Tesla kills Models S and X to build humanoid robots instead

EVs that were once industry-leading have long since been left behind.

See full article...

 

[Lexus Lunar Lorry]

So S3XY is now just 3Y? Or YE? Like Kanye?

I guess that's in character given the behavior of the company's leaders...

 

[arvedui]

Of course. They have to make room for the new Models N, 4, Z, and I.

 

[Sajuuk]

Car company says it’s bored of cars now. Stock up eleventy-katrillion.

 

[toolery]

Pipe dreams. The robots will not succeed. Metaverse part deux.

 

[dennis.kext]

I think it’s time for the Tesla Death Knell.

 

[d3x7r0]

That's one way of spinning the fact that you're discontinuing products you left to languish for so long in the market without any updates that they become uncompetitive in the market they were once leaders in.

Not that it matters much. Tesla stock is a meme stock and just continuously goes up regardless of how the company is managed.

 

[Bravesirrobinson]

The S was my dream car for nearly a decade after reading The Oatmeal comic about it in the early 2010s. It's what turned me on to Tesla, SpaceX and Musk.

Now it's a relic, Musk has been outed as a horrible person and a Nazi, and I wouldn't accept any Tesla even if it came completely free. How times change.

 

[Modus_Derperandi]

The robots are even more complicated than the robo-taxi he has so far spectacularly failed to deliver on.

I don't really understand the economy, and I fear that betting on the economy is now the actual economy and actually delivering on products and promises is tertiary sub-effect.

 

[twoangstroms]

Maybe someone can help me with this. I do not understand even their pitch that robots will inevitably lead to prosperity for everyone, to the point that this "abundance" will mean that everyone is wealthy and healthy.

It seems, currently, that their proposition is (too lazy this morning to look up how to get "exist" and "all" and other logic symbols):

1. Some company produces humanoid robots
2. Somehow everyone gets at least one
3. Abundance

Will these robots be free? Isn't that anti-capitalist? Won't the shareholders want to maximize returns? And then there's the gap between the second and third steps. I have heard some rumblings about UBI, but like so many things, the techlords ignore that policy, not technology, is the controlling structure there.

Honest question! I can't poke fun at their arguments if they don't, you know, actually have one.

 

[sporkinum]

Loose definition of what a robot is. They are more of a waldo.

 

[Pino90]

So you're telling me that an expensive car that doesn't get refreshed in years doesn't appeal people in the market for luxury cars?

That is surely unexpected.

/s

 

[ColdWetDog]

OK, start with cars. Hmm, boring now, need to add some flash - ah, self driving cars. Well, that's not working all that well. Let's pivot to a super cool EV truck for the masses. Damn, kinda messed up on that one. And the self driving stuff still isn't working. OK, cars are boring. But we've already covered Boring. I got it - AI. In the meanwhile, we can make a super cool taxi service with the self driving that doesn't work. That'll make zillions, right? Oh. Wait. I got it now, this time for sure. Robots! Everybody needs a robot! Hmm. Still not working out the way I wanted it.

OK folks, Furbies are next. I'm sure we can get them out next quarter.

 

[Oldmanalex]

Of course. They have to make room for the new Models N, 4, Z, and I.

I salute your perspicacity, along with the appropriate heel click. I hear that the only performance metric will be 0-88 mph.

 

[Coriolanus]

Maybe someone can help me with this. I do not understand even their pitch that robots will inevitably lead to prosperity for everyone, to the point that this "abundance" will mean that everyone is wealthy and healthy.

It seems, currently, that their proposition is (too lazy this morning to look up how to get "exist" and "all" and other logic symbols):

1. Some company produces humanoid robots
2. Somehow everyone gets at least one
3. Abundance

Will these robots be free? Isn't that anti-capitalist? Won't the shareholders want to maximize returns? And then there's the gap between the second and third steps. I have heard some rumblings about UBI, but like so many things, the techlords ignore that policy, not technology, is the controlling structure there.

Honest question! I can't poke fun at their arguments if they don't, you know, actually have one.

Elon was doing ketamine while watching some cyberpunk anime.

That's probably the reason.

 

[Sarty]

And he needs factory space to build these Optimus robots, which Tesla claims will go on sale in 2027.

Even presuming Musk's magic robots were a real actual ready-to-produce-en-masse product, is there any particular reason to think a former car factory is well-suited to be a good robot factory, other than being a large enclosed box?

I know Musk already tried to "disrupt" the concept of putting a factory inside of a large enclosed box; maybe it's a case of once bitten, twice shy. No robot tents for you!

 

[fenris_uy]

Probably just a ploy to fire some Fremont employees to save on operating expenses.

 

[pug fugly]

I think it’s time for the Tesla Death Knell.

About a decade overdue at this point

 

[chiasticslide]

Maybe someone can help me with this. I do not understand even their pitch that robots will inevitably lead to prosperity for everyone, to the point that this "abundance" will mean that everyone is wealthy and healthy.

It seems, currently, that their proposition is (too lazy this morning to look up how to get "exist" and "all" and other logic symbols):

1. Some company produces humanoid robots
2. Somehow everyone gets at least one
3. Abundance

Will these robots be free? Isn't that anti-capitalist? Won't the shareholders want to maximize returns? And then there's the gap between the second and third steps. I have heard some rumblings about UBI, but like so many things, the techlords ignore that policy, not technology, is the controlling structure there.

Honest question! I can't poke fun at their arguments if they don't, you know, actually have one.

There's no plan, no argument. This is peak Silicon Valley techbro. They bring ideas, and figure that everything else will be worked out later. They're not details guys. They're big picture guys. Sure, the transition will be painful. Many people will die. But that's the price of progress, baby! Progressing me right to my superyacht.

But seriously, all they need to do is sell enough people on the idea. Then they get money to invest into infrastructure and tooling and development. Increase their valuation, make their stock more valuable and in turn make them wealthier. Just gotta keep it running until they're ready to cash out or die. It's an intellectual Ponzi scheme.

 

[scrimbul]

The robots are even more complicated than the robo-taxi he has so far spectacularly failed to deliver on.

I don't really understand the economy, and I fear that betting on the economy is now the actual economy and actually delivering on products and promises is tertiary sub-effect.

I just wish there was a way other than shorting stocks to bring the stock market to its knees without committing securities fraud.

The stock market is not the economy and it's well past time the valuations were forcibly brought back down to and chained to how Main Street is actually doing so we can actually allow some failures or even mild recessions to let out 30 years of steam, all of which would result in more ethical people in control of smaller valuations and unrealized capital gains.

 

[Tridus]

I'm not sure Tesla even had a profit this time without regulatory credits and those are largely going away, so how is this company even making money now?

Course, the stock doesn't care about that because this is one of the biggest bubble stocks ever. It's even more divorced from reality than Gamestop was.

 

[informationsuperhighway]

According to Musk. Robotaxi in all 50 states soon, optimus robots in every home,AI Chip fab,Mars colony in 2027,etc.. why stock is pumped.

 

[Bravesirrobinson]

Maybe someone can help me with this. I do not understand even their pitch that robots will inevitably lead to prosperity for everyone, to the point that this "abundance" will mean that everyone is wealthy and healthy.

It seems, currently, that their proposition is (too lazy this morning to look up how to get "exist" and "all" and other logic symbols):

1. Some company produces humanoid robots
2. Somehow everyone gets at least one
3. Abundance

Will these robots be free? Isn't that anti-capitalist? Won't the shareholders want to maximize returns? And then there's the gap between the second and third steps. I have heard some rumblings about UBI, but like so many things, the techlords ignore that policy, not technology, is the controlling structure there.

Honest question! I can't poke fun at their arguments if they don't, you know, actually have one.

Genuine (best guess) explanation: planned Enshitification.

Sell the robots at a loss. Robots start to make your life easier, doing laundry, cooking, etc.

Years go by and you can't imagine not having one. All of a sudden, they start costing a small monthly fee. That's fine, the cost is totally worth the time savings. Over time, the monthly fee gets higher and higher, you continue paying it because you're used to it. It becomes a standard cost of living that you never think about, and yet you're paying hundreds a month for something you could easily live without.

You will own nothing and be happy.


(That said, I think we're decades away from useful humanoid robots and think Musk is a sack of shit goosing TSLA's value)

 

[Mawich]

It's really rather remarkable that everyone hasn't sold all their Tesla stock by now. This is not a well-managed company.

 

[Marsflap]

Creating the first EV that people actually want when conventional wisdom said it was science fiction was such an amazing feat that it seems to have permanently broken investors' brains, such that they still apparently believe predictions from a company with a roughly 5% rate of following through on their stated timelines.

 

[Fatesrider]

Pipe dreams. The robots will not succeed. Metaverse part deux.

I see it as a lateral move.

Closing a line that made products no one wanted anymore to open a line that makes products no one wants now.

 

[Sajuuk]

The robots are even more complicated than the robo-taxi he has so far spectacularly failed to deliver on.

I don't really understand the economy, and I fear that betting on the economy is now the actual economy and actually delivering on products and promises is tertiary sub-effect.

Marx theorized that once commodity markets matured and nations stopped having places to colonize in order to create new markets, then existing markets would necessarily turn toward speculation for continued extraction.

Welp.

 

[galahad05]

I see how, while he's being reviled in some circles, all this self-hype and over-promising has earned him the biggest pay package in history....

Maybe I should start telling you all about my new company and product? It is an honest to goodness self-flying personal car that can also be a boat and submarine. Coming in 2 years tops.

 

[huskcummerbund]

I wonder if the new assembly line will include an orphanage to assemble the telepresence operators that control the robots.

 

[Tech-Space-Cars]

The only thing smarter would be to kill the cybertruck as well

Looking at crashing sales, it’s coming.

 

[the_frakker]

I don’t understand the “1 million Optimus per year” goal. Who is buying these Robots?

There is a finite # of consumers who would. Probably close to the sales number of Cybertrucks (currently between 50-60k). Nowhere near 1 million. And those CT sales numbers are cumulative since launch.

In manufacturing, there are limited use cases for such robots to replace humans. Most robotic tasks are better left to specialized robotic equipment, not humanoid robots.

Optimus barely works being remotely controlled by humans. I know Tesla put out more hyperbole during the investor call about the next version, but there are serious doubts that these robots will be capable of what’s needed on scale. Talking about a long S curve doesn’t even get close to how long that tail would be given current state of the project.

This is all just insane. Even if you can overlook the insanity and deplorability of the CEO.

 

[FranzJoseph]

OK, start with cars. Hmm, boring now, need to add some flash - ah, self driving cars. Well, that's not working all that well. Let's pivot to a super cool EV truck for the masses. Damn, kinda messed up on that one. And the self driving stuff still isn't working. OK, cars are boring. But we've already covered Boring. I got it - AI. In the meanwhile, we can make a super cool taxi service with the self driving that doesn't work. That'll make zillions, right? Oh. Wait. I got it now, this time for sure. Robots! Everybody needs a robot! Hmm. Still not working out the way I wanted it.

OK folks, Furbies are next. I'm sure we can get them out next quarter.

I think I saw a documentary about these...

 

[harlequin69]

There is something I don't get about the business of selling a robot taxi or a general purpose worker robot.

Why would you sell a source of passive income to your customers? You sell a taxi/robot for 50k to someone, they set the taxi free to collect fares, or the get the robot to fold laundry at the nearest hotel. With the profit they come back you to sell them more taxis and robots. In the meantime they did nothing while you were sweating on your decreasing taxi/robot margins.

If your product is that good, why would you need customers at all? You should rent their services direct to the consumer.

 

[Tech-Space-Cars]

The only robots for now, the near future, and well into the future will be on Tv only.

 

[Jeff S]

I keep being tempted to do something like buying long term put options on TSLA stock, but then I remember Keynes's sage advice that "the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent", and that while put options at least limit your risk (compared to shorting stock where your risk is unlimited), I also remember that I don't have enough money to gamble on market timing.

But I really am convinced that TSLA has completely lost the plot. That EVs were their only proven product with a proven market, which Musk then, at least partly, detonated in a self-own. After spending massive amounts of money to build the factories to build those vehicles.

So they have lost the only real line of business they had and are now going back to the drawing board to re-invent the company as making completely different products which may or may not succeed.

Sounds like a company worth $1.3Tn to me.

 

[ColdWetDog]

The only thing smarter would be to kill the cybertruck as well.

Most car makers only make money on a few models, with the rest as "halo" products. Basically they are substituting the halo product from cars to robots.

While robotics is an absolutely great idea in the next 4 years, I think Tesla is far behind the Boston Dynamics (Hyundai) and Alphabet (Deepmind) partnership. We will all have robots in every home by 2040, but they will be made in Chinese factories with their precision and mass manufacturing techniques, married with Google AI.

You will note that despite impressive skills of Boston Dynamic's robots, they have failed to make any sort of a commercial presence save for a few dog like robots. The price alone will absolutely limit the market to tiny niches. They'll be cool and all, but not particularly profitable.

Like the kind of profit needed to justify the stock valuations in these companies.

 

[Iphtashu Fitz]

The robots are even more complicated than the robo-taxi he has so far spectacularly failed to deliver on.

Compare the Tesla robot apparently collapsing when a remote operator removed his VR headset to what Boston Dynamics demonstrated in a recent TV news interview and you have everything you need to know about Tesla's chances with robotics.