Yeah, genius thought that creating CyberTruk and turn full Nazi will expand his consumer base.
Sucks for real founders of Tesla, but hey, at least you helped bootstrapping switch to EVs.
turn full Nazi
He’s a Nazi? Like, literally? What’s the latest?
Edit: we’re discussing the down votes for this comment below. I’m baffled, because I’m merely asking for info. Please, if you want to down vote, reconsider, and consider replying to me why instead. 🙂 I don’t care about the votes, I’m just curious why a simple request could be so unpopular. Thank you.
He lets Nazis use his platform and calls it “freedom of speech”, although this exact freedom is limited by the wellbeing of others. And promoting Nazis is harmful to not only minorities, but the society in my opinion, as they strive to split the society with populist arguments.
Nope. Lefties like to call any outspoken conservative a “Nazi” to discredit them. It’s like when conservatives call lefties “communist.” It’s juvenile IMO, but I guess it works.
If you let Nazis in your house and kick out people saying they don’t want to hang around Nazis, what does that make you?
Collaborateur! 📣
If you’re looking to have a public forum, you need a representative sample from all sides of the political spectrum. Look at parliamentary systems as an example of that, where you have literal fascists and communists sitting alongside one another as a very vocal, but incredibly small minority. If that’s your goal, you need to take the good with the bad.
That is what Musk has stated as his goal, so what you’re seeing makes absolute sense with that stated goal.
That said, I don’t like Musk or what he claims to believe in politically, I just think the idea of an open town square is desirable. I hope someone can pull it off (doesn’t seem like Musk is doing it), which is part of why I’m working on a Reddit/Lemmy alternative that discourages echo chambers and encourages high quality discourse. Doing that is incredibly hard, because people like to group up into tribes, and I think Musk absolutely does that as well (hence why I don’t like him). However, I don’t think Musk is a “Nazi” because he allows Nazis on his platform, I think he’s just incapable of running the type of social media platform he wants to see exist.
How do you know they are left?
I don’t, but there seems to be a very strong correlation between leftist political views and calling people who tolerate Trump “Nazis.”
That said, I’m not a leftist or a conservative, I dislike Trump, Musk, and what they stand for. I’m libertarian, and not in the “I’m a conservative who likes weed” way (I have no desire to use weed, but it should 100% be legal), but in a “We should work toward open borders” way. I respect Musk’s statement that he wants Twitter/X to be a free speech platform and understand him allowing Trump et al back on, but I think he has really lost what made Twitter interesting. I don’t think he actually wants free speech, he wants people to agree with him to be heard, and “free speech” is the excuse to get them platformed again.
My issue here has nothing to do with Musk, but with the liberal (pun intended) use of the term “Nazi” to label people you don’t like. There are actual Nazi movements that could apply to, such as the Proud Boys, and abusing the term just cheapens the meaning of the term.
Really? Because the right doesn’t throw the Nazi card around like there’s no tomorrow at the left with their disingenuous “national socialism bullshit”. Only one party/political leaning is actually courting the neo-nazi vote.
Of course they don’t, the Nazi card is a far-right concept. The far-left analog is communist, and they did plenty of that during the “red scare.” They still use “communist” or “socialist” terminology to write off opponents.
And no, the Republican party isn’t actively courting neo-nazis, it’s neo-nazis that are using Republican talking points to appeal to a broader audience. There’s certainly a venn diagram overlap there, so Republicans can appear to be supporting neo-nazis, but that’s really just neo-nazis trying to appeal to more of the mainstream.
Don’t get caught up in the partisan name-calling, it sucks when Republican do it, and it sucks when Democrats do it, it’s just a really stupid version of a strawman. Democrats don’t want to seize the means of product but Republicans want you to think they do, and Repbulicans don’t want to kill minorities but Democrats want you to think they do. Don’t buy in to the divisiveness BS, look at the facts and make your own decisions from there.
I personally hate both parties since neither actually deliver on the parts I like from their platforms, and they tend to behave similarly on the issues I care about (e.g. both largely support Israel, both seem happy to continue undeclared wars, both seem happy to run up deficit spending with little to show for it, etc). Screw the two party system and “pundits” in general.
Leftists are communist though. Liberals are the progressives that prefer capitalism
No, I disagree with each of your definitions. Here’s how I see them:
- leftist - anyone left of center; this is a big tent with both capitalists and communists
- progressives - leftists who want significant, but moderate political change (e.g. universal healthcare, high minimum wage, etc)
- liberals - anyone who believes in individual rights and private property, so basically the capitalist wing of leftist ideology; originally, liberals were more synonymous w/ modern libertarians, but now they tend to prefer larger government
So in terms of size of the groups: leftists > liberals > progressives. The communist part of the left is largely mutually exclusive from progressives and liberals, though some progressives are in favor of some elements from socialism.
At least that’s how I see it. I’m neither leftist or conservative, I’m a pretty centrist libertarian. I’m left of many leftists and right of many conservatives, depending on the issue.
You may disagree, but it is a pretty widely agreed upon distinction. It’s a symptom of the issue of a fractured left wing. The left leaning communists wanted to distinguish themselves from the left leaning capitalists, so they started calling themselves leftists and not liberals.
It’s just a bunch of different labels, it’s not really set in stone or definitive. I totally understand why you disagree.
My point really was just that a conservative calling someone a communist isn’t insulting to a lot of self described leftists because they are communist, it’s mostly just considered an insult to a conservative. Kinda like calling an alt right person a Nazi is an insult from a leftist, but plenty of alt righties wouldn’t be insulted because they are (jk but not really but jk)
The left leaning communists wanted to distinguish themselves from the left leaning capitalists, so they started calling themselves leftists and not liberals.
I don’t really care what they call themselves, I care what people in general mean by the terms they use. Academics use “leftist” to mean anyone on the left, “liberals” to mean those who prioritize individual liberties and private property (e.g. founders of the US), and “progressives” to mean those interested in utilitarian changes to existing systems to improve outcomes. “Liberal” has change a bit recently with the right using it to describe the left, but it’s also not wrong because both Dems and Reps are liberals, Reps are just socially conservative liberals, and Dems are socially progressive liberals. Those have clear definitions that are generally understood by the public, and changing their meaning just confuses things IMO.
My point really was just that a conservative calling someone a communist isn’t insulting to a lot of self described leftists because they are communist
But most aren’t. Calling Biden a communist because he wants to expand access to medical care is similar to calling Trump a fascist because he wants stronger border protections. They’re just inflammatory, inaccurate labels used for political gain. The communist label is relying on the “red scare” nonsense, and the fascist label is relying on holocaust imagery. Both are inaccurate and harmful IMO.
Yes, there are legitimate communists on the left and legitimate fascists on the right, but they’re such a minority that using them for any public figure is almost guaranteed to be inaccurate.
Liberalism is not necessarily capitalist. It is possible to be an anti-capitalist liberal by recognizing the inalienable right to workplace democracy @technology
I don’t think that’s true, at least not given the classical definition found here on Wikipedia. In general, I think John Locke embodies liberalism really well, and he believed in a natural right to life, liberty, and property. So to me, property has been a foundational part of liberalism since its creation.
Then again, a lot of people use “liberal” to essentially be the same as “leftist,” meaning anyone left of center. But I think that’s silly, because in my eyes and using the academic definition of liberalism, both the Democratic Party and Republican Party have strong liberal roots, and they’re different in where they deviate from that (Democrats are weak on property rights and free markets, Republicans are weak on civil liberties and secularism).
If you’re anti-capitalist, by definition you’re not a liberal IMO. And I think most people who claim to be anti-capitalist aren’t actually anti-capitalist (can’t speak for you though), they’re just frustrated at our corrupted form of capitalism. A purer form of capitalism (less protectionism, i.e. fewer IP protections, fewer options to limit liability, etc) accompanied with a healthy safety net (e.g. something like UBI) and worker protections is probably more than adequate to most who espouse anti-capitalist sentiment.
It is exactly people’s right to property that rules out capitalism. The principle behind property is getting the positive and negative fruits of your labor. The capitalist employer-employee relationship has the employer appropriating 100% of the positive and negative fruits of workers’ labor while employees receive 0% of the property rights to the produced output and liabilities for the used-up inputs. The only way for workers to get the fruits of their labor is in worker coops @technology
Good? Even if Tesla wasn’t shit it’s probably for the best if one company doesn’t make up the majority of an industry.
And normally this would be good for Tesla as it’d indicate the industry is growing a lot. So even if they aren’t most of it their total sales would probably increase.
Surprisingly their sales have actually gone down YoY, and considering the hugely growing EV market, that is hard to do.
Idk, the EV market has stagnated quite a bit, which is why used EVs are getting a lot cheaper. They just don’t have the range for broad market appeal, so those who want them largely have them.
It’s still growing, but a lot of EVs are sitting on the lots longer instead of being a waitlist. Essentially, supply has caught up with demand.
I wouldn’t say supply has caught up with demand, there’s a lot of other factors that contribute to people WANTING an EV, but being aware that it’s not feasible yet for them due to things like average price, charging access issues, etc.
That’s a demand issue then. The supply has saturated demand at current prices, so prices need to come down to align with demand at lower price brackets.
But demand is sti higher, it’s just mitigating factors, I want an EV but I live in an apartment so I can’t easily charge it, so I went with a hybrid instead as an in-between till I own a home and the infrastructure and battery tech improves.
Tesla will probably be a case study one day in how to get the lead in a market that is hard to break into and somehow squander it.
Are we all pretending that the investment in Tesla was organic and for the company?
You guys have seen the man with creepy world leaders. Multiple countries investing in and pumping Tesla stock to get favors from Elon is PRETTY BLATANTLY what’s going on.
the problem is tesla basically got in early and did literally nothing to actually innovate and improve
They did that prior to Musk getting involved.
i saw a Hyundai Ioniq6 this morning was like, damn! They have great performance, great reviews, and great warranties. they’re nice on the inside, too.
can’t remember ever thinking that about a Tesla
I saw a KIA the other day that I was surprised looked as slick as it did. Decided to look into it and saw a lot of positive reviews from owners. Was refreshing to see, but definitely surprising. The market is definitely changing and evolving. Tesla isn’t the only game in town.
exactly. next to every other car company, Tesla looks like it’s been standing still for years.
and that’s not even considering the toxic association Musk brings…
A couple of years ago KIA hired new designers and changed their logo, they basically turned from being the butt of a joke to one of the hottest car makers around.
I weirdly love their logo.
KN
I didn’t know Nine Inch Nails was making cars. It’s a big change but I know Trent and Atticus can get it right
Nothing weird about it
Kia poached their designers from Audi of all places.
I have a friend who got a brand new EV6 and LOVES IT. He’s the absolute last person I’d expect to love Kias, his previous car was a Lexus SUV. And he loves everything about his EV6 and would buy it again ig. So yeah, the company does seem to be different these days
I have a 2017 ioniq hybrid and I’ve been happy with it.
I was referring to a 2024 Ioniq6. I saw this and was obsessed all day. This car was hot. I especially liked its backside.
It’s an automotive design trend I’ve seen for 2 decades in the Mercedes CLS and CLA series, and even as far back as the original Infiniti i35 back in the mid-90s. The whole body of the car is just one big arc. I love it. It”s so elegant and sporty.
Not a fan of the Ioniq6 design personally, but I know where you’re coming from; I’m obsessed with the Abarth 500e Scorpionissima in acid green! 🤤
It reminds me of old Porsches. It just looks sporty as hell!
I have a great deal of experience of Porsche’s. I actually hate them. They’re expensive, impossible to maintain, and extraordinarily uncomfortable. I believe these cars are far more enjoyable to drive and own.
I don’t doubt that they aren’t ideal for everyday commuting. I was talking about how they look.
This is not surprising. When Tesla started out they had not much competition. Now that all the other carmakers have entered the market it is much harder to maintain their lead. Tesla losing market share was pretty much to be expected and Musk alienating their customers and the laughable Cybertruck certainly did not help.
When Tesla started out they had not much competition.
Half the joke of the company was how they stepped in and bought a bunch of the EV-1’s patents and plant infrastructure for a song, then spun around and sold EV production credits to the Big 3 auto companies so they could greenwash the SUV industry. Had GE simply kept turning out EV-1s, they’d have cleaned up during the late Bush Era gas price explosion. Instead, Musk got top dollar to churn out heavily subsidized sports cars while racking in government subsidies and deposits on cars that wouldn’t be built for half a decade.
Musk alienating their customers and the laughable Cybertruck certainly did not help.
Americans have a downright neurotic fixation on big trucks. I don’t think his Cybertruck idea was necessarily all that bad on its face. But he’s so fucking slow, he’s such a shitty product manager, and he was so heavily derailed by the promise of Robotaxis that Ford and Rivian beat him to EV Truck delivery.
Now his brand new flagship vehicle is barely more than a punchline.
The lack of CarPlay/Android Auto makes Tesla a non-starter
I honestly don’t care about that. For me, it’s price, both for purchase and if I ever need to replace the battery pack.
Used Bolts and Leafs are right in the price range I’m looking at, and I only want it for a commuter, so I don’t need a ton of range or a vast charging network. I imagine a lot of other consumers feel similarly.
Imagine a $5-10k commuter vehicle with little/no fuel cost. You could have another vehicle for longer range trips if you need to.
Yup. I’m considering getting an ebike, but that’s not going to be pleasant in the winter. I honestly don’t need much, I just need to get to work and back, and maybe grab a few groceries on the way.
This deserves a pay package in the billions.
I’m sure there will be someone to lick up Elon’s Nazi tears
giving elon another bonus should fix it
I’m still absolutely flabbergasted they gave him that bonus. Like, legitimately, what success has the company had recently that was worth it?
Its all good, Elon got paid.
If that was the cost of BEVs getting a toehold in the auto industry…
… Nah that still sucks, bad deal
It was a joke. The fact he got paid for doing nothing to right what is a failing car company is a condemnation of the stock market.
Elon Musk Will Reinstate Neo-Nazi on Twitter https://lamag.com/internet/elon-musk-will-reinstate-neo-nazi-on-twitter
Elon Musk expresses support for antisemitic post on X, calling it “the actual truth” https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-antisemitic-comments-x-post-actual-truth/
Can’t send links to actual tweets as the site is terrible now and won’t let me enter it without an account. The second link is notable for promoting anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, like the Great Replacement.
That’s crazy they had above 50%, though I guess they were the only EV-only company in North America (I believe?).
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“EV sales exceeded expectations during a record-breaking quarter,” said Cox’s industry insights director Stephanie Valdez Streaty.
Much of the growth in electric vehicle sales is due to new kit from General Motors, Cox said, with additional strong showings from Ford, Hyundai and Kia.
A recent study on EV adoption from Cox reiterates those points and predicts US car buyers are keen on electric tech.
Increased competition “is leading to continued price pressure, helping push EV adoption slowly higher,” she opined.
2024 hasn’t been a great one for Tesla, which has seen worsening sales declines, an arson attack, mass layoffs, fallout from the Cybertruck launch and more lawsuits than you can shake a stick at - and all that’s before the troubles owner Elon Musk has caused for the company.
It’s not clear how far that market share could dip in coming years as EV buyers begin to migrate away from startups toward companies with established histories.
The original article contains 638 words, the summary contains 156 words. Saved 76%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
arson attack
😮 What? I missed some juicy news, I see.
Good, tesla looks like a shit.
If I wanted a death trap I’d buy a Ford Pinto!
Credit where credit is due, Tesla makes some of the safest cars on the road if we exclude the Cybertruck.
What other company sells cars that self-drive themselves into fatal collisions?
I’m talking about crash ratings but as far as I know actual collisions data is in favor of Tesla vs non-self driving/assisted driving cars.
because that 3 1/2 ton monstrosity will absolutely demolish anything it collides with.
The cybertruck seems ultra safe for the driver. RIP to who gets hit by it, though
It actually doesn’t absorb the impact well because it’s too rigid
not to mention that having 3 1/2 tons slamming into you at however-many mph tends to end poorly, regardless of the crumple zones on your car and especially when it’s mounted that high up.
