← Back to context

Comment by jack_riminton

21 hours ago

Electrek’s ‘reporting’ has proven so one-sided that I take all their stories with a bucket of salt. Even if the truck has been a flop I doubt their whole battery program has been. Perhaps they’re rejigging suppliers and pausing whilst they get ready to ramp up cyber cab production lines

> get ready to ramp up cyber cab production lines

The word on the street is this is only 2 weeks out.

Right after fulfilling the roadster orders.

And right before the Dyson sphere that will power Grok AI is deployed.

And what evidence do you base those assumptions on? According to the journalists at electrek despite Tesla having capacity to manufacture 250k cybertrucks per year, they're only selling 20-25k per year

  • I actually get a kick out of Eletrek’s roasting of Elon and Tesla, but if you read a few of their articles, it’s clear they don’t like him. Lots of opinions and editorializing in the articles. I have no problem with that, you just have to realize where they are coming from and base your interpretation accordingly

    • The reason for that is actually very funny. Electrek guy (Fred) was one of the main propagandist for Tesla's cult - he 'earned' 2 free Tesla Roadsters for his convincing enough people to buy a Tesla.

      It was only once he realized that he has been duped and those will never materialize that the coverage turned negative.

    • Its not that they dont like him, its more of Editor was big believer until Tesla scammed him out of half a $mil worth of fake roadsters that never materialized.

      8 replies →

Yeah, I'm getting the same feeling. They've announced that semi will use 4680 and Cyber Cab as well, right? If that's the case, this would point to a specific supplier issue rather than something more general.

It isn't something that I've looked into in depth, but it feels like a lot of the discussion isn't hitting the mark here.

Almost all these articles always read like hit pieces. Find a way to spin the story in the worst possible way.

The haters on here are ridiculous. If everyone who ever had a product that failed in the market was called a fraud on HN then probably almost everyone would be. SpaceX failed on their first three launches. All the haters here would have voted to shut it all down. Glad Elon's able to recover from business failures without going to the HN comments section to find out what he should do next.

  • Ya it is terrible and very much not what HN is about. Elon has delivered so many things that to doubt him is pure stupidity.

    • Elon has done sufficiently impressive things which is why it’s sad that he has to make up a whole bunch of new things to try to impress people. Being the richest man alive is not enough he also has to be the best gamer as well. If he lies about small things that don’t matter then how could I trust him to tell the truth on important things that do matter.

      3 replies →

    • That’s the ironic part. HN is supposed to be about tech startups and you’d think people would be rooting for the guy who is trying to do game changing tech.

      I can’t tell if it sour grapes or just the left doing their “you must hate anyone who disagrees with you politically”.

      6 replies →

I honestly don’t follow this much but I doubt that production ramp up is the Cybercab’s long pole when they’ll need a significant number of market approvals for FSD to reach critical mass.

[flagged]

  • Funny how similar sibling comment is. There’s definitely no anti-tesla brigading happening.

    https://imgur.com/a/bPnYwja

    • It's gross that it has come to HN as well. EDS in full swing here, presumably partially bots. All the negative articles are from the same few "journalists". They find a way to spin crumbs of news into the end for Tesla.

    • It's just a popular opinion. Not everything is a conspiracy.

      HN has lots of people who can think for themselves and lots who can't.

When somebody is siding with reality, especially a media source, that's a reason to listen to them more not less.

And when it's straight up facts easily verifiable from others sources, pretending that it's not based in reality is just sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "la la la la" which is something that even very few 12 year olds do.

  • The only fact was about the contract which is like a sentence of the article. Then it goes into a guessing game on what it could mean, with the most negative spin possible.