2/24/2026 at 7:03:15 PM
Even ignoring Musk's shenanigans, anyone buying a new EV may need to reconsider whether Tesla is in it (supporting consumer-owned EVs) for the long haul. Recent moves, and even quotes from Elon, suggest they might not be.by bdcravens
2/24/2026 at 7:31:06 PM
quote from Tesla latest earnings call, at 04 min.."Because we're really moving into a future that is based on autonomy and so if you're interested in buying a Model S and X, now would be the time to order it, because we expect to wind down S and X production in next quarter and basically stop production of Model S and X next quarter. We'll obviously continue to support the Model S and X programs for as long as people have the vehicles, but we're gonna take the Model S and X production space in our Fremont factory and convert that into an Optimus factory, which will... with the long-term goal of having 1 million units a year of Optimus robots in the current S/X space in Fremont."
by Betelbuddy
2/24/2026 at 7:55:22 PM
I genuinely don't understand, is the Optimus real? Isn’t there a like 10 to 1 ratio of Boston Robotics demos to Optimus demos? Has it ever been verified to actually do anything?Boston Robotics robots are over there doing backflips and the only thing I’ve seen Optimus do is in extremely controlled environments.
by techblueberry
2/24/2026 at 8:08:48 PM
I second this. Is there anyone who actually believes Optimus is going to be a success and has any sort of data to back that up?I'm not in robotics, but I look at humanoid robots and, while incredible examples of engineering know-how, they seem to be a long way from useful in commercial applications. Am I jhust ignorant of their true value? Seems like all I ever see them doing is parkour.
by RyanOD
2/24/2026 at 8:45:15 PM
Optimus could do really well if they had all the smartest robotics engineers working on it...But it seems that ~80% of the smart people I know refuse to work for Musk on principle, and the remaining 20% prefer to work somewhere that pays well (Musk companies do not).
End result is he has a team of mediocre engineers working on it which is why their demos appear years behind some competitors like Boston dynamics and Unitree.
I think the same is happening to Tesla cars (not much innovation in the last few years).
by londons_explore
2/25/2026 at 9:04:17 AM
I mean, it well be true that Tesla and SpaceX are populated by mediocre engineers.I doubt it, considering their accomplishments.
by Gud
2/25/2026 at 3:58:28 PM
What has Tesla accomplished lately? I mean, within the last decade?They certainly have accomplished amazing things. They had a lead that even five years ago was considered insurmountable. But they've made at best incremental progress, the kind made by mediocre engineers. The only novelty was the Cybertruck, which didn't live up to expectations and didn't open up any new domains.
SpaceX is still advancing, though even that is getting a bit of an asterisk if they can't get Starship to fulfill its promise.
by jfengel
2/25/2026 at 6:28:30 PM
I suspect they had an amazing team, but the last few years the best people have been departing and they are being replaced by mediocre people due to Musks involvement in politics.by londons_explore
2/25/2026 at 1:06:21 PM
> I second this. Is there anyone who actually believes Optimus is going to be a success and has any sort of data to back that up?If there was no competition (there is), and he met the price envelope he's talking about (Cybertruck suggests he won't), I can buy the idea that there's a market opportunity for a few tens of millions of humanoid robots which are even just 5% AI and 95% remote workers in VR headsets, just because this means you can get cheap 3rd-world wages running your "made in America*" factories.
But there is competition, and I don't think he'll meet his price target.
As for the AI: even when I forecast under the assumption of continued improvements of hardware and software, I see at least a ten year gap between any given level of self-driving car and a humanoid robot small enough and light enough to get into the driver's seat of a normal car and drive it to the same standard, and that's just for driving a car, not all the other things people like to imagine in a world where androids are good enough to generically replace human labour.
* insert any other nation as desired, it works in any place where wages are higher than the cheapest nation with reliable internet (modulo the TCO of the robot, which nobody knows yet).
This will lead to minds getting blown as all those "foreigners coming here and taking our jobs" whose deportation people demand, are now "working from home in a different country and still taking our jobs" and the US in particular will have to wrangle with how this is a first amendment issue because remote control is just speech isn't it?
And when we consider how the current AI boom seems to have come with a total lack of even the most basic security considerations in their usage, these robots, wether** AI or remote controlled, are absolutely going to get turned into Mr-Stabby-the-totally-deniable-assassin.
** pun not intended, but when I noticed the misspelling I decided the implications still worked as a joke.
by ben_w
2/24/2026 at 9:31:00 PM
Elon's hype level over Optimus practically off the charts. He has profit projections that have Optimus be effectively all of GDP in the future. Say what you want about Elon, but he does put his money where his mouth is and I believe he will try to manufacture robots. Also, the S and X models are old and their market segment is heavily saturated at this point so it makes sense for Tesla to exit those model lines.Optimus is also a bit of a "squirrel!" for the market that he likes to talk about whenever sales figures at Tesla start flagging. Meme stocks only work as long as people still believe in infinite exponential growth.
by jandrese
2/24/2026 at 10:50:42 PM
> Also, the S and X models are old and their market segment is heavily saturated at this point so it makes sense for Tesla to exit those model lines.Car companies typically invest in new models in the same segment in order to stay competitive with the other car companies.
by zardo
2/25/2026 at 2:11:23 AM
Tesla is not your average car company.by jandrese
2/24/2026 at 8:56:18 PM
Is there any evidence there is any kind of market a humanoid robot at all?(Regardless, from what I've seen, the Chinese will own this segment too.)
by JKCalhoun
2/24/2026 at 10:27:10 PM
Right. How many people actually want a remotely monitored robot collecting personal data, that will likely also require a hefty monthly subscription?by spprashant
2/24/2026 at 10:38:40 PM
And he's talking about an eventual price point of $30K a robot. So a bit high for early adopter middle class folks who are just curious.by jimmydddd
2/24/2026 at 8:22:57 PM
There is some value in producing a lot of solid hardware, but nowhere even close to Tesla's absurd valuation.I think they are perfectly capable of writing software to drive the robot - if Musk doesn't stick his head in like he did with LIDAR/FSD and impose some stupid requirement that handicaps the product.
by SR2Z
2/24/2026 at 9:35:05 PM
But the whole shtick with Optimus is that they aren't writing software. It's supposed to be all LLM training so when you buy your robot you can give it orders like "do the dishes", "clean the gutters", "dig a backyard pool for me", or "build me another Optimus" and you can go off to do whatever while it completes the task.Elon thinks it would be too expensive to have to write code for every task you might ask one of these to do, they want it to be fully autonomous.
Their engineers aren't behind keyboards typing C++, they're wearing VR headsets and feeding the data to a LLM, although even that is probably too specific for Elon's long term plans. Obviously he doesn't want to have to have people repeat actions hundreds of times before the dumb robots figure it out. Especially for "simple" tasks like serving drinks at press events.
by jandrese
2/25/2026 at 9:16:00 PM
I feel like society is decades away from being comfortable with "you can go off to do whatever while it completes the task"...regardless of whether or not the tech is there.by RyanOD
2/25/2026 at 10:19:08 PM
It's just the AI singularity discussion again. AI Techbros insist it will be here before the end of the decade. Like you I am skeptical about it. I tend to think AI capability is already plateauing and ever more effort is going to be spent chasing smaller and smaller returns.I'm experiencing AI that is very fast, but also kinda dumb and thoughtless.
by jandrese
2/25/2026 at 12:54:44 PM
You say this like it's a bad idea. These VLA models are going to be even more disruptive than the coding models because otherwise it's prohibitively expensive to set up an industrial robot for most uses.My main doubts about Tesla's plan are that they will sell enough of these to get benefits of scale or that Musk will force the engineering team to "skip lidar" again and compromise the design.
by SR2Z
2/25/2026 at 5:09:43 PM
It's yet another gamble where if it works out he will look like a visionary and if it doesn't he'll look like an idiot. The exact sort of bet that Elon never fails to go for.by jandrese
2/24/2026 at 9:02:42 PM
But how would we evaluate "perfectly capable" without evidence, there's just been no evidence they've done anything so far right? Am I missing something? I guess looking closer it was only announced four years ago. But it seems like it's only been smoke and mirrors so far.by techblueberry
2/25/2026 at 7:02:42 AM
I think FSD is very impressive, even if it is still pretty unsafe.Tesla clearly has at least some AI chops, and if Musk can bullshit for long enough, they might have enough time to make these robots more than just props.
by SR2Z
2/24/2026 at 8:26:44 PM
And China is likely to do to Tesla robots what they’ve done to the cars. I assume the bans will be incoming, because the US can’t have millions of Chinese kung fu robots sitting about pouring tea, waiting for critical mass.by richardw
2/24/2026 at 8:33:42 PM
Optimus is a longer horizon promise that allows Elon to keep kicking the "can of untold profits" down the road. Tesla car hype has fizzled, robotaxi is currently fizzling, so the new promise is optimus. Elon sells dreams and visions, not really products.Tesla absolutely cannot keep it's valuation without a promise for it's delusional stock holders or actual massive revenue streams.
by WarmWash
2/24/2026 at 8:35:06 PM
This it could be the real strategy. Because the more credible promises you make, the more valuable is your company. If sales of cars are spiraling down, then what promises remain there to keep valuation ?by rvnx
2/24/2026 at 9:51:47 PM
Accuracy.> Elon sells dreams and visions, not really products.
Do you want me to pull out a list, or can you google it for yourself?
Sure, he also sells dreams and visions. Sure, all the dumb money is going to regret it once the smart money dumps on them.
Yet, claiming he doesn't really sell products (and or services, which he also does) is absolutely ridiculous.
by 5o1ecist
2/24/2026 at 11:46:05 PM
I think that the point of the comment was not that he does not sell any products, but that he predominantly sells dreams & visions, if you use TSLA market cap as a guide. If you look strictly at the products he sells, the valuation of his company ought to be somewhere between 50% and 100% of Ford. By that analysis it seems like TSLA is about 97% hopes and dreams.by rootusrootus
2/24/2026 at 8:52:47 PM
The hype to fizzle cycle is shortened with each new dream and approaching zero, which is the true value of the company.by calmworm
2/24/2026 at 9:05:30 PM
You are correct to be suspicious, but don't be impressed by backflips. Those are just for show. Doing "real work" is the test. As is doing real work for a compelling price.by MetaWhirledPeas
2/24/2026 at 7:33:43 PM
So no parts when they are eventually needed!by illwrks
2/24/2026 at 7:36:18 PM
Do manufacturers tend to pump out parts for old models after they are superseded by newer ones?by iknowstuff
2/24/2026 at 8:09:19 PM
Yes, because they make money selling the parts, and there are warranty requirements that are hard to fulfill if you don't have parts.Often after a decade or so, companies will sell the designs to dedicated parts makers. For example, Volvo has Volvo Classic Parts, and they even have a reman program, and will even 3D print parts not available. Mercedes has Mercedes Classic Parts. Chrysler has MOPAR, etc.
Here you can browse parts for a 1968 Mercedes SEL: https://classicparts.mbusa.com/c-280sel-223
If you are a business, the costs of designing the part has already been paid, if you can sell the design and get some royalty payments, why wouldn't you turn those old plans into cash?
And of course there is a huge industry of Chinese clones and other suppliers that will provide replacement parts that are not genuine.
Be prepared to pay, though :)
by carefree-bob
2/25/2026 at 4:54:24 PM
This reminds me that in the early days of Tesla they were complaining about the difficulty of competing on pricing with established automakers because they subsidize the cost of the vehicle at sale with profits from selling parts/service - a stream of revenue unavailable to a startupby iknowstuff
2/24/2026 at 7:41:50 PM
It’s still possible to order new and original parts for SAAB models, almost 20 years after they went under. The spare parts are made by a separate company which is still going.by larsnystrom
2/24/2026 at 7:38:54 PM
IIRC, by law manufacturers are required to maintain parts and service for vehicles for a minimum of 10 years. Whether superseded, discontinued, whatever.by rootusrootus
2/24/2026 at 7:43:36 PM
But what happens when Musk decides the law doesn't apply to him...by afavour
2/24/2026 at 7:45:47 PM
The law will adapt, same as it adapted for OpenAI/Anthropic when they started doing piracy to train their LLMsNvidia started funding piracy sites too; https://torrentfreak.com/nvidia-contacted-annas-archive-to-s...
If you are billionaire+ it's "legal", and if not at least financially worth it + almost never punishment on management.
If you are worth xx'000 you personally go to jail, you get into very big troubles, and get ruined.
by rvnx
2/24/2026 at 7:55:15 PM
No? The law is just the law. But until someone actually gets a judge to rule that what they did is illegal...by hvb2
2/24/2026 at 8:33:36 PM
Buying a 30M USD mansion to the daughter of the judge is going to fix that.by rvnx
2/24/2026 at 9:45:54 PM
In a banana republic.by brnt
2/24/2026 at 8:56:33 PM
Do you actually look at the current US landscape and think “the law is just the law” for the rich and poor alike?Getting a judge to rule on something is also part of that “the law is just the law” and it’s obvious that judges are more willing to rule on cases for the poor and powerless than the rich and connected.
by lovich
2/25/2026 at 12:24:07 PM
The point I was trying to make was that whether or not something is illegal is typically decided by a judge.Most of the things corporations do aren't as clear cut as a traffic violation. So in those cases, you only know if something is illegal when it's made it through the courts
by hvb2
2/24/2026 at 8:01:19 PM
This is an urban legend. Safety defects have to be remedied by the manufacturer for a period of 10 years, but that remedy doesn't have to involve replacement parts.https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/timereplcepartpollak12...
by wat10000
2/24/2026 at 8:52:19 PM
I agree, looks like you are correct. It seems that it is just one of those things that manufacturers have agreed to do voluntarily, in the absence of a specific law. I imagine they have calculated that the loss of goodwill from abandoning a product quickly would outweigh the cost savings (especially since there is so much sharing of parts that keeping a few specialty components on hand is not going to move the needle much).by rootusrootus
2/24/2026 at 9:57:35 PM
It’s not about goodwill. Selling parts is simply a good business. The margins at authorized dealers are crazy.by bgarbiak
2/24/2026 at 8:27:59 PM
Yes. Auto manufacturers tend to have contracts with different tiered automotive suppliers that have heavy-hitting production lines for current vehicles, and also maintain a 'service' department where these style of products are produced. The tools for producing these parts have really good lifetimes, and you can take the tooling and put it into whatever mold machine you have written the program for, or set it up for another machine.In my experience service departments are basically a large warehouse with a small set of assembly machines running at any given time where you are setting up time to produce some random part for a day or two and then change to something else, whereas the real production assembly lines are designed to produce as many of X part for the latest car as possible.
Several of the old mold machines where I worked that made parts for this service business ran DOS, with PCMCIA cards to load programs. I helped a process engineer get these PCMCIA cards working on his contraband laptop running win98 (obviously banned from the network) because we could never get them working with anything newer. This was in like 2021.
by hhh
2/24/2026 at 9:40:54 PM
It depends. Lots of parts are shared by multiple models or even companies so it may be the case that nobody has made for example a new water pump specifically for your car for 10 years, but the design is the same as the 2025 something else so you can just use that one. There are also warehouses with older parts that can last for years. You can also pull replacements from junked cars that have not been crushed yet. In some cases third parties manufacture replacement parts when the supply runs out, but those replacements are often of poor quality and sometimes are only vaguely shaped correctly and require extra work to actually fit on your vehicle. Keeping old cars running is a challenge, especially if the car was obscure when it was new.by jandrese
2/24/2026 at 8:59:11 PM
A lot of parts are refurbished too. Transmissions, differentials for example.by JKCalhoun
2/24/2026 at 7:38:42 PM
Their subcontractors do.by Qwertious
2/24/2026 at 7:40:15 PM
For traditional vehicles, there's typically a large marketplace of first-party and third-party auto parts for vehicles going back several years. Depends on the make and model, but usually yes.That said, Tesla is a very unusual automaker in most senses and I'm not sure what their aftermarket parts situation is.
by CodingJeebus
2/24/2026 at 8:20:34 PM
This is a concern for me not only for the Tesla but for the new Chinese manufacturers. When I've talked to owners of these cars (in other countries), the consensus seems to be "you use it for 5 years and then throw it away". Not because the car has poor build quality, but because there aren't local mechanics that can service it, it's impossible to find documentation such as torque specs and service procedures for anything but trivial stuff you'd find in an owner's manual, and it is very hard to find parts.It seems like an incredible waste to throw away a car after 5 years.
A big part of what I look for in a car is a long lasting manufacturer that publishes to end users technical and repair information, including part numbers and procedures, together with a healthy third party part supplier ecosystem and independent repair infrastructure.
That doesn't mean that information needs to be available for free or that the parts themselves are cheap -- Volvo parts are not cheap -- but they are available and the information, engine specifications, repair manuals and workshop manuals are available.
If you don't have that, I'm not interested in buying the car. A car is far too expensive to treat as a disposable consumer good. I'm worried that more and more, manufacturers are locking down their systems, putting information behind paywalls where you can't make your own backup copy, and doing things like adding DRM to their parts to prevent indy shops from working on them.
by carefree-bob
2/24/2026 at 9:50:36 PM
Wait, wait, don't tell me, let me guess: "The robots will make their own replacement parts," stated Musk.by CamperBob2
2/25/2026 at 6:12:17 AM
What is this supposed to mean in the sense of Tesla being in the car game for the long haul? They're stopping production of 2 of their oldest model cars, but they're continuing to make and sell their most popular models globally the 3 and the Y.The model S and X are their oldest most expensive models that aren't even sold everywhere in the world.
However the Model 3 and the Model Y are, of which the Model Y was the most popular car model sold globally of any manufacturer.
In Australia I see Model 3s and Model Ys everywhere. Stopping production of the S and the X, you wouldn't even notice it here.
by NoPicklez
2/24/2026 at 7:42:49 PM
So Tesla abandons cars ? Keeps only the Cybertruck ?by rvnx
2/24/2026 at 7:49:23 PM
No, they'll still be making the Model 3.by tavavex
2/24/2026 at 8:08:59 PM
They'll also keep making Model Y, the most sold car model in the world.by BurningFrog
2/24/2026 at 11:13:01 PM
They are going to have a hard time keeping it that way in 2026, since they were just barely ahead of both #2 and #3 (Toyota Corolla and Toyota RAV4), and as far as I know Toyota hasn't done anything to annoy a large fraction of the demographics that have bought the most of their cars in recent years.by tzs
2/24/2026 at 8:17:32 PM
* As claimed by Musk.by Marsymars
2/24/2026 at 7:50:16 PM
Thanksby rvnx
2/24/2026 at 8:08:38 PM
Autonomy or robots? Because autonomy very much still includes (personal) transportation?by barbazoo
2/24/2026 at 7:40:57 PM
> shenanigansIt's a lot more than "shenanigans": he's likely responsible for the deaths, via starvation and illness of hundreds, thousands, or more. The quick and sudden DOGE cuts ripped those programs that were keeping people alive away, without any chance to phase in replacements.
by davidw
2/24/2026 at 7:53:09 PM
Current estimates are 500,000-1,000,000 directly from aid cuts https://www.cgdev.org/blog/update-lives-lost-usaid-cuts with 1.6 million deaths projected.by luke5441
2/24/2026 at 8:07:16 PM
From that URL: our estimates of “lives saved per dollar” from US aid are, at best, ballpark estimatesI can't help being very suspicious of up to a million dead without identifying a single dead individual, or country or even continent where these mass deaths are supposed to have occurred.
by BurningFrog
2/24/2026 at 8:35:14 PM
Also from that URL (with links):> There is on-the-ground evidence of resulting impacts: Rising malnutrition mortality in northern Nigeria, Somalia, and in the Rohingya refugee camps on the Myanmar border and rising food insecurity in northeast Kenya, in part linked to the global collapse of therapeutic food supply chains. Spiking malaria deaths in northern Cameroon, again linked to breakdown in the global supply of antimalarials, and a risk of reversal in Lesotho’s fight against HIV, part of a broader health crisis across Africa.
"Spiking malaria deaths in northern Cameroon" links to an article[0] which states:
> BOGO, Cameroon, Oct 2 (Reuters) - Nine-month-old baby Mohamat burned with fever for three days before his family took him to the closest health centre in northern Cameroon, but it was too late. He died of malaria that day. Mohamat's death was part of a spike this year in malaria fatalities that local health officials attribute to foreign aid cuts by the United States. Before the cuts, Mohamat might have been diagnosed earlier by one of more than 2,000 U.S.-funded community health workers who would travel over rough dirt roads to reach the region's remotest villages. And at the health centre, he might have been treated with injectable artesunate, a life-saving drug for severe malaria paid for by U.S. funds that is now in short supply. But the centre had none to give out.
So the URL very directly identifies a dead individual, a country and a continent, while also mentioning other cases that we hopefully all can agree will also directly lead to deaths.
Do you take issue with this example? Or why are you stating that they're not "identifying a single dead individual, or country or even continent where these mass deaths are supposed to have occurred"?
[0]: https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...
by Timon3
2/24/2026 at 8:14:32 PM
Individual stories spotlighting lives lost in the wake of these cuts aren't hard to find. Do you want me to Google that for you?by breakyerself
2/24/2026 at 11:07:59 PM
By that reasoning you should be suspicious of the claim that cigarette smoking has caused any deaths from lung cancer, since no one has ever identified a single individual whose lung cancer could be proven to be from smoking.by tzs
2/24/2026 at 8:15:05 PM
“the total lives at risk from aid cuts to 1.6 million lives lost per year”It’s a projection, a risk, and a rate, not a claim it has already happened to specific people.
by zzrrt
2/24/2026 at 8:37:09 PM
More lives would be saved if usaid never existed.by slaw
2/24/2026 at 8:10:14 PM
US AID was always about soft power. No reason Europe or China can’t step up and fill that demand.by ta9000
2/24/2026 at 8:17:09 PM
Sure, but while the world waits for another super power to step up lives are being lost. The US could have announced a phase down with a hard pressure campaign to get the other countries to take over with no loss of life.Instead these are just numbers in a statistic and opportunities for leverage in geopolitics instead of real lives with as much depth and meaning as your own.
by breakyerself
2/24/2026 at 9:29:01 PM
> Instead these are just numbers in a statistic and opportunities for leverage in geopolitics instead of real lives with as much depth and meaning as your own.I didn’t vote for this, it’s not about me, I have no control over this. I live in California, we never voted for Trump. Please don’t lecture me about how I feel.
by ta9000
2/24/2026 at 9:38:39 PM
So did the US reach an agreement with them first in order to avoid thousands of easily preventable deaths?by rurp
2/24/2026 at 8:17:31 PM
So softpower kept all these peole alive?Ofc this is overly simplistic. There is hard power enabling soft power and there are alturistic extreme radical leftists actively seeking out and staffing such programs.
by throwawayqqq11
2/24/2026 at 8:05:37 PM
Fun fact : there are poor people in America who need help. Some of which served in the military, or they come from families which several people served in the military. Do these people not come first?Despite popular belief, it is not the job of the US Tax Payer to feed the impoverished world. How many billions have been sent to Africa? People need to make their own countries great instead of waiting for more Gibs from the USA.
by htx80nerd
2/24/2026 at 8:26:51 PM
I hope such egotistical zero sum thinking leads to the economic isolation of the US. 4chan Fun fact: You and only can make america great again, amirite. Who needs steady deficit funding when you have freedom.by throwawayqqq11
2/25/2026 at 1:24:14 AM
We don’t (didn’t) do it because it’s our job, we do (did) it because it’s the right thing to do.I’m surprised that preventing famine and malnutrition is controversial
by danny_codes
2/25/2026 at 1:30:53 AM
>We don’t (didn’t) do it because it’s our job, we do (did) it because it’s the right thing to do.We didn't do it because it's the right thing to do, we did it for soft power, to spread our political and cultural influence and have leverage against those governments to serve our interests. Nations are not moral actors.
by krapp
2/24/2026 at 8:25:29 PM
> Do these people not come first?Not to republicans who have repeatedly voted down measures to take care of people getting straight up cancer from abysmal practices during the middle east wars that they started.
Those same republicans also voted down support for the aid workers of 9/11 dealing with absurd health issues from all the dust.
Literal heros and innocent victims, but republicans don't want to spend pennies on them.
by mrguyorama
2/24/2026 at 8:15:46 PM
> Despite popular belief, it is not the job of the US Tax Payer to feed the impoverished world.This is an overly simplified perspective. Work at this scale requires impressive logistics and commitments that are haphazardly "rug-pulled" can have catastrophic consequences, regardless of whose "job" it is.
When I was looking at being a bone marrow donor, they talk about this. The process for such donation is involved, including minor surgical procedures for the donor. But they talk about autonomy and consent, and one of the topics is this (paraphrasing): Do I have the right to change my mind about donation at any time?
The answer: while you always maintain the legal right to withdraw consent, at a certain point in the process, the recipients existing bone marrow is destroyed in preparation for your donation. At that point, there may be considered a moral obligation to continue the donation, as without your donation, the recipient will die, due to the destruction in preparation.
> How many billions have been sent to Africa?
Speaking for myself, I'd rather continue sending billions to Africa than contributing ~1.5% of Israel's GDP in foreign assistance to it.
by FireBeyond
2/24/2026 at 8:26:39 PM
If you are curious, the number #1 beneficiary of USAID is Ukraine, by far, and just behind #2 is Israel.Sounds more like foreign influence than actual survival help. Maybe USAID even funded wars, and caused more death and chaos, who knows. Difficult to predict what's next. Perhaps it will be good because countries will adapt and shine, instead of having local dictators surviving on these aids, etc.
Also, there is a thing about people depending on you:
I am feeding birds during winter, so at some point they depend on my food. Should have I had started feeding them at all or not ?
If I didn't feed them, technically less birds would have died because they would never had a chance to live...
by rvnx
2/25/2026 at 1:00:24 AM
Except Israel is an economically sound and undamaged country who has the upper hand against its enemies and Ukraine has been invaded and is the underdog of in this war ?It doesn't look that weird to me that humanitarian assistance would go to people who need it the most ? Do Israelis currently need heaters not to die from the cold after their energy system has been destroyed ?
It's as if helping populations in need would buy you goodwill and popularity. Crazy to thing about it. I don't see how program trying to contain the spread of AIDS or preventing people to die from the cold is "funding" war. Not sure what you are on about. People will not adapt and shine, they will die or be more miserable, or revolt and probably be crushed. Civil war is always an option too.
But your bird comment tells me you just don't care. You should have started with that.
by cassepipe
2/25/2026 at 2:05:29 AM
The comments above mine were blaming USAID saying that it caused more damage because it existed and made people became dependent on it, and (in their logic) that it would have been better if it did not exist.If you look above you can see the whole concept “people die because of USAID”. It’s not my concept.
I am showing with the bird analogy how this is absurd. That you always have the choice to feed the birds or not.
At the end, it’s still a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” type of dilemma, like all important political interactions.
Nobody knows if the long-term impact will be positive or negative. It can push countries to take care of their population, to have new coalitions of countries (what if China double-down and offer more aid ?), etc.
Pretty much unknown. I hope it will eventually work out for the innocents who are victims of politicians who are in comfy places.
by rvnx
2/25/2026 at 12:47:49 AM
Sure, let's send them malaria nets, food engineered for being able to eat without dying after being starved and free condoms, why not ?by cassepipe
2/24/2026 at 8:22:21 PM
You know Republicans keep cutting services to veterans right? While democrats pretty much always vote in favor of benefits for vets.You choices aren't to either fund vets or fund aid. Your choices are to cut both or save both and I have a feeling you voted to cut both.
by breakyerself
2/25/2026 at 1:55:39 AM
What help for these Americans did the Republicans put forward and approve along with these cuts? All I saw was a cut to the affordability of healthcare for those people. Did I miss some help that is coming that they didn't have before the USAID cuts?by _DeadFred_
2/24/2026 at 11:05:26 PM
> it is not the job of the US Tax Payer to feed the impoverished world.Other countries would like to contribute (more), but the people that represent us taxpayers want to keep all the inluencing for your good selves.
by Ylpertnodi
2/25/2026 at 2:28:57 PM
Great news. Trump and DOGE cut programs for domestic poor too!by UncleMeat
2/24/2026 at 7:49:43 PM
Citation:by toomuchtodo
2/24/2026 at 7:47:58 PM
[flagged]by __loam
2/24/2026 at 7:51:58 PM
And to be clear, there is a difference between America not being obligated to save lives and tearing away treatment once you’ve started providing it. DOGE did the latter, and some of the cases are horrific, experimental devices being left implanted in study participants.by JumpCrisscross
2/24/2026 at 7:58:33 PM
There's also a difference between winding down a charity program and abruptly pulling support overnight such that even if other entities or organizations wanted to take up the mantle, doing so would be 100x more difficult (or in some cases impossible)by estearum
2/24/2026 at 7:46:58 PM
[flagged]by ezfe
2/24/2026 at 8:00:33 PM
Atrocities can be repeated. There is nothing wrong with reiterating the negative outcomes a specific person has unleashed to towards societies greater good.by notyourwork
2/24/2026 at 7:49:16 PM
Yet we're still downplaying it all with words like "shenanigans." The comment above didn't even get onto the subjects of election interference, MEGA or MechaHitler/white genocide.by AlecSchueler
2/24/2026 at 8:05:51 PM
When a comment starts with "Even ignoring Y, there's also Z" or "Setting aside Y, there's also Z", it shouldn't be read as downplaying Y. It's a way of introducing a secondary issue Z without first needing to write a 1000 word essay that gives due weight to issue Y and any other issues that are more important than Z.This is useful to do when issue Y is widely known and well-explored elsewhere, but issue Z hasn't received as much attention. It my no means is an attempt to downplay the importance of Y, merely to create a space for conversation about a more niche issue Z.
It's disappointing to see so much attention put into replies attacking the OP for not giving adequate weight to Y, when the very premise of their comment was to create a space to discuss Z.
by mitthrowaway2
2/25/2026 at 8:48:29 AM
No, you've abstracted it too far. I understand the grammatical construction, I'm not sure what suggested that I don't. The issue is referring to the spread of fascism in the world as if it's a little mistake anyone could make.It's disappointing to see this defended.
by AlecSchueler
2/24/2026 at 11:09:55 PM
Yeah at first this was all "man Elon turned a lot of people off" and now it seems like "uh ... is Tesla quitting?".If they do end up quitting this will be the weirdest ever business story.
by duxup
2/24/2026 at 7:54:08 PM
Agreed, Tesla will sell autonomous miles not cars going forward, Model Y is still the best selling car on planet earth for many years in a row though so they'll keep selling that as they make large profit margins on it (unlike every other EV maker who are making a loss)by small_model
2/24/2026 at 10:06:09 PM
Model Y is #8, not #1. Note this is specific to the US. If you include the entire world, it would be lower.https://www.kbb.com/best-cars/top-10-25-best-selling-cars-tr...
by malfist
2/24/2026 at 11:36:05 PM
Worldwide, the top models are Tesla Model Y, Toyota RAV4, and Toyota Corolla, all pretty close together (in 2024 it was 1.09 million Y, 1.08 million Corolla, 1.02 million RAV4 [1]). Sources for 2025 have the same 3 at the top in a close spread, with some disagreement over the exact order.When you look at brands rather than models then it is no contest. For 2025 the top 15 was Toyota with 11.3 million sold, VW with 9.0, Hyundai Kia at 7.3, GM at 6.2, Stellantis at 5.6, Ford at 4.6, BYD at 4.6, Honda at 3.5, Suzuki at 3.3, Nissan at 3.2, Geely at 3.0, Changan at 2.9, BMW at 2.5, Renault at 2.4, and Mercedes at 2.2.
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/239229/most-sold-car-mod...
by tzs
2/25/2026 at 1:48:38 PM
https://electrek.co/2025/12/31/elon-musk-claims-tesla-model-...by malfist
2/24/2026 at 7:46:00 PM
They refuse to use lidarThey cut the lifetime subscription to fsd
They canceled two Tesla models
They're converting Tesla factories to make Optimus robot
I was going to buy a Tesla but now have concerns.
by the_real_cher
2/25/2026 at 3:20:54 AM
You weren't concerned by Tesla recalling 5.1 million cars in 2024, more than Ford, and recalling the Cybertruck 5 times in 18 months[1]?You weren't concerned by Consumer Reports ranking Tesla in last place out of 26 manufacturers for reliability[2]? Or their quality control so poor that customers are buying their own delivery inspection checklists[2]?
You weren't concerned by Tesla Owners reporting Tesla authorized repair centers keeping their cars for months unable to source parts to repair them, or consumers unable to buy replacement parts[3]?
You weren't concerned by the worker awarded $130M for hostile work environment filled with racial abuse at a Tesla factory, after paying another worker $1M for racist abuse at their factory, and facing a class action about racist discrimination[4][5][6]?
You weren't concerned about Tesla's telemetry tracking all details about every drive and sending it back to HQ to train their FSD?
You weren't concerned by any of Musk's behaviour, such as his misleading statements about FSD delivery dates and abilities for years, about the sportscar that would jump with compressed air, about the Cybertruck and Semi truck abilities, about the Hyperloop, about getting Tesla to buy his cousin's failing SolarCity, about trying to get a trillion dollar paycheck out of Tesla, etc?
[1] https://www.carscoops.com/2025/04/which-tesla-models-have-ha...
[2] https://www.carscoops.com/2025/04/which-tesla-models-have-ha...
[2] https://www.jalopnik.com/teslas-quality-control-is-so-bad-cu...
[3] https://www.teslaownersonline.com/threads/tesla-cant-supply-...
[4] https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/usa-form...
[5] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tesla-laws...
[6] https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/18/business/tesla-black-work...
by jodrellblank
2/25/2026 at 3:47:32 AM
To be honest I haven't really kept up that closely until recently when I started looking for a new car but that is concerning!by the_real_cher
2/24/2026 at 7:49:16 PM
Is any other US company making a play for putting these shiny new AI's in bots like Musk is trying to do with Optimus or has society just resigned itself to shovelling money on to his doorstep?by pupppet
2/24/2026 at 7:37:06 PM
EVs have the technological novelty of a washing machine. The only way to win this game is by making fabrication cheaper, and we all know that China can't be defeated here.by amelius
2/24/2026 at 7:40:06 PM
> EVs have the technological novelty of a washing machineThis has been similarly true of ICEVs for the better part of the last 100 years.
by rootusrootus
2/25/2026 at 9:20:23 AM
> This has been similarly true of ICEVs for the better part of the last 100 years.Well no, since a 1926 engine is very different from a 2026 engine.
An early 90s fuel injected computer controlled engine is pretty similar to a current engine though (just incremental improvements), so we could say fairly similar for the last ~35 years. But not 100.
by jjav
2/24/2026 at 7:45:19 PM
No, over 100 years there have been vast improvements in efficiency in ICEVs. In EVs, the curve is mostly flat.The hope is for better batteries, but developments are excruciatingly slow.
by amelius
2/24/2026 at 7:58:20 PM
The curve is mostly flat for EVs because they started with such high efficiency to begin with. At their best, internal combustion engines are quite terrible so there has been more room to make improvements.Even so, the vast, vast majority of cars in the past 100 years have had all of the technical innovation of a washing machine (and that might well be underselling the washing machine!).
> developments are excruciatingly slow
10% a year on average, something like that? ICEVs haven't had that kind of incremental improvement in a loooooong time.
by rootusrootus
2/24/2026 at 8:48:06 PM
You have to zoom out a bit. EVs are still improving of course because they are relatively new. It's not fair to compare that to the last few decades of car history. You can make any flat looking graph look steep by zooming.by amelius
2/25/2026 at 2:33:51 AM
The only part of an electric car that hasn't been in development for at least as long as any ICE vehicle is the battery. So really it all comes down to that one thing.by rootusrootus
2/24/2026 at 10:23:47 PM
EVs are as old as ICE vehicles, people should compare both on the same scale.by ponector
2/24/2026 at 7:57:59 PM
> over 100 years there have been vast improvements in efficiency in ICEVs. In EVs, the curve is mostly flat.This may be true, but my family's "daily" ICE vehicle costs us about $0.162/mile to run; our actual daily EV costs about $0.028/mile -- almost one sixth as much. It doesn't matter how much more improvements ICE vehicles achieve, they're not going to catch up to the "mostly flat" EV curve.
by mynameisash
2/24/2026 at 8:50:44 PM
EVs are incredibly efficient. It's why aerodynamics matter so much and they all look so weird. The electricity from fossil sources they use is also efficiently generated at scale and in many states, mostly from renewables. It's equivalent to driving an ICE car that gets 200mpg in the absolute worst case.by tencentshill
2/24/2026 at 10:08:21 PM
Hence the eMPG.by malfist
2/24/2026 at 9:47:51 PM
If you compare a 2012 tesla model s 70D (the most efficient model tesla had then and arguably the gold standard) it had 33.4 kWh/100mi EPA, the 2025 LR is 27.2kWh/100m which is nearly 22.8% less and this while being larger.What's even crazier is that a tesla 2008 tesla roadster had 28kWh/100mi EPA combined, which is more than today's model S.
Literally there isn't a single combustion car (not including hybrids) which comes anywhere close to this improvement.
Also I don't know about other countries, but I'd argue that in 20 years at least in Europe the fuel economy of diesel cars has gone worse due to emissions, I'm talking about real world usage, regardless of what this WLTP non-sense says.l
by unclejuan
2/24/2026 at 7:52:10 PM
Crucially the flat EV curve puts them mostly ahead of where ICEVs have been for their entire history.by DangitBobby
2/24/2026 at 7:56:47 PM
It's not really an ICE vs EV thing, more that "EVs as hip new technology improving leaps and bounds annually" isn't really a thing and they're the car version of air fryers.This is, to me, actually a good because there's no longer any early adopters remorse anymore so no reason not to buy one now because it won't be outdated in six months.
by Spivak
2/24/2026 at 8:09:44 PM
I believe you have a mistaken impression. First, the bottom has fallen out of the used market creating significant buyers remorse for early adopters. Buyers remorse also for the switch from the previous US charging standard to Tesla's. And people are generally waiting with bated breath for advancements in battery technology for charging speeds, longevity, and capacity. Accurate or not, people are waiting for the technology to mature so they don't have an EV that isn't worth what they paid for it.by DangitBobby
2/24/2026 at 8:47:27 PM
> First, the bottom has fallen out of the used market creating significant buyers remorse for early adopters.I feel this directly. On paper I've lost more money on my Model 3 than I have on the previous half dozen cars combined, I'm pretty sure. But on the other hand, Ford canceling the Lightning has (at least temporarily) improved the resale value on my Lightning considerably. I couldn't really sell it today for what I paid for it, but I wouldn't be that far off.
Problem is that I don't really love the Tesla, but I do love the Lightning. Ha! So I keep them both but for differing reasons.
> the switch from the previous US charging standard to Tesla's
As an aside, this is finally happening for real! Several models coming to market now are shipping with J3400 (aka NACS) ports standard. Yay! I look forward to a time where the days of various adapters being required are firmly behind us.
by rootusrootus
2/24/2026 at 9:42:21 PM
> First, the bottom has fallen out of the used market creating significant buyers remorse for early adopters.The very high deprecation is often noted but the comparison is mostly in relation to sticker price, but the high discounts plus subsidies mean that the average discount for an EV was way higher than on ICE cars. Most of the high depreciation disappears once you take into account what the first buyer would have actually paid for the vehicle (often a five-digit discount), at least in my used car market. Some models seem to actually hold their value remarkably well, particularly those with no/few known issues and no real successors.
by formerly_proven
2/25/2026 at 1:26:33 AM
I bought my car in the very brief period (a few months) where my purchase did not qualify for the tax credit. After 3.5 years of ownership, cars like mine sell for $15k, roughly 50% what I paid for it. The car works perfectly and the model has no widespread issues. I'm definitely planning to keep it, but my original plan was to trade it in for something newer when battery tech got battery. Seems like that's no longer in the cards.by DangitBobby
2/25/2026 at 1:07:24 PM
Yeah, but if you had the tax credit that presumably almost all other buyers got, then the amount of depreciation would be completely normal or even relatively low, depending on how high the EV subsidy was in your state (I'm assuming something in the 5-10k range?).Another example would be small EVs (Zoe, e-up etc.) - the list price on these was often really high, like 25+k (and they were technologically obsolete already 5-6 years ago). But then you got 5k+ in EV subsidy, with the OEM also matching the subsidy, and you would've ended up actually paying like 15k for them. Now, 3-4 years later, these go used for 12-13k. So in reality they lost barely any value (20% deprecation over 3 years), but the published deprecation figure would be 60+%.
This explains why despite these "EVs suffer huge deprecation" claims there are actually very few bargains on the used market to make.
by formerly_proven
2/24/2026 at 8:18:25 PM
I hear people say this, but I also see announcements from Chinese carmakers like this:"NEW: Latest EV model boasts full charge (200 miles) in only ~5 minutes"
To me, that seems like a leaps & bounds improvement.
by julianeon
2/24/2026 at 7:53:42 PM
> No, over 100 years there have been vast improvements in efficiency in ICEVs. In EVs, the curve is mostly flatEngine and battery performance are analogous.
by JumpCrisscross
2/25/2026 at 7:22:50 AM
What vast improvements in ICE? From 20% to 40% efficiency?by abenga
2/24/2026 at 7:59:48 PM
> there have been vast improvements in efficiency in ICEVs. In EVs, the curve is mostly flat.Uh yes, because it's really hard to improve the efficiency of something that is 4 to 5 times as efficient...
by hvb2
2/24/2026 at 8:10:58 PM
If it were only about costs, German car manufacturers would have been out of business since the 80s.by baxtr
2/24/2026 at 8:22:25 PM
For the greater majority of people, cost has always been the main factor.You can be a luxury brand, but that doesn't scale.
by amelius
2/24/2026 at 9:13:44 PM
Scales well enough for being a manufacturer with robust sales (let's ignore the daft share price a moment), and Tesla were ideally placed to capitalise on being the brand name in EVs until Elon decided to torch the brand equity, particularly with the demographics most likely to buy brand new EVs...by notahacker
2/24/2026 at 8:26:18 PM
So have not heard of Volkswagen?by baxtr
2/24/2026 at 8:47:21 PM
VW had massive, ahem, political support.by rvnx
2/24/2026 at 9:23:14 PM
So too have current Chinese car manufacturers.by MrDresden
2/24/2026 at 7:40:29 PM
It's not just a question of the long haul. About 25% of new model 3's failed their first inspection in 2024 in denmark. That means they aren't road legal without repairs. That's compared to 9% of other electric cars. And yeah, they run a 4 year warrenty, so when the first inspection is due after 4 years, it also conviniently out of warrenty.It's even worse with the Y where 50% (yes, HALF) of 2021 models failed their first inspection.
by delusional
2/24/2026 at 8:13:02 PM
I was under the impression EV's are relatively maintenance free, especially compared to ICE. What are the typical failures of those teslas?by Rnonymous
2/24/2026 at 8:34:47 PM
They have had problems with the suspension arms, but word on the street is that it’s just the brake discs.Denmark is significantly more moist than California, and EVs regenerative braking doesn’t wear the braking discs, so they rust, thus failing inspection.
The solution is trivial (periodically disable regenerative braking), but many people didn’t know.
by simonask
2/25/2026 at 6:40:10 AM
> They have had problems with the suspension arms, but word on the street is that it’s just the brake discs.That is certainly one of the issues, but 22% of the model Y's had loose suspension arms. So the brakes (which I agree is a more minor yet still inexcusable issue) aren't the only issue.
by delusional
2/24/2026 at 8:25:12 PM
The EV is usually not the problem. The suspensions don’t age well.The headlights also often need adjusting.
by speedgoose
2/24/2026 at 7:22:57 PM
Honestly I think it depends if Trump stays in power above his current term (not here to argue whether or not its possible). But he knows he cannot collect billions of tax payers subsidies for EVs and then flip a switch and have factory producing Optimus bots. That 100% fraud, and only Trump will ignore it.by joering2
2/24/2026 at 7:30:07 PM
How is it fraud for a company to change focus and start producing other kinds of products? It's not fraud in the same way that promising that the car would be able to drive itself from Los Angeles to New York in 2017 and selling people "Full Self Driving Hardware" is.by bagels
2/24/2026 at 7:37:02 PM
Tesla single-handedly created the market for EVs. There are over 9 million Teslas on the road worldwide. That's a much bigger return on their subsidies than most government programs.by ralph84
2/24/2026 at 11:49:07 PM
Have you forgotten about the Nissan Leaf? Tesla created the market for expensive sports car EVs, but Nissan made the market for EVs for the mainstream.The Tesla Roadster came out first, by a couple years, but only sold about 2500 over its lifetime. By the time Tesla got its second model out, a couple years after Leaf went on sale, Leaf had 50k sales.
It took until 2020 for Tesla cumulative sales to catch up with Leaf cumulative sales.
by tzs
2/25/2026 at 12:43:17 AM
The first generation Leaf belongs more to the early curiosity phase of EVs than the mainstream. Funny looking, less than 100 miles range, and slow charging via a port that never caught on outside of Japan. Tesla didn't just build a car that addressed the biggest EV objections (range, charging speed, looks), they also built a DCFC network that has more ports than all of the other ones combined. Without the charging network there is no EV market.by ralph84
2/24/2026 at 8:02:16 PM
Maybe that's true but maybe it also isn't? Tesla or no Tesla, China would've thrown incentives at domestic EV makers to reduce their dependence on oil imports. Without Tesla maybe there would be fewer EVs in North America and Europe today. But I don't see history playing out very differently elsewhere. The economics are just too strong.by triceratops
2/24/2026 at 7:27:38 PM
Why would that be fraud? Is the subsidy something other than giving the people purchasing EVs a "rebate"?by deburo
2/24/2026 at 7:36:19 PM
A good lawyer could argue that Tesla must be aware that exiting the auto market would immediately crash the value of all existing Teslas because it would essentially create a sunset date for those vehicles, given how much software they're running. Good luck to anyone trying to sell a used Tesla once that announcement is made, because who would buy a car that is going to be bricked at some point?by CodingJeebus
2/24/2026 at 8:10:56 PM
How is that good lawyer going to make the case that Tesla should somehow be liable for this? Tesla doesn't owe any duty to keep resale values up.by wat10000
2/24/2026 at 7:44:35 PM
> I think it depends if Trump stays in power above his current term (not here to argue whether or not its possible)If that were to happen, we will not be caring at all about Tesla's choices, so I'm not sure how you can make such a statement and then claim there is no argument to be had.
by rootusrootus
2/24/2026 at 8:09:26 PM
The subsidies are things like emissions credits and tax credits for purchases. They applied to units already manufactured and sold. There's no conceivable case for fraud if they decide to stop making EVs.by wat10000
2/24/2026 at 7:35:19 PM
LMAO. do you say the same for Rivian or any of the other EV's actually failing?by leesec
2/24/2026 at 7:37:25 PM
I look at Rivian with their forthcoming R2 and they seem to be making a lot of effort. While Tesla has been milking the same basic design for coming up on 10 years now, and even removing features. I can see an argument that Tesla isn't really trying to win, they seem to be coasting.by rootusrootus
2/24/2026 at 9:46:43 PM
Tesla owner here, I agree. One of my cars is over a decade old and I don't see any compelling reason to upgrade. They're still nice, but aside from "Self Driving" the improvements in that time are fairly minor and incremental. They need an actual truck, not the monstrosity they're trying to sell. The new Roadster is six years late. Once the S and X are dropped they're only going to have three models on offer, and no matter how good they are that's going to leave out a lot of customers whose needs/wants aren't met by those three.They got distracted by self driving and let that take up all of their attention. Now they're pivoting to robots before they've even got their first distraction working. They needed somebody who could tell Elon "no" about eight years ago.
by wat10000
2/25/2026 at 3:58:11 PM
False dichotomy. The market for BEVs isn't limited to BEV-only companies. Most considering one not made by Tesla are probably looking at an incumbent manufacturer instead.by bdcravens