutoSteer is a temporary replacement for MobileEye, and that the reason it isn't better is that it is getting only minimal maintenance. If that's not the case... we could be waiting a while.
Re: Conflicting niches (Score:1)
You sure make Tesla's Auto Steer sound like an immature technology but so many people seem to trust it with their lives so I'm wondering if your car is defective in some way. Maybe take it in to Tesla and ask them why they were willing to give you a feature that would certainly result in damage to your expensive vehicle and possible bodily harm.
Also, while I'm sure the delay in turning is an issue with processing time, the correct way to navigate a turn is to eclipse it, which is not a constant radius turn.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, you're right. Technically, it's not constant radius (though I think that's the term they used in our driver's ed class
Re: (Score:2)
And no, it's not just my car. Everyone who has ever driven on a road with moderately tight curves has experienced this behavior, which is why Tesla says in the manual that AutoSteer should be used on roads without tight curves. They weren't kidding when they made that recommendation. They just haven't gotten the math right.
Re: (Score:1)
Who the fuck has heard of "Navigant [sic] Research", and why would anyone pay any attention to their clickbait?
No, I'm not a Tesla "fanboi." But they are advancing the art, and Navigant Research is apparently just a remora [wikipedia.org].
(Beyond which, all the self-driving car companies seem to be testing in sunny, dry locations, Michigan based GM included. It's not ready-for-prime-time until they can drive t
Re: (Score:3)
t's not ready-for-prime-time until they can drive through a white-out condition snow storm on icy, snow covered roadways.
Of course, by that criteria, most humans aren't ready to drive a car either. Here in Los Angeles even a modest rainfall seems to discombobulate a lot of the local wetware implementations :)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, but that just means they're stuck in the ditches, which leave the road open for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in the Greater Toronto Area, you'd expect people to be able to drive in snow... but almost everyone seems to forget for at least the first snowfall of the year. You get two kinds of drivers: the ones who suddenly do half the speed limit even though you can still see bare pavement, and the ones who think their pickup truck or SUV makes them invincible, and exceed the speed limit even in a whiteout with no bare pavement at all (the latter kind you sometimes find in a ditch as you pass them further down
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, this story is really dumb. You don't have to be first in the driverless vehicle race, any idiot can just buy and install that technology in their vehicle, figuratively speaking of course. Sure you try to develop your own but you install the one that works best, the sensible decision.
Just look at things in the right way. So for example, the waffle on about hypersonic aircraft and how they can escape missiles but you look at it from another perspective. Hypersonic aircraft, how manourverable, pretty mu
Rank this (Score:5, Funny)
Navigant ranked the 19 major companies developing AV technology based on 10 criteria, including vision, market strategy, partnerships, production strategy, technology, product quality and staying power.
I ranked 27,013 market research firms based on the relevance of their research and the value of their brand. The only reason Navigant didn't finish last is because I included Trump's twitter feed in the list.
Ford in top tier (Score:2, Interesting)
Hilariously Ford are in the top tier, by Fords own admission they're playing catchup.
Navigant are blind IMHO.
There are only 3 major contenders, Waymo, Tesla and Volvo. All of them actively have driverless cars out on the road. Baidu are just starting that, Ford, GM etc. are rebranding things like 'lane feedback' as driverless control (it isn't).
Toyota a top tier??? Seriously? I've got a Toyota. The lights are Auto, Off, On..... no "daytime driving lights mode", Off isn't off, its on, it leaves the accent li
Re: (Score:2)
Volvo is ideal for automated cars. The owners already can't drive.
Staying Power? (Score:1)
How much weight was given to the "staying power" metric? That's naturally going to lean twords GM, which literally can't go out of business...
Re: Staying Power? (Score:1)
Haha, they tried but the U.S. Government said no.
Tesla has more real data (Score:2, Insightful)
Tesla has a pretty huge advantage over other companies, in that there is a TON of data from around the world, in so many different conditions... especially the model 3 has a good number of sensors all around. The performance of that system may be lagging at the moment but Tesla is the one that has the most ingredients for success at hand.
Re: (Score:3)
"Tesla has a pretty huge advantage over other companies, in that there is a TON of data from around the world, in so many different conditions"
Very true but you have to be able to make sense of all that data. Tests by Tesla owners selectively covering the cameras to see at which point Autopilot would become unavailable found that it's only using the front camera / radar, just like the old system.
Whether or not they're collecting data from the other sensors is unknown but their progress has been minimal in t
Yes, for now (Score:3)
Tests by Tesla owners selectively covering the cameras to see at which point Autopilot would become unavailable found that it's only using the front camera / radar, just like the old system.
Sure but that does not mean they are not collecting from the other cameras/sensors while people drive, and can learn from that as well for more advanced systems.
their progress has been minimal in the past 6 months.
I imagine they are being very careful with updates, but that doesn't mean major upgrades are not around the
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla is the one that has the most ingredients for success at hand.
No, Tesla has too few sensors and that is really hampering its efforts to even get back to where it was 2 years ago.
Originally Tesla was using MobileEye tech. They ended that partnership and developed their own hardware platform, which uses cameras, front radar and ultrasonic sensors. Crucially there is no lidar or stereo vision.
When AP2 was introduced it was a huge step backwards. A year and a half later they are starting to reach parity with the old AP1 system from MobileEye. But it really isn't clear if
uh... (Score:3)
Not sure I want to be in the winner's car in this race
uh, what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Tesla and Apple are the two biggest laggards
That they list a company that doesn't even have a product in the market, neither active nor announced, and which is working on something only according to rumours, tells me a lot about how trustworthy this article is.
Re:uh, what? (Score:5, Informative)
You mean this rumor?
https://www.engadget.com/2017/... [engadget.com]
Maybe Apple just decided to publish a paper on car, pedestrian and cyclist detection using LIDAR because they were bored?
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1711.063... [arxiv.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Apple was rumored to be working on a car for a long time. I don't think they could actually build one, a car is a complicated thing to build and involves a lot of regulatory approvals and a massive investment in manufacturing. I'm not sure the regulatory requirements would also line up with Apple's marketing style, either.
It's not that Apple doesn't have or can't hire the right talent, and they are good at supply chain management but a car is a different product than Apple knows how to make.
Tesla has show
Re: (Score:2)
Apple wouldn't build an entire car, most likely. What's far more likely is that they'd license an electronics package, like Microsoft and Nvidia do. Apple already makes something called CarPlay, it'd be something like this.
Re: (Score:2)
Any idiot can publish a paper, but I have yet to see one of these on the road: https://www.theinquirer.net/w-... [theinquirer.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Same as Tesla then.
Re: (Score:3)
Tesla and Apple are the two biggest laggards
That they list a company that doesn't even have a product in the market, neither active nor announced, and which is working on something only according to rumours, tells me a lot about how trustworthy this article is.
Apple are also laggards in the jam making arena.
Which car can I buy now? (Score:2)
And how many different models? An SUV? A sports car?
Re: (Score:2)
Its got the GUI that EV drivers crave.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not automated?
This WOULD be relevant, but... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
GM hasn't ever positioned themselves as "even mainly a[n] AV maker".
So obviously they aren't including only companies that have "positioned themselves as even mainly a[n] AV maker".
They are ranking the companies that are doing anything significant with self-driving vehicles.
Given Elon Musk promised a cross-country self-driven ride by the end of 2017, I think Telsa qualifies.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they do sell the feature of full autonomous driving*.
*when available.
Re: (Score:2)
'Trunk Monkey' is currently available, except where 'prohibited by law'.
Re: (Score:2)
The Model 3's control panel was replaced with a central touchscreen on the theory that looking away from the road to mess with the touchscreen is ok because the car is driving autonomously anyways. For the same reason, you don't really need to see the speedometer. This is the official explanation for the layout.
Re: (Score:2)
Another "market research" company poopoos on Tesla (Score:2)
Thus far, lots of market research companies have said Tesla is a complete failure and would be dead by the end of the year and thus far they have all been proven wrong. Tesla is taking the AI heavy approach by only using radar and cameras which is likely why they have been ranked last. However, I would point out that people don't have LIDAR and yet manage to drive. Tesla isn't always on time with their products and thus far have a few kinks but they always manage to produce a product. GM, Ford, Nissan a
Tesla has different goals, too ..... (Score:2)
When you look at the big auto makers like Chevy, they're cutting deals to partner up with ride-sharing services like Uber or Lyft. That should tell you what their long-term goals are. They want to be the ones who own or exclusively sell fleets of driverless vehicles used in a future where people no longer own their own personal cars -- but simply call for one as needed, on a trip by trip basis.
Tesla, on the other hand, is still more firmly entrenched in the idea of making a desirable electric car with as mu
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about that. Their cars are still pretty expensive, compared to say a Corolla or Civic. People who would buy one of these are more likely to just call auto-cabs... which could be a Tesla. Electric cabs are likely to be cheaper than ICE to deploy/maintain, so cab companies will consider Teslas for this purpose, if they're autonomous.
Autopilot is about getting real world data (Score:2)
Price for hardware? (Score:2)
Re:Price for hardware? (edit) (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Lidar cost $70,000 in 2012.
In 2016, it costs $250. Projections are for it to cost $90 (no date, but guess by 2020?).
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, if you go from 64 beams to 1. Decent Lidar still costs $8000.
Good! (Score:2)
Because I'll be damned if I trust my safety to a driverless vehicle.
Is this a competition Tesla should even be in? (Score:2)
According to Musk, the primary reason for existence of Tesla is to get the world to move more quickly to electric cars. It does this by making good enough cars, and making enough money from them, that other companies realize they are missing out and so chose to emulate Tesla. I'm sure that Tesla also want to become a long term profitable major car manufacturer, but if we believe Musk, that is a secondary goal.
Given all this, and given Tesla motor's significant growing pains and limited resources (compared t
Re: (Score:2)
Vision? (Score:1)
When the first thing they are grading on is "Vision", I am not going to RTFA. The summary also says they have reports of ???. As opposed to the reports on my Toyota not driving itself. Because it doesn't...
They are first in one important way (Score:2)
Just talk (Score:1)
Anyone of us is capable of pointing out problems, but people with solutions are the only ones that matter. Rest is just noise.
Tesla is also the first in the driverless vehicle race. Because I don't see anyone else in it who could be taken seriously yet. Lots of talk, very little self driving cars.
But I do reserve the right to change my opinions, because they are often proven wrong.
Musks unsustainable technologies (Score:2)
GM etc just have more technical resources to back these things up, so they can use their existing technology and supply chains rather than having to build everything from scratch.
The big problem with electric cars is that its not sustainable however, and will not scale to large usage, because the batteries consume so many rare earth metals. The idea that electric cars are environmental is such an outrageous idea, its a joke. When you consider the effects of mining and how it is depleting non-renewable resou
Re: (Score:2)
No idea why it is a surprise. (Score:2)
We want driverless motorcycles! (Score:2)
And when the company's C-levels are going to work on driverless motorcycles, then I'll believe driverless technology is ready.
http://media1.break.com/dnet/m... [break.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I think Tesla has been clueless at selling vehicles.
As long as Tesla has a backlog, it seems to me that their marketing is doing just fine relative to their production capacity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Only Americans are skeptical about vapor?