Retractable flush door handles without an obvious, usable, and effective manual override option are one of the most stupid and user hostile "innovations" ever.
Designers effectively said: "Lets save 0.03 on our Coefficient of Drag, add unnecessary weight of extra motors and control complexity, and make sure whenever the 12V supply is cut or a bit of ice is in the mechanism, everyone inside is trapped —— it'll look cool".
China is already looking at banning them [0] because of the difficulty they present to emergency crews trying to rescue passengers.
And while I used to admire Musk and defend him here, this now seems like just another "innovation" by a sociopath who cares only about how cool it might make him look, and nevermind the people burned to death trapped inside his cars. At least the Ford Pinto exploding gas tank debacle was for profit [1], this is just one man's ego.
It wasn't even about those things. It was about having cool electronic door handles like a spaceship. If it was about those things that would imply a level of intentionality in the design that goes beyond whatever happened here.
Since you're attributing the design of all Tesla features to Musk, would you compliment him on the Tesla Model 3 being reported as the "safest new car on the market," acheiving an overall EuroNCAP score of 359/400?
yes, as I mentioned, I have posted similar strong compliments/defenses of Musk in the past, including on here.
I'd also point out that while one person can drive design of the most salient features (such as a noticeably different door-handle), the entire design of a modern automobile and its systems are obviously not from only one person. I also attribute the overall requirement for high crash-test results to Musk, but this sort of anti-safety feature shows his drive is not for safety, but notoriety.
If I were in your position, I'd also actively practice with family using the alternate handles from inside so it is ingrained in your mind sufficiently to recall in an emergency; I hope no one ever needs it, but...
It's really too bad what he's changed into or shown himself to be; I used to really want to own a Tesla, now I would take or keep a free one.
No, I did NOT say the safety features were not due to Musk, I stated clearly I believe he was responsible for that safety initiative, just as I thought him responsible for the door handles, but I doubt he had much input in the detailed design of either, and OBVIOUSLY the design of a whole modern automotive crash safety system is more than the work of one person.
More importantly, the juxtaposition of the two features makes clear his motivation is primarily a collection of features that Musk thinks will make Musk seem cool, which is a very different thing than trying to make the safest cars in all respects to protect his customers.
As for when and why my opinion of Musk changed, again it changed years before 2024, and was cemented when he argued publicly with one of his software engineers and revealed a level of cluelessness showing his previous reputation as some kind of tech genius was a curated sham.
You seem to suggest it is wrong of people to reconsider their opinion of Musk around 2024 when he claims to be a "Free Speech Absolutist" yet used his ownership of the largest social media platform and his massive fortune to actively promote proto-fascists in the US and around the world to convert democracies into racist authoritarian states.
It is not wrong to shun people who work to introduce intolerance into a society — in fact, the only thing that an open tolerant society can not tolerate if it wants to survive is intolerance itself [0]. While I was not one of them, I am perfectly happy to see people changing their opinion of Musk due to his actions around 2024. If you have not, you are not looking closely enough; please do so.
The only point being demonstrated here is that you fail to see the explicitly authoritarian actions of the parties Musk supports in the US (Republicans), Germany (AfD), Hungary (Fidesz), etc., and do not understand that in democracies the branches of government (legislative, judicial, executive), and the institutions of society (press, academy, finance, industry, sport, religion, social) are all independent. In contrast authoritarians coerce or corrupt these institutions to serve the executive.
If you can't see those authoritarian actions by the parties Musk supports, you are either willfully ignorant or just plain obtuse, or a willing authoritarian proto-fascist.
And no, your point is still wrong; there is nothing wrong with changing ones opinion of a public figure when he comes out supporting authoritarianism
I am merely deeply disappointed to discover he was not even close to the person I thought he was, either in technological skill or wanting to actually improve humanity.
His tech skills turn out to be largely taking credit for work of others and marketing himself as a tech 'genius', and it turns out he is more interested in implementing autocracy than in actually creating an abundant future for humanity. Even with all that wealth, he takes the easy way out. Sad, really
> he was not even close to the person I thought he was, either in technological skill or wanting to actually improve humanity.
He was the chief product architect of Tesla's first production vehicle, and he is the chief engineer of SpaceX.
Here's what experts said about him
> "Elon and the Propulsion department are leading development of the SpaceX engines, particularly Raptor. I offer my 2 cents to help from time to time"
-- Tom Mueller, regarded as one of the foremost spacecraft propulsion experts in the world, who owns many patents for propulsion technologies.
> "Elon is brilliant. He’s involved in just about everything. He understands everything. If he asks you a question, you learn very quickly not to go give him a gut reaction.
> "He wants answers that get down to the fundamental laws of physics. One thing he understands really well is the physics of the rockets. He understands that like nobody else. The stuff I have seen him do in his head is crazy.
He can get in discussions about flying a satellite and whether we can make the right orbit and deliver Dragon at the same time and solve all these equations in real time. It’s amazing to watch the amount of knowledge he has accumulated over the years."
-- Kevin Watson (developed the avionics for Falcon 9 and Dragon. He previously managed the Advanced Computer Systems and Technologies Group within the Autonomous Systems Division at NASA's Jet Propulsion laboratory.)
> “He’s obviously skilled at all those different functions, but certainly what really drives him and where his passion really is, is his role as CTO,” or chief technology officer. Basically his role as chief designer and chief engineer. That’s the part of the job that really plays to his strengths."
> "What's really remarkable to me is the breadth of his knowledge. I mean I've met a lot of super super smart people but they're usually super super smart on one thing and he's able to have conversations with our top engineers about the software, and the most arcane aspects of that and then he'll turn to our manufacturing engineers and have discussions about some really esoteric welding process for some crazy alloy and he'll just go back and forth and his ability to do that across the different technologies that go into rockets cars and everything else he does."
--Garrett Reisman, engineer and former NASA astronaut, Professor of Astronautical Engineering at University of Southern California.
> "Elon is both the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Technology Officer of SpaceX, so of course he does more than just ‘some very technical work’. He is integrally involved in the actual design and engineering of the rocket, and at least touches every other aspect of the business (but I would say the former takes up much more of his mental real estate). Elon is an engineer at heart, and that’s where and how he works best."
-- Josh Boehm, the former Head of Software Quality Assurance at SpaceX.
> "Elon is the chief engineer in name and reality."
-- Eric Berger, space journalist and Ars Technica's senior space editor.
Some people "waste time" recognising superb acheivements of people they don't know. This happens a lot in science and technology, where a single individual can contribute a tremendous amount to advance human knowledge and technology.
Other people waste time criticising people they don't know simply because those people have different political opinions.
The former behaviour comes naturally to me. People who do the latter need to be pulled up on it.
He reduced the cost of space travel by 10x and restored America's re-usable vehicle capability after decades of government mis-management.
He spearheaded the transition to sustainable transportation by building a brand new car startup which is now the most valuable automaker in the world (by market cap).
He has demonstrated viable brain-computer interfaces in humans.
He co-founded the most important AI company in the world.
He brought free speech back to Twitter, ending a dystopian era of government-coordinated censorship.
He reduced Las Vegas commute times from 45 minutes to 2 minutes by starting a tunnelling company from scratch, developing new electric tunnelling machines with continuous capabililty, and building tunnels.
I agree that it's crucial that in democracy, the press, academy, finance, industry, sport, religion, social should all be independent.
That, unfortunately, is simply not the case at the moment. A good example is Biden excluding Tesla from EV-related events and discussions (and making the laughable claim that GM was leading the EV industry). Or the Biden-state Democrat-appointed judge McCormick who intervened in the Musk's X deal, and who cancelled Musk's pay package.
Musk believes in libertarian, small-state values. In fact he intervened recently to reduce the size and power of the American state system. That's what libertarians do. That's not what authoritarians do. It's CERTAINLY not what fascists do (one aspect of fascism is large, totalitarian state apparatus)
I'm glad you agree democracy requires independence in the three branches of govt and various branches of society.
Which is why Musk's "Libertarian" presentation does not match reality.
Musk spent more than a quarter BILLION dollars electing the most authoritarian person ever to occupy the chair of the US president, and now that the president Musk helped elect is actively using the power of the state to take control of corporations and threaten and coerce everyone in academia, journalism, media, and even comedians, Musk is not even posting protests on his own social media network to such massively anti-libertarian actions; he's egging it on. Musk is either the dumbest Libertarian ever to be suckered into putting $250 Billion into an anti-Libertarian candidate, or you are being deceived.
As for Biden's relationship with Musk, would you really expect the most pro-union President in the last half-century to actively promote one of the most flagrantly anti-union and worker-hostile corporate executives in recent history? I agree it may not have been the smartest move by Biden to so blatantly shun Musk, but.
As for the DOGE efforts, they were most definitely NOT supporting small-state values, they actively cost the govt money, and the primary reason was the most massive data raid ever, taking most of the Social Security Administration, Dept Of Labor, Dept of Educ., and other databases onto uncontrolled servers outside the govt system, attempting a data fusion unauthorized by ANY representatives of the people. Considering his relationship with Peter Theil running Palantir, who is openly authoritarian, believing democracy is incompatible with freedom, I'd put at best even odds the data hasn't been exfiltrated to the most authoritarian technology effort ever in the democratic world.
Musk is either an extremely bad libertarian or none at all.
> he president Musk helped elect is actively using the power of the state to take control of corporations and threaten and coerce everyone in academia, journalism, media, and even comedians.
Coercing who, exactly? Do you have any examples?
Seems odd that an alleged authoritarian president would massively reduce the power of the state (DOGE), doesn't it?
> As for the DOGE efforts, they were most definitely NOT supporting small-state values, they actively cost the govt money,
Not in the long term, they won't. Reduce the size of the state = reduce the cost of the state.
Peter Thiel is a libertarian. He was misconstrued by some as "authoritarian" based on a 2009 essay which included the phrase "I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible" -- the sentence is misunderstood as anti-democratic. What Thiel instead feared is "that mass democracy, driven by emotion, resentment, and short-termism, will deliberately or accidentally dismantle the freedoms that underpin innovation and growth"
>>Coercing who, exactly? Do you have any examples?
Seriously? #2
We now have the President and Commander In Chief (elected with the essential help of a quarter-$$billion++ of Elon Musk's money) just addressed an unprecedented gathering of Generals declaring the most important war is in "[US cities .....That's a war too. It's a war from within"
The most important potential war is not Russia, China, or even Transnational Drug Cartels, it is US citizens
And the Secretary of War also addressed the same group telling them that "We untie the hands of our war fighters to intimidate, demoralize, hunt and kill the enemies of our country. No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement, just common sense, maximum lethality and authority for war fighters,"
So, the very top leadership of the country is declaring to the top militery that greatest enemy is US citizens and the military will be deployed to US cities to fight, and without rules of engagement, so they can more effectively "intimidate, demoralize, hunt and kill" everyone, including those US citizens and residents.
This is the most authoritarian, and frankly straight-up fascist move I've seen in the US in my lifetime, if not ever.
Please explain how these actions (again, directly supported by massive amounts of money and effort from Elon Musk) are in any way "Libertarian". Seriously.
>>Coercing who, exactly? Do you have any examples?
Seriously?
How can you ignore or justify as not authoritarian all the newspeople and COMEDIANS who Trump has coerced the networks into cancelling? All the spurious lawsuits and threats of abusive government action against any org broadcasting non-Trump-favorable news? Check the current abuse of the DOJ to go against anyone involved in investigating his crimes, the unilaterial userpation of Congress' power of the purse with the daily tariff announcements?
DOGE is massively reducing the power of the state? NO, (aside from teh data raid) it is removing career professionals who might govern competently instead of loyally to the Chief Executive. That is the opposite of reducing government power, it is concentrating it.
DOGE saving money? Nope again, every week it gets worse. They are literally recalling fired workers who have been on payroll doing nothing since April because the functions cannot be performed without them. Six months of paid leave without even firing people is the opposite of efficiency with payroll money.
Theil Libertarian? Are you serious? He is building Palantir, which is the largest surveillance company ever, and integrating it into every government function he can. His friend Ellison also stated 'people will be on their best behavior when they are under cameras all the time'. Those are not the statements or actions of Libertarians, and any Libertarian sentiments are cover at best.
Seriously, look and reassess. You are providing a fine example of how motivated reasoning and enthusiasm can lead to deeply wrong conclusions
edit: correct "unpaid leave" to "paid leave"
Plus, another reminder, Elon supported ALL of this with $250 - $400 million. That is not the action of a libertarian
6 minutes before this comment you proclaimed yourself a Tesla fanboy, admitted the door handles are unsafe, and now you are trying to deflect the criticism to point out the EuroNCAP results?
Would the EuroNCAP stat help you in any way if your kids get trapped on the back of your car while you are unconscious and burn to death because they don't know how to operate the handle? That's the issue, it doesn't matter the EuroNCAP if such a stupid decision has and will kill people, statistically it's very improbable it will affect you but it will affect someone just like you.
Designers effectively said: "Lets save 0.03 on our Coefficient of Drag, add unnecessary weight of extra motors and control complexity, and make sure whenever the 12V supply is cut or a bit of ice is in the mechanism, everyone inside is trapped —— it'll look cool".
China is already looking at banning them [0] because of the difficulty they present to emergency crews trying to rescue passengers.
And while I used to admire Musk and defend him here, this now seems like just another "innovation" by a sociopath who cares only about how cool it might make him look, and nevermind the people burned to death trapped inside his cars. At least the Ford Pinto exploding gas tank debacle was for profit [1], this is just one man's ego.
[0] https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a66052483/china-possible-b...
[1] https://www.autosafety.org/ford-pinto-fuel-tank/