Tesla Model 3 becomes best-selling car in Switzerland - <AUTHOR> https://electrek.co/2019/04/09/tesla-model-3-best-selling-car-period-switzerland/ <comment><USER3> Anecdata from someone living in a small Swiss village (c. 1,500 residents outside the ski season):

\- I see a handful of Teslas around the village. I would guesstimate 5 local residents own them.

\- The local taxi firm has a couple even.

\- Filling stations on the autoroutes have the charging points (at least in Romandy)

\- The country is small so, hey, it seems ideal

I'd like to get one but it doesn't fit my use case (namely long road trips in the summer).

<comment><USER4> I have a Model 3 and have gone on multiple long-distance road trips (>1,000 mile) with it. It's an absolute pleasure to drive with AutoPilot. Plus, most people already stop every 3-4 hours for bathroom/food breaks anyway, so if you use the in-car nav system (Google Maps), it will make it so those stops are at superchargers. The supercharger stops are almost always in high-density places with plenty of restaurants and usually are ~30minutes which I've found is the perfect time to do all the bathroom/food purchases you would need for the next leg of the trip. Plus with Supercharger V3 rolling out in the next few months, those stops will shrink to just 15 minutes for 80% battery.

<comment><USER5> Are there any problem on long trips if it is to some event that is drawing a lot of people?

A couple years ago, when I was planning a trip to the middle of some rural area to see a total solar eclipse, I checkout out of curiosity what the electric charger situation was to see what the trip would be like in an EV.

At the time the Tesla network was sparse enough in that area that you'd need to get pretty full charges to make it from charger to charger. After the eclipse you'd have everyone leaving at about the same time, and so arriving at chargers at about the same time, and so it seemed you might get some long lines.

30 minutes to charge isn't bad if you can plug the car in and go eat or use the bathroom while it charges. But if you have to wait for two or three cars ahead of you do their 30 minute charges, can you do something while you wait or do you have to stick with your car to move it up whenever the line moves?

In situations like this regular gas stations also can have lines, but usually you can drive a bit away from the main highway and find a less busy gas station.

<comment><USER6> > But if you have to wait for two or three cars ahead of you do their 30 > minute charges, can you do something while you wait or do you have to stick > with your car to move it up whenever the line moves?

This seems like an ideal use for self driving technology - park at the tail end of the queue and your car moves itself forward.

<comment><USER7> Once you move to the front of the queue, you need this to happen too:

[https://youtu.be/uMM0lRfX6YI](https://youtu.be/uMM0lRfX6YI)

<comment><USER8> You can always have an attendant plugging and unplugging the cars (at the busiest stations where queuing is necessary), until that technology is ready.

Some gas stations still have pump attendants, after all!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I hate how Tesla advertises Model 3 as a 35k$ car. In Germany, the cheapest, bare bone version of it is around 60 000 (53k euro). At this price point, it doesn't make much sense, it's just better to get a car like Merc E Class.

<comment><USER10> Tesla's price is $35k but your country adds hefty taxes. I was in Germany last year talking about a 5 series rental my coworker upgraded to. I was pretty shocked when they said it was over €100k. I pulled up the same car for about $60k at my local dealer in the states and that price is before bargaining. Pick it up in Munich and you can save 5%.

Companies in the US don't post prices including taxes in almost all cases.

<comment><USER11> > I was pretty shocked when they said it was over €100k. I pulled up the same > car for about $60k at my local dealer in the states and that price is before > bargaining.

I don't believe you. The only stock 5 series over €100k is the M5 Limousine (€119k). All other models are well below €100k, unless they come with options / BMW Individual. 550d Touring xDrive is €82k base price (with taxes).

I'm looking at a 2019 530d M package with full option and that thing would cost me €82k, after discounts comes as low as €60k (trade in).

What you say with $60k is probably something like 520i base option before taxes (knowing US).

So, I don't believe that story.

<comment><USER12> Just for your reference, it appears the 520i is not offered in the US. The base model would be the 530i. It doesn't seem like a 530d or a 550d are offered in the US...but for some kind of comparison:

with little effort I was able to find a 2019 540i xDrive with the M sport package for $53k on cargurus. Factor in taxes and its $57k. Factor in that I haven't even bothered to check autotrader or shop around emailing/calling dealers as I would do if I was interested in purchasing one.

Yes you can't get that deal everywhere and it might not be typical. But it's there

For $60k you can certainly get a lot more BMW than a 520i in the US

<comment><USER11> Ah, I see, you are talking about a second hand car. All the numbers I included in my replies refer to a brand new car delivered to order. For a reference, I just visited a US configurator. A brand new 540i M package is exactly $62550 and the configurator says: "MSRP excludes destination & handling fee of $995, tax, title, license, and registration."

Sorry, but a brand new car will be much more expensive then in the US than in Germany.

<comment><USER12> I think you are again confused. It's a brand new car. The MSRP is over 60k, but MSRP != selling price.

Perhaps it's common to pay MSRP in Germany, but if you're paying MSRP in the US for a non special vehicle you're doing it wrong.

> Sorry, but a brand new car will be much more expensive then in the US than > in Germany.

You've provided no evidence to suggest this is the case.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'd like a tesla but not comfortable with their data policy. If tesla provides a way to opt out I may consider a base model 3 in the future.

<comment><USER14> I own a BMW i3 and the Tesla Model 3. Both have cellular connections and are constantly pinging their motherships. At least on the Tesla I have the option of opting out. No such ability is available on the BMW.

<comment><USER13> > __No such ability is available on the BMW. __

Does the CEO of BMW tweet that it 's your fault after you wreck your car?

<comment><USER15> No. But the CEO of Tesla doesn't do that either.

(They can't tell the reason for the crash remotely, they extract the data directly, in person, with physical access to the car.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> There are a lot of conversations about road trips in a Tesla. I have a Model S and have done a few. I honestly believe that is indeed an increased hassle to stop for Supercharging every few hours. I have done it a few times, and these days mostly take my ICE vehicle for long road trips. But, having said, my long road trips (> 250miles) are once in every 3-4 months. And my daily driving is, well, daily. And this where Tesla blows everything else out of the water. Convenience of Autopilot, Home charging, carpool access, a 21st century UI, constantly improving features. 100x better than my ICE vehicle, and I will choose Tesla every time, even with the drawbacks of long road trips.

<comment><USER17> Would it be possible to put a gasoline generator in the trunk (vented of course) and wire it into the charging system to increase the range?

<comment><USER18> As long as it emits pure sine wave. There's forum posts everywhere talking about this.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Non-Tesla owner here with some questions:

\- are there ever times when there aren't enough charging stations free due to other Teslas tying them up?

\- do you find yourself chatting with fellow Tesla owners while charging?

\- are the superchargers free to use?

<comment><USER20> \- are there ever times when there aren't enough charging stations free due to other Teslas tying them up?

It happens. I use them maybe once a month for the last year and I've only had to wait once. It cost me 10 minutes or so. If you're unlucky you might live near a particularly crowded supercharge and have longer waits. I think the vast majority of owners charge at home 90+% of the time.

\- do you find yourself chatting with fellow Tesla owners while charging? Some people hang around their cars while they charge but I tend to grab a coffee or do some shopping. The chargers are usually near at least a coffee shop if not an entire mall. With the exception of the occasional long trip, I'm usually not staying long.

-are the superchargers free to use For some people. My model 3 didn't come with free supercharging but a lot of the chargers are sponsored by the local mall (I've seen a few tourist centers with free charging too). The only time I've paid it cost about $6 for a roughly 75% charge (200 to 240 miles).

<comment><USER21> > The chargers are usually near at least a coffee shop if not an entire mall. > With the exception of the occasional long trip, I'm usually not staying > long.

What happens when the car is fully charged and the owner doesn't come out for hours?

<comment><USER22> Not sure if it's still true, but recently I was in a rented Model X, and the encouraged you not to do this by -charging- owners for over-charging, even if they have unlimited charging.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This article is plain wrong. The original NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) article, which is linked in this article, says nowhere that the Tesla Model 3 was the best selling car in March. The Model 3 was only the fourth best selling car in March. You can find the original data here: [https://www.auto.swiss/statistiken/autoverkaeufe-nach- modell...](https://www.auto.swiss/statistiken/autoverkaeufe-nach-modellen/)

According to the data the Škoda Octavia was sold nearly two times as much as the Model 3. It must be said, however, that the Model 3 is the best-selling electric car.

</comment><comment><USER24> TLDR

All the Tesla 3 preorders arrived [1][2] in Switzerland in one month, putting the Tesla sales of usually one year (~1500) into one month, making it the "best-selling"[3] car in Switzerland ahead of Skoda and VW (for the month of March).

[1] one with a bit more knowledge than me can probably find the ship and the shipment.

[2] see comments on that article from users getting theirs with that shipment

[3] have probably been sold months earlier, better worded "most-delivered"

<comment><USER25> Not true.

The first Model 3 arrived in Switzerland in the 3rd week of February (2019-02-16). Tesla already sold 316 in February 2019 (+754% YoY).

How much of an exceptional month March will be for the year, we'll see after the April data is released. The number of preorders for Model 3 in Switzerland should be easily 1 order of magnitude higher than what they delivered in March.

<comment><USER26> > Tesla already sold 316 in February 2019 (+754% YoY).

I'm sure that's not your intention but please don't quote % numbers like this because it is extremely misleading and has zero indicative value. Going from selling one car to selling 100 is a 10000% increase. Is that a meaningful figure? No. All it does is inflate the percieved growth and makes the post look biased and suspect of having an agenda.

Values that are useful in such a context is the number of cars sold from other makers in the same segment or the growth of new models from other brands.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> There's a charger under my window and I can confirm that it is in heavy use by many different EPFL employees.

</comment><comment><USER28> Any insight on whether this will make up for the falling Q1 sales in the US?

<comment><USER29> This was the case in March, meaning it was within the Q1 release (and obviously didn't make up for the drop in the US). Actually, the long lead time to get shipments to Europe may be what caused a lot of the drop in the US - <USER2> was the first chance for shipments to Europe after Tesla's Q4 was mostly focused on getting Model 3s out across the US. The "other Europe" region still hasn't gotten any shipments, as far as I'm aware.

Personally I'm of the view that there is no drop in demand for the cars, just Q4 last year demonstrated the massive backlog they had in orders. When (if?) $35,000 cars actually start shipping, we'll start to see what actual sustained demand looks like.

<comment><USER30> I agree with you for the most part. The Q4 results had guidance indicating that Q1 would end with ~10K vehicles in transit at the end. That is exactly the result.

There were two surprises, though. They also guided flat shipments of X and S, when in reality they cut them in half. Also, they appeared to be indicating that Model 3 production would increase slowly over the quarter, but in reality they kept it flat. Both of those were negative surprises to varying degrees.

But, of course, we now know that S and X are likely to be revised soon. It is possible that the drop there was related.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Not sure why it isn't mentioned more, but the main selling point is safety. A tesla's weight distribution is safer than any ICE could possibly be.

</comment><comment><USER32> How much of the battery capacity goes to the heater?

<comment><USER33> In the UK in winter (around 0 deg C) having the heating on shaves off about 5% of range in my Nissan Leaf.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Interesting that Switzerland has $57k per capita income vs $54k in the USA, but the model 3 is probably 2x the cost of the US best selling car.

I assume the variance in Switzerland income is allot smaller than the US, thus more residents can afford the car.

<comment><USER35> As discussed in this thread, they delivered 1 year of pre-orders in a single month, thereby topping the charts. It remains to be seen what sales figures will be like the next few months. This may just be another case of bad statistics.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Can we stop with the Electrek spam?

</comment><comment><USER37> i was flying through zurich recently. McDonalds big mac, fries and soda were $20 (!!!).

Is everyone there pretty much a millionaire?

<comment><USER38> Does that comparison work in that context, though? I've seen a lot of traditionally "cheap US fast-food" be expensive overseas in many countries. I imagine because there is almost a tourist aspect to it, unlike when it's here in the US. Is there a Swiss version of what they consider cheap fast-food, and is that place still $20 for a basic meal?

<comment><USER39> McDonald's is used as a pretty good proxy for local prices and buying power around the globe. There's even the Big Mac Index ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index)).

<comment><USER37> exactly. McD is a good proxy for overall cost of living.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Out of those 1,094, 9 are already on AutoScout24 for sale starting at CHF 64k.

[1] [https://www.autoscout24.ch/de/autos/tesla-- model-3?make=391&...](https://www.autoscout24.ch/de/autos/tesla-- model-3?make=391&model=2864&vehtyp=10)

<comment><USER25> For comparison, 186 Audi e-tron are listed there: [https://www.autoscout24.de/lst/audi/e-tron?sort=standard&des...](https://www.autoscout24.de/lst/audi/e-tron?sort=standard&desc=0&ustate=N%2CU&cy=D&atype=C) \- with total sales in Germany being 571 in March.

Audi, just like other german car makers are well known for making their dealers purchase cars for inflated statistics ( [https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tageszulassung](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tageszulassung) ).

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Why? Do they have to buy electric cars in Switzerland (aka: gasoline cars are banned)? Or maybe everyone just have that extra money to blow? Or maybe they get large incentives from the Government? In the US it would take something like 15 years to pay for the difference between a Honda Civic and a Tesla Model-3 (both cars are about the same size)

<comment><USER42> Nope - no such ban.

It's probably a combination of pent-up demand, Switzerland being (generally) affluent, and having a reasonably environmentally-friendly culture.

<comment><USER41> Do the corporations also care about the enviroment in Switzerland?</comment></comment></comment>


Whatever happened to Generation X? - happy-go-lucky http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20170316-whatever-happened-to-generation-x <comment><AUTHOR> It has been said that history is written by the victor. I am from this time (born in 69) and I was a mucisian from the liberal northeast of the US (born and grew up in Cambridge, Massachusetts). The history recounted by the author is not what I remember. It was a much more conservative age than they author lets on.

But the reflection upon being the generation which grew up analog but groks digital is true. We shall never be again. We know what it is to not be able to reach someone simply because they are not by their phone at home. We know the joy of solitude and the peace and refuge of time spent in our own thoughts when evil can not constantly whisper agenda into our ear.

We are the only group who identify with both sides of the divide.

Plus our music was better! boo-yah!</comment>


Elon Musk emails employees about 'extensive and damaging sabotage' by employee - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/18/elon-musk-email-employee-conducted-extensive-and-damaging-sabotage.html <comment><USER2> I made this same comment on the other discussion.

I find it concerning that one person was able to push malicious code to 'production'. To me, this suggests that Tesla, a company building highly sensitive software, does not employ basic branch policies. How is is it that these changes could have made it through a code review process and get deployed?

If a company like Microsoft or Google announced that a disgruntled employee was able to push some code that, say, stole user information, I think the general reaction would be "why was this allowed to happen?" I'm not sure why Tesla gets a pass in this regard

<comment><USER3> This is a very naive comment. There will always be a small handful of engineers that can push the button to move code into PROD or even change code in PROD live. Ideally, with mature controls, the people in this list is short. But to jump to the conclusion that Tesla doesn't use good practises is very short sighted. Who's to say that external parties didn't target this person specifically because of their role/influence.

<comment><USER4> Obviously, not all details are available, but the wording in the email suggests that the parent comment is anything but naive:

> This included making direct code changes to the Tesla Manufacturing > Operating System under false usernames and exporting large amounts of highly > sensitive Tesla data to unknown third parties.

This sounds like something out of the 1990s, that dark and romantic era of version control when we thought CVS was pretty cool actually and we didn't know what key-based authentication and 2FA were.

There are volunteer-ran projects that don't have this problem.

Edit: to be clear, I presume no one is debating the fact that someone with high enough credentials can push code to production. The questions that the email raises are:

1\. Why can _anyone_ , regardless of credentials, push mission-critical code without review (or, alternatively, if the changes did go through review, why did the review process not catch _multiple_ malicious changes?)

2\. Why can someone compromise _several_ high-level credentials without anyone figuring it out (the changes were made, apparently, under "false usernames")?

<comment><USER5> Some manager asks IT multiple times over the course of a few weeks to create an account for a contractor, then give them permissions to access production type machines.

Or a contractor that was fired had their credentials appropriated by this manager, perhaps by that manager removing them from a "delete these accounts" list.

Those are a couple of mundane ways of getting a false username to a production machine. This is even easier when there is a lot of flux at the company with many people coming and going, a lot of account management happening etc.

It could have been that the accounts were local to specific machines and not managed by the company as a whole.

<comment><USER4> > Some manager asks IT multiple times over the course of a few weeks to create > an account for a contractor, then give them permissions to access production > type machines.

And -- keeping in mind that production type machines operate machinery that can kill -- this sounds okay to you?

Not to mention this:

> Or a contractor that was fired had their credentials appropriated by this > manager, perhaps by that manager removing them from a "delete these > accounts" list.

...keeping in mind that production type machines operate machinery that can kill, does it sound OK to you that _anyone_ can get access to an account that they don't own and control it?

This particular case would be enough to have PCI certification come into question (if not for it to be revoked), and that's just about money, not life- and-death stuff.

<comment><USER5> Someone has to be responsible for managing people and organising access to the appropriate machines for them to do their job, if it isn't their manager then who is?

<comment><USER4> You can manage people and organize access without actually having the ability to gain access to their credentials. In fact, that's how it's _supposed_ to work in safety-critical environments.

<comment><USER6> This is how it works in normal software companies too. I never see the credentials for my employees.

<comment><USER5> My point is, as a manager one can request that their subordinates get credentials to access systems. Therefore as a manager you could create a fictitious person (or use one that's recently left the company), and have them be given credentials to access those systems. Then you could use that fictional identity to do whatever nefarious things you want to do.

Then again it could be just as simple to create an alternate fictitious identity without going through IT but just by accessing the systems you have permission to access anyway.

<comment><USER4> In a normal company, _you could absolutely not_ create a fictitious account that way, or re-use the credentials of someone who just left. But more important, there is a very, very long way from having created a fictitious person to being able to push stuff to production in their name.

The former restriction is maybe difficult enough to efficiently implement in an organization that it's excusable (we have a scheme for it at $work, but it unfortunately means that sometimes people show up at work and the paperwork isn't ready yet and some of the accounts they need aren't yet ready).

The latter, on the other hand, is security 101 and not implementing it on the production floor is just irresponsible. I really hope it's not what happened.

<comment><USER5> So what are the odds then that they created a new user account on some local machine and used that to make the changes?

<comment><USER4> If we're talking about changes to the software that's used to manufactures vehicles that are driving on public roads, I sure as hell hope the odds are zero.

<comment><USER5> I hope so too, but then again we constantly read stories where serious industrial equipment and critical infrastructure has their computer systems opened up to the wide Internet because someone thought they would like to control it from a crappy app on their phone. Etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I have no problem believing that a disgruntled employee sabotaged part of the production line. But I do have a problem believing that all of the problems since the Model 3 started production were caused by sabotage.

I also have no problem believing that the disgruntled employee simply wanted to take revenge by sabotaging his/her employer -- that's not uncommon, and it should not be difficult to prove if it really happened. Musk is going a bit too far in suggesting that other forces are involved unless he has credible evidence, and he should share it if he has it.

<comment><USER8> > But I do have a problem believing that all of the problems since the Model 3 > started production were caused by sabotage.

So, uh, where exactly is that said? In the email, or anywhere for that matter? On my monitor, the email doesn't claim _any_ influence on Model 3 production problems, much less "all".

> suggesting that other forces are involved

"Investigation" and "be extremely vigilant" are a mite different from "suggesting".

You might want to consider talking about what is actually written.

<comment><USER7> > You might want to consider talking about what is actually written.

You might want to consider that the author knows full well that the implication is what really matters, and that people who only think about the literal written words are missing the point.

<comment><USER9> There is also the case that filling too much between the lines is in danger of driving its own narrative.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Everyone's reaction to this seems to be "He is crazy / paranoid". He gave very specific examples of things this person did. If you were someone with a large position against Telsa, or a competing manufacturer, or an oil / gas company finally picking things up after a terrible oil price collapse, yeah maybe it makes sense to go mess things up subtly enough that the company slips a little bit closer to bankruptcy? I'm not saying I 100% believe this theory, but when you're working at this level as CEO I feel like you have to at least consider the possibility.

<comment><USER11> From the standpoint of anyone trying to sabotage Tesla, the risk/reward ratio is extremely high. To claim that someone is trying to do so is an extraordinary claim, and we all know the saying about extraordinary claims...

<comment><USER12> Uh it says the guy admitted to it...and gave reasons...a confession is more than enough evidence.

<comment><USER13> People at Tesla are working incredibly hard, they just had a FTE mass layoff and are relying heavily on 'associates'. This reminds me of the darker days at Zappos with their holocracy business model and all powerful vanity CEO. It's not hard to imagine the disgruntled moving fast and breaking things in frustration

<comment><USER14> s/holocracy/holAcracy/

<comment><USER15> I wish I saw this before taking to google and becoming disappointed that no hierarchy based on holograms exists

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> > In 2007, a comprehensive study of markets around the world found that ones > where short selling was legal and common were more efficient than ones where > it was not. And a 2012 study concluded simply, "Stock prices are more > accurate when short sellers are more active."

[https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/03/23/in-praise- of-s...](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/03/23/in-praise-of-short- sellers)

Short selling is a _good thing_. Blaming the short sellers is the practices of companies like Enron, AIG and Lehman. Elon is not covering himself in glory here.

<comment><USER17> Agreed. In many cases, short sellers do a better job of identifying, researching, and flagging illegal behavior than government agencies charged with enforcing the rules.

<comment><USER18> Its also true of long investors: they also do a better job of identifying, researching and flagging top-performing companies than government agencies charged with the task.

The key thing is, motivation. Both long and short investors have motivations to cull the herd.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I concede it's possible that saboteurs are operating within Tesla, but lashing out at invisible enemies sends a strong "crazy" signal. Elon has been sending a lot of crazy signals lately...

<comment><USER20> Well the email said that the guy admitted to it, and did it because he was denied a promotion.

Not so invisible.

<comment><USER21> The boogyman isn't the sabeteur, it's the mysterious cabal of oil barons and short sellers that put him up to it.

<comment><USER22> I think the boogeyman is whoever the guy was exporting data too, since they found data exportation features. Because why have data exportation unless you are doing it _too_ somewhere.

<comment><USER23> I read "exporting data" as "took home a sql dump and now plans to sell email and related data on the darknet". Standard small blackhat stuff, not industrial espionage, but I doubt tesla will publicly say what happened in this case

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> > Looking forward to having a great week with you as we charge up the super > exciting ramp to 5000 Model 3 cars per week!

This was actually the most surprising part to me -- it appears that they believe that they will actually make the 5K/week goal by the end of this quarter.

As to the allegations... the email doesn't say much, but it sounds like a disgruntled employee grabbing data to me, and perhaps modifying some OS code in order to achieve that (eg: backdoor).

If there had been actual, Stuxnet-style sabotage of plant machinery and the like, I would have expected the email to address this instead of leaving every employee in the dark as to why things around them are breaking.

<comment><USER25> Then again, Musk knows that this email will instantly get leaked. This is PR as much as anything.

<comment><USER26> What if that communication was an attempt at discovering the leak source? Maybe there is an uniquely identifiable token or wording in the original mail(s) (per division, or team). Did any one counted the spaces or looked for invisible Unicode characters?

<comment><USER27> They could also find a few places where synonyms can be substituted without sounding weird, a few places where a comma is optional or can be replaced with a dash, ... much more likely to survive a journalist doing the responsible thing and retyping the e-mail.

For example:

His {stated, claimed} motivation {is, was} that he {wanted a promotion that he did not receive, did not receive a promotion he wanted}. {In light of, Given} {these, his} actions, not promoting him was definitely the right {move, choice}.

This can be detected by people comparing two e-mails, but the unicode trick can often be found just by looking at one of them, so I wouldn't say one is more stealthy than the other.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> There's $10B in TSLA short positions, when the numbers get this big its not unthinkable.

<comment><USER29> > _There 's $10B in TSLA short positions, when the numbers get this big its > not unthinkable_

Yes, it's unthinkable. If a $10 billion short were to even marginally pay off, regulators would dig deep. Anyone with that kind of cash on hand is savvy enough to know that. Sabotaging a visible company, with lots of stockholders and lenders and bankers standing to benefit from the company's success, to pay off a short is something that sounds plausible in fiction but is boneheadedly moronic in real life.

<comment><USER30> Why would they dig deep? Tesla has had many documented, self-inflicted execution issues with nearly every single one of its mass-produced cars. Tesla's done far more damage to itself than a single saboteur ever could.

<comment><USER29> > _Why would they dig deep?_

Whenever an outsized high-risk position pays off, multiple regulators--at the SRO, state and federal levels--investigate. Mostly for insider trading. Sometimes in response to investor complaints or broker arbitration proceedings.

These are well-paid professionals at the SEC, CFTC, FINRA, state financial services regulators, Federal Reserve, OCC, Treasury, and a bajillion other acronym agencies. Some of them are there while they wait for something better in industry. Many eye an administration appointment or political office. These are motivated people with comprehensive data across multiple markets, all tied to the natural persons behind accounts.

Corollary: One will notice that most insider trading busts happen to mid-level employees at publicly-traded companies. _Not_ traders or hedge fund managers. A large part of this comes down to the general public having no idea how competent securities regulators are. So while someone in the industry would never _e.g._ text about insider trading before buying out of the money options in a relative's name, Midwestern CFO's daughter sees nothing risky about that.

<comment><USER31> I don't think "outsized" is a factor here. How invested is the plurality shorter here? Maybe $10 million? One-thousandth, even one-hundredth, of a market position doesn't sound like an "outsized" investment to me.

<comment><USER29> > _I don 't think "outsized" is a factor here_

I originally criticized the notion of a short seller sabotaging Tesla to make money. The moment you reach the scale where it makes sense, it also becomes easily discoverable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> > This included making direct code changes to the Tesla Manufacturing > Operating System under false usernames and exporting large amounts of highly > sensitive Tesla data to unknown third parties.

How do "false usernames" work in a modern development environment where all commits are tied to a single real-world user?

<comment><USER33> With a vanilla git configuration, it's as easy as:

      $ vi centrifuge_rpm_controller.cc
      $ git commit --author "Bob Goodguy <email@example.com>" -a -m "Totally harmless changes"
      $ git push

In a high-stakes environment, it's probably worth signing commits. [https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Signing-Your-Work](https://git- scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Signing-Your-Work)

<comment><USER2> Are we really saying that Tesla, a company building highly sensitive software, is not employing basic branch policies? How is it that these changes could have made it through a code review process and deployed to 'production'?

What I take away from this is that one malicious actor was able to single handedly deploy malicious code and that there were no processes in place to stop this. That is a far more worrying issue

<comment><USER34> Not sure if it changes your point at all, but the changes were to the manufacturing operating system, not the car OS. I'm not familiar with manufacturing but I imagine there are a ton of different systems and perhaps not all are as secure as the other. I recall reading they needed some paint improvements, so perhaps they changed something there. I don't imagine they would have software controlling paint totally locked down.

<comment><USER35> Most manufacturing machines run G-code. Simply changing one of the G-code values (text editing) would cause the machine to make parts incorrectly, and this would screw up things down the line. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-code](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-code)

on my Haas mill, the code is directly editable by the operator. On my robots, the code is 'taught' by moving the arm and telling the machine that the new location is the updated. It is routine to have to adjust minor things in the robots, the operator would have to have access to do their job.

I had a welder put a washer under a sensor on my robot one time, making every weld 1 mm in the wrong spot. We couldn't figure it out and ended up reprogramming the entire setup, 8 hours, to fix it. A week later I noticed the washer, put there by a guy who I fired for bad attitude a week before. Once I had found the washer, I had the choice of going back to the old code, or leaving it with the new code.

I left it with the new code. I didn't have another 8 hours to waste to fix the fix.

Even tiny companies like mine can have sabotage. Why not Tesla?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> The code review systems I'm familiar with give you the opportunity to submit code that's different than what was approved. The assumption in these systems is that the developer is acting in good faith.

</comment><comment><USER37> What I hope is that proper forensics was done so that this can be verified in some way by a third party.

I'll let people more familiar with security auditing and forensics weigh in on exactly how this should be done.

</comment><comment><USER38> There's something really sad about all the people who are claiming that Musk has developed deep psychological problems in recent months.

Do they really think these claims are going to stop people from buying his cars, or stop big companies from hiring SpaceX to launch their satellites into orbit? Or that it will cause the megafactory to be a total failure?

I think what we are seeing here is speculators who have bet deeply on Tesla's stock crashing and are about to be wiped out. They are desperately trying anything they can to undermine the company, even though they know it is very unlikely to succeed.

To those who are so critical of Musk I ask, what is your prediction about how the company will be doing in 6 months or a year? And give us some specific reasons, not just some vague claims about Musk's mental state.

<comment><USER39> Prediction: they will raise new capital.

Because if not, prediction 2: bankruptcy at the end of the year.

Reasons: widely reported ginancial status of Tesla, based on official publications.

<comment><USER40> What if Musk supplied the required capital himself?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Perhaps they should have better security measures?

If I understand correctly, Tesla cars can be updated OTA including critical functions, so someone who manages to insert a malicious software update might be able to kill everyone driving a Tesla at some moment, plus numerous bystanders.

<comment><USER40> Language nitpick: I think you mean _anyone_ , not everyone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Hard to judge whether this is true, but with billions of dollars in play I wouldn't put it past human nature to do something immoral.

<comment><USER43> It's enough money to make someone amplify global warming concerns in the media. Then, every news article about climate change - and even very hot days - become an advertisement for the product.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> I'm sorry but Musk's email is ridiculous and unprofessional, and the defenses here are extremely concerning.

By ArsTechnica's count this is the 5th fire in the plant. 5th. That's insane. Report after report is that things continue to not go well and the email sent out reeks of paranoia and combined with other comments made recently are quite clearly dishonest. They aren't failing at the details of ramping a manufacturing line...they are failing at the basics of running a factory. To use a restaurant analogy, he's presenting this like a giant conspiracy to throw salt in his special new desert, all the while their walkin freezer is at room temperature. It is a distraction.

Here is the full email as reported by CNBC:

>From: Elon Musk

>To: Everybody

>Subject: Some concerning news

>June 17, 2018

>11:57 p.m.

>I was dismayed to learn this weekend about a Tesla employee who had conducted quite extensive and damaging sabotage to our operations. This included making direct code changes to the Tesla Manufacturing Operating System under false usernames and exporting large amounts of highly sensitive Tesla data to unknown third parties.

>The full extent of his actions are not yet clear, but what he has admitted to so far is pretty bad. His stated motivation is that he wanted a promotion that he did not receive. In light of these actions, not promoting him was definitely the right move.

>However, there may be considerably more to this situation than meets the eye, so the investigation will continue in depth this week. We need to figure out if he was acting alone or with others at Tesla and if he was working with any outside organizations.

>As you know, there are a long list of organizations that want Tesla to die. These include Wall Street short-sellers, who have already lost billions of dollars and stand to lose a lot more. Then there are the oil & gas companies, the wealthiest industry in the world — they don't love the idea of Tesla advancing the progress of solar power & electric cars. Don't want to blow your mind, but rumor has it that those companies are sometimes not super nice. Then there are the multitude of big gas/diesel car company competitors. If they're willing to cheat so much about emissions, maybe they're willing to cheat in other ways?

>Most of the time, when there is theft of goods, leaking of confidential information, dereliction of duty or outright sabotage, the reason really is something simple like wanting to get back at someone within the company or at the company as a whole. Occasionally, it is much more serious.

>Please be extremely vigilant, particularly over the next few weeks as we ramp up the production rate to 5k/week. This is when outside forces have the strongest motivation to stop us.

>If you know of, see or suspect anything suspicious, please send a note to [email address removed for privacy] with as much info as possible. This can be done in your name, which will be kept confidential, or completely anonymously.

>Looking forward to having a great week with you as we charge up the super exciting ramp to 5000 Model 3 cars per week!

>Will follow this up with emails every few days describing the progress and challenges of the Model 3 ramp.

>Thanks for working so hard to make Tesla successful,

>Elon

It is one thing to report details or a broad explanation of the incident and request vigilance. It is another entirely to speculate about the source, especially to continue to place your company as the victim of conspiracies...ESPECIALLY when IN THE SAME EMAIL you make clear that the motive had nothing to do with any of those sources. He comes off as having a serious Martyr complex.

He said it was about promotion, why the speculation and the paranoia? The first 3 paragraphs are fine, they need ot be there. 4,5, and 6 look to me like planting excuses and leaking them through your employees. This email reads to me like it was written to leak. It was written to be PR sexy. I think it was written this way to get the 'sabotage' story press coverage.

This is a precursor to them missing 5k again. As others have reported they may not have the permitting necessary to even paint the number of cars they are targeting. They have 3 assembly lines trying to collectively produce 5k/cars a week, something other plants do with 1. Yesterday Musk talked about the short's eating their words because the stock price blipped...and now this. Shorts aren't in it for the short haul, look at Enron, look at the housing bubble. When a spaceX rocket blew up, he claimed sabotage. He made a PR show of 'moving into the Tesla factory' why? what is he going to do? Turn a wrench?

Taken individually none of these things are individually 'proof' he's losing it. Taken collectively, the preponderance of evidence is becoming increasingly damning. Occam's razor comes into play here. I've worked in big factories...I led lean task forces at two factories. All of these issues look to me like a lack of planning and an unawareness of how to execute on manufacturing mechanical things at scale. You can't rush a ramp, but you can speed it up. Getting management off the floor and getting them to empower engineers rather than manage engineers is a strong step towards it. Having the CEO living in the factory isn't anywhere in the Lean playbook that has let Toyota absolutely crush other companies in terms of manufacturing. And remember [edit: Toyota offered to help them do this and Musk burned that bridge].

Tesla's greatest enemy at this point is the cult of Elon Musk, and the cult's leader, Elon Musk.

<comment><USER45> > Tesla's greatest enemy at this point is the cult of Elon Musk, and the > cult's leader, Elon Musk.

Huh, well, given that, I strongly suggest you short TSLA, which would be a sure thing, right?

<comment><USER44> The best counter argument you have is sarcasm?

They had their 5th body shop fire yesterday. Immediately they implied the saboteur was to blame. What is more realistic

I don't short TSLA, I don't hold TSLA stock or options. I don't want to be involved with it in anyway shape or form.

<comment><USER45> > The best counter argument you have is sarcasm?

Yeah, I was tired and irratible when I wrote that. As quotes, it's actuly true: his small but extremely vocal 'cult' following is a big problem.

I still don't agree with most of what his most strident critics say.

I think he's being unusually straightforward in thought and communication.

<comment><USER44> Fair, I have definitely done the same thing.

Friends?

<comment><USER45> Friendly at least! (:

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Elon Musk has built up a really uncomfortable cult of personality in my opinion and I think it results in an incredibly horrendous environment to work in.

The way he's been behaving over the past few weeks (incl. his since-deleted reference to a cult site) does not exactly help his credibility when he's making broad claims like this. He's been blaming everyone else but himself for every single little mistake and I can't imagine him lasting very long like that if not for the cult surrounding him propping up his ego.

<comment><USER47> > He's been blaming everyone else but himself for every single little mistake

Really? I guess you glossed over him personally accepting responsibility for pushing Model X's falcon wing doors even though it was a mistake; and personally accepting responsibility for automating too much of the Model 3's assembly line which has caused massive delays.

And those are just the two examples that spring to mind of him apologizing personally and acknowledging the weaknesses of his personality, multiple times, in public.

Maybe you should reevaluate your absolutism.

<comment><USER46> Where was that personal responsibility when he started slinging mud at the media for reporting on the issues his company has been very publicly going through? Or when he started insulting people in the Tesla earnings call? Or during the fatal autopilot crash?

Or him linking to, again, a literal cult website and calling it good journalism.

<comment><USER48> I don't share your absolutism, but you're absolutely right that at least lately, Musk has been sending a lot of signals that he's becoming unhinged.

I wonder if, in trying to compete with people like Bezos, including by trying to become more macho, that he has overdosed on testosterone lately.

He used to be circumspect in his public comments. Now he seems to be increasingly paranoid and grandiose in his thinking, and bitter towards the "fake news" media that made him a celebrity in the first place.

And his proposals and estimates are likewise getting more detached from reality. He claimed rockets could be a good form of intercontinental travel, and his video showed a rocket outside a city with passengers boarding.

We can't put rocket ships outside of cities. His proposed BFR system would have about as much explosive potential as a Hiroshima nuke, and there'd be constant sonic booms and extremely loud engine blasts. One mix up, and you could incinerate Manhattan.

I do like his present goals of electric cars, reusable launch vehicles, solar power, and cheaper tunnels. But maybe take a chill pill. Ease up on the steroids or whatever.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Musk has every incentive to play up this incident, as long as it's concluded. A single bad event in the past can now be used to explain any number of problems. I trust him enough to believe there's a kernel of truth here, but the degree to which the sabotage actually affected operations is going to be presented in the greatest possible light.

<comment><USER50> Codename: Snowball.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> I can't really put my finger on why, but this looks like a quite stupid move. Usually in such situations this person gets fired and sued and then the top management tries to put silence over that topic. An email to the whole staff is the opposite of that and makes me wonder if Elon tries to cover some own missteps. Any hints in that direction?

<comment><USER52> This is almost certainly an element of it. Elon also seems to have discovered he finds theatricality quite appealing lately, so there's also that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> This doesn't make sense. If there is/was a saboteur then you would expect Musk to stay quiet until after a criminal investigation. Especially if there are alleged co-conspirators. Electric cars are a given now. The tech is proven. The AI autopilot is still open but that's a NTSB issue.

</comment><comment><USER54> Even if it's true I doubt the wisdom of publicizing it. It could derail any internal investigation, not to mention potentially looking like bullshit excuse-making.

Industrial espionage is real. I've heard plenty of stories. Usually it's handled very quietly and internally for exactly these reasons.

<comment><USER55> I think in the case of Tesla and their recent production failures they want to publicize it to explain shortages and help defend their stock.

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> This seems to be the introduction of a boogeyman to cover up for failures.

Or it might be true as well.

Only time will tell.

<comment><USER57> The paranoid minds here are too much. Consider the likelihoods of each explanation. Elon Musk didn't get to where he is now by orchestrating bizarre excuses.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> So if I work at Tesla and have a bit of a dispute with my colleague, I can now dob them in to the inquisition?

Sounds like a great corporate culture!

</comment><comment><USER59> From: Elon Musk

To: Everybody

Subject: Some concerning news

June 17, 2018

11:57 p.m.

I can't stand it, I know you planned it I'mma set it straight, this Watergate I can't stand rockin' when I'm in here 'Cause your crystal ball ain't so crystal clear So while you sit back and wonder why I got this fuckin' thorn in my side Oh my god, it's a mirage I'm tellin' y'all, it's sabotage So, so, so, so listen up, 'cause you can't say nothin' You'll shut me down with a push of your button But, yo, I'm out and I'm gone I'll tell you now, I keep it on and on 'Cause what you see, you might not get And we can bet, so don't you get souped yet Scheming on a thing, that's a mirage I'm trying to tell you now, it's sabotage Why Our backs are now against the wall Listen all y'all, it's a sabotage Listen all y'all, it's a sabotage Listen all y'all, it's a sabotage Listen all y'all, it's a sabotage I can't stand it, I know you planned it I'mma set it straight, this Watergate But I can't stand rockin' when I'm in this place Because I feel disgrace because you're all in my face But make no mistakes and switch up my channel I'm Buddy Rich when I fly off the handle What could it be, it's a mirage You're scheming on a thing, that's sabotage

Thanks for working so hard to make Tesla successful, Elon

<comment><USER60> I don't get it.

<comment><USER61> I think OP took the email and replaced the body with lyrics from Sabotage by the Beastie Boys.

[https://genius.com/Beastie-boys-sabotage-lyrics](https://genius.com/Beastie- boys-sabotage-lyrics)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, perhaps a short-seller paid an employee to sabotage. It is not out of the realm of possibility, especially since $TSLA is at a whopping 33% float short.

<comment><USER38> This was my thought exactly. Sounds like they hired an ex-CIA field operative who was expert at what he was doing.

<comment><USER63> >"This included making direct code changes to the Tesla Manufacturing Operating System under false usernames and exporting large amounts of highly sensitive Tesla data to unknown third parties."

What in here indicates ex-CIA operative to you? Theres no need to add any conspiracy around it. Adding a commit with a different username is incredibly trivial to anyone who can run commit with the command line, i.e. 99% of software engineers. As for exporting data to unknown third parties, I have seen interns do this by accident. Its not complicated or needs rare skills to do a lot of damage internally.

If Tesla runs fast and loose with ideas like their PR pieces suggest, I doubt their security is incredibly top notch in terms of locking down internal threats either

<comment><USER38> What matters is motivation. A person who is trained in sabotage, is used to doing it, and is being well-paid to do it is a lot more likely to so behave than a regular person who knows they will likely go to jail if they get caught. And there are lots of actors out there who have both the funds and motivation to hire such a person.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> What are the chances of this being FUD pushed by Musk to cover up for failing to meet expected deliveries and/or possibly other obstacles Tesla's been hitting recently?

</comment><comment><USER65> I had heard from a third party vendor on the site that Profibus issues (for communication to drives) was one of the major issues at site. I wonder if that was accurate or still true if so.

<comment><USER66> Profibus is a generic protocol for sensors and machines talking to each other (analog to JSON for web resources) so that essentially means they had problems with systems integration, e.g. getting machines integrated into the production lines.

Pretty surprising actually, I thought their problems were beyond that hurdle (e.g. the automation already works but has reliability problems).

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> Makes sense for Elon to be on the lookout. With a short position that size, hard to tell how low some could stoop.

</comment><comment><USER68> Searching For "Production Hell" At Ford's Kentucky Truck Plant [0]

[https://dailykanban.com/2018/02/searching-production-hell- fo...](https://dailykanban.com/2018/02/searching-production-hell-fords- kentucky-truck-plant/)

<comment><USER69> Thanks for posting that. Great article. I was blown away at the open access Ford grants to visitors and media at its most advanced production facility. ("Most advanced" is my assumption given that this plant produces Ford's highest margin vehicles.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> I don't want to be the conspiracy guy, but if I read the email the opposite way, I found out that the message is the sabotage first (yes), but the second point about ramping up the production to 5k is the second subject. I'm asking the question if this email could be a stunt to inform the investors their production state, to inform about the delays, etc. ? Simply wondering.

<comment><USER71> 5k/week was already the goal. He's just reassuring investors that it hasn't changed. [https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/01/tesla- delivers-1550-mod...](https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/01/tesla- delivers-1550-model-3s-in-q4-says-it-wont-hit-5k-per-week-next-quarter/)

<comment><USER70> Indeed. But I sense a more subtle message in this email than the sabotage. Don't you feel it ? It is purely subjective.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER72> Isn't this the plot in one of the episodes of Billions? If you are short a stock and a billion dollars is on the line, there are people you can pay who will "ensure" that a company fails and you win your B+ bet.

<comment><USER40> I believe it's a plotline in any film or TV series featuring gangs or mobs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER73> "His stated motivation is that he wanted a promotion that he did not receive. In light of these actions, not promoting him was definitely the right move."

Haha

</comment><comment><USER74> Yeah right, first employee sabotages them and another employee shares email from Elon to public. And choose CNBC. Someone needs to lower the stock price.

</comment><comment><USER75> Doesn't it make sense for Elon himself to be holding a sizeable short position? Presumably he'd like to hedge his large Tesla holding?

</comment><comment><USER76> Short sellers lost over $1 billion dollars on one day a couple weeks ago. Money talking, bullshit walking..... [https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/06/shorts- against-teslas-stock-...](https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/06/shorts-against- teslas-stock-lose-more-than-1-billion.html)

<comment><USER40> $1 billion sounds like a large number, but how many people was it spread across and what percentage of their portfolio was it?

</comment></comment><comment><USER77> _We need to figure out if he was acting alone or with others at Tesla and if he was working with any outside organizations._

 _As you know, there are a long list of organizations that want Tesla to die. These include Wall Street short-sellers, who have already lost billions of dollars and stand to lose a lot more. Then there are the oil & gas companies, the wealthiest industry in the world — they don't love the idea of Tesla advancing the progress of solar power & electric cars. Don't want to blow your mind, but rumor has it that those companies are sometimes not super nice. Then there are the multitude of big gas/diesel car company competitors. If they're willing to cheat so much about emissions, maybe they're willing to cheat in other ways?_

Wow, the level of paranoia he's going into is impressive.

And amazing how close his speech is moving (in form) to Trump's: it is all about "rumors", "alleged", "witch hunt", "unfair"...

<comment><USER78> There's a $10+ billion short position against TSLA, constituting over 25% of outstanding shares. Anyone working at Tesla _should_ be paranoid. Remember Enron? People invested deeply in something do criminally reprehensible things.

Much more importantly, Musk made very concrete allegations, the truth of which should come to light in short order. I remember the insinuation SpaceX made during the 2016 incident, which was much more circumspect. If this allegation proves false I don't think people will be as forgetful about the attempt at blame shifting.

<comment><USER79> >There's a $10+ billion short position against TSLA, constituting over 25% of outstanding shares.

Where do you get these stats?

Is there some place where we can see how many people are shorting different stocks?

<comment><USER80> It's educated guessing, from analysts, according to what I've seen.[1] That said, it's not just a large short position, it's _the largest_ (recently surpassing Apple shorts). Given that Apple's market cap is 15 times that of Tesla, that's quite a lot.

1: [https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2018/04/15/tesla- has...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2018/04/15/tesla-has-the- largest-short-position-of-any-stock-followed-by-the-faangs/#449dfbcc1573)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER81> > As you know, there are a long list of organizations that want Tesla to die.

Is it correct to use 'are' here instead of 'is'?

<comment><USER82> I'm not sure, but my hunch is either is OK.

Compare:

> There are a hundred organizations that want Tesla to die.

> There is a hundred organizations that want Tesla to die.

<comment><USER83> How many organizations? A hundred: plural. "There are a hundred organizations.."

How many lists? One: singular. "There is a list of a hundred organizations.."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER84> Ahh, the little man again. The little man has been giving Elon and Tesla problems for a long time.

Early on Musk thought Henry Fisker, who led the design on the Model S then left to start his own EV company was the little man, so he launched a lawsuit against him, but it turned out Henry wasn't the little man, and the lawsuit was meritless.

The little man talked Musk into building falcon wing doors into the Model X, and it wasn't until production had been delayed by many months fussing with those stupid doors that Musk realized he had been tricked by the little man.

Who put the little man up to this? Was it the Koch Brothers? No one knows for sure.

The little man talked Elon into putting expensive autonomous driving hardware into every new Tesla, even though the software hadn't been made yet, and most Tesla buyers weren't willing to pay for it. Don't worry, said the little man, Tesla's will be driving autonomously coast to coast by christmas 2017, and Tesla will be the greatest most futuristic company ever. But Christmas 2017 came and went and Autopilot still sucked. Damn that little man!

The little Man must be Sterling Anderson, the director of Autopilot left the company right after launching HW2, and cofounded Aurora Innovation. Musk was sure Sterling was the little man, so he launched a lawsuit against Aurora, but alas, it turned out the Little man was not Sterling Anderson, and the lawsuit was meritless.

And then there was the time the little man tricked Elon into spending $2.6 billion worth of money Tesla didn't really have on a failing, debt ridden solar panel company. Oh you little man!

The little man one night snuck into the hot tub with Elon and filled his head with visions of a highly automated production line, that the little man dubbed 'The Alien Dreadnought'. The Robots will move so fast you won't even be able to see them, said the little man. Model 3s will shoot off the assembly line like bullets out of gatling gun. Buy Grohman Engineering, said the little man. So Elon did. And many hundreds of millions of dollar later when the Alien dreadnought failed miserably, Musk realized once again he had been tricked by the little man, and all the robots had to be ripped out. Musk is determined, though. Now he has parts of the Model 3 assembly line set up in a tent in the parking lot. Elon will make it happen, even if he has to live on the factory floor. You shall not defeat me, little man!

But it bothers him every night, that little man, who put him up to this? Is it the Tesla shorts? are they the ones who put the little man up to this? Was it May Mcormack? The little man has been out there, corralling the NTSB, the NLRB, the Media, financial analysts, Moody's and the UAW all to conspire against Tesla. Now the little man is setting the paint shop on fire and changing code. I'll get you if it's the last thing I do, little man!

<comment><USER85> News flash! Achieving great things is hard and everybody makes some mistakes along the way. On the way, they meet jokers who take great pride in laughing at their mistakes, because, let's be real, jokers are sore losers. Deep down they know they can't do 1% of that shit, and so yeah, let's lift a leg and piss on that fucker. That will show him!

<comment><AUTHOR> Being founder / CEO of one industry disruptive company would be fine. Risky proposition under anyone's helm, yes, but Musk is a great salesman so he would stand a better chance than most of probably pulling it off. But no fewer than FOUR (Tesla, SpaceX, Boring Co, SolarCity (technically under Tesla's umbrella but for all intents and purposes its own business)), it starts to strain credulity.

<comment><USER85> Landing two rockets at the same time also strains credulity. Using it as defense Is failure of imagination

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER86> A dog-ate-my-homework tier excuse, from Elon Musk?

What can I say, except "lol".

</comment><comment><USER87> Shorting should be illegal.

</comment><comment><USER88> Listen y'all it's sabotage

<comment><USER65> I can't stand it, I know you planned it... gotta set straight this Watergate.

<comment><USER89> "young npm punks littering the thread with beastie boy references and old C wizards grumbling at the youth of today"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER90> This isn't good.

I mean, there may well be saboteurs in Tesla. That's not my issue. What worries me is that Musk sent out a general email and announced this to the world.

Why is that worrying?

Whether it is Trump's "Deep State", Stalin's "wreckers", shadow governments, or Freemasons. Any time a leader starts publically pointing to invisible actors and demanding they be investigated and stopped, something is about to go very wrong.

What inevitably follows is leaders asserting that their failures are not due to incompetence or poor planning on their part, but are caused unseen and irrational forces who must be opposed.

<comment><USER91> How is this an unseen and irrational force? It is a seen force - assuming we trust Musk in his assertion that a specific saboteur was identified and confessed to their actions, which I personally do given his overall track record - and it is a rational force given both immediate motivations (revenge for lack of promotion) and general motivations (massive extensively-documented well-funded multi-decade effort by the fossil fuel industry to thwart adoption of alternative energy). On top of that, none of this was public by virtue of it being a leaked internal email.

> I mean, there may well be saboteurs in Tesla. That's not my issue.

Yes, but your issue _is_ apparently issuing proclamations about responses to saboteurs. Your stance on said issue holds little ground when you either seemingly can't be bothered to look at the basic facts or mischaracterize them to fit an agenda. So, which is it? Did you not read the article or are you being deliberately misleading?

</comment></comment><comment><USER92> To me this sounds like a major violation of SOX controls. If this is the case Tesla is in deep trouble with the SEC.

<comment><USER93> > _major violation_

> _deep trouble_

Serious: no they wouldn't. Their auditor would report the compliance failure and say, try harder next year ok!

Real: ah hah hahah hhaaaah hahahah ha lolll

<comment><USER92> Won't they need report the failure of controls to the SEC?

<comment><USER93> > _Their auditor would report the compliance failure_

You have to fail multiple times, hard, before anyone gives a shit

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER94> according to CNC? The machines are aliiive! [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_control](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_control)

</comment><comment><USER95> While plausible, it kind of sounds like a "Blame it on the Rain" situation. [https://youtu.be/BI5IA8assfk](https://youtu.be/BI5IA8assfk)

</comment><comment><USER96> Is it possible to make money by convincing everyone to short your company and then pushing the rug in under them by making earnings projections? Musk's recent announcements have been suspiciously suspicious.

<comment><USER97> probably... 'short squeezes' do cause price spikes, and if you control the news cycle about a company, I'm sure you could benefit from the extra volatility.

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> Hmm, this doesn't paint rosy (immediate) future for Tesla :( Usually when CxOs start internal blaming it's the final phase...

</comment><comment><USER99> Warming up the excuses. /s

I wonder if any of these changes made it into production automobiles.

Hurray for OTA updates to safety critical systems. Go Silicon Valley, disrupting lives everywhere!

</comment><comment><USER100> Wow...I've lost all hope in HN. It's officially become worse than Reddit in terms of astroturfing. I don't know how you can take a story about someone inside Tesla sabotaging their operations and come out against Tesla in this situation, but somehow every single comment in this thread has manged to do that in different ways. "Tesla's fault for letting this happened!" "It's just an excuse for production delays!" "Elon's paranoid!" "Conspiracy theorist!" "Blaming short sellers is what Enron did! Leave the poor short sellers alone!"

I don't trust anything I read on HN anymore. Alright bots, now down vote me into oblivion where all the pro-Tesla comments end up.

<comment><USER101> Why do you assume it's astroturfing? In my opinion, a lot of people just don't like Tesla or Elon Musk.

It's dangerous to assume that everyone who disagrees with you on the internet is a bot.

</comment></comment><comment><USER76> I love Elon, and he has been seeming a little more random lately. Shortsellers lost over $1 billion dollars in one day earlier this month, I know Elon is paranoid, but is he paranoid enough? [https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/06/shorts- against-teslas-stock-...](https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/06/shorts-against- teslas-stock-lose-more-than-1-billion.html)

</comment><comment><USER102> Sounds like all the bad decisions about who to hire (low cost, inexperienced workers) and who to fire (higher cost, experienced workers), how long to force people to work, overuse of automation, etc., has caught up with Tesla. And now Musk wants to externalize it so Tesla doesn't look bad and loose _even_ more orders of the model 3.

<comment><USER103> I think you just have a lot of pot shots to take against Tesla (most of which seem to have no precedent??), and want to project them onto this situation. This story relates to an internal email Musk sent around, telling staff to speak up about suspicious behaviour. It's not like he brought this to a shareholders meeting.

<comment><USER104> Musk is not dumb enough to think that an all-company "internal" email would _not_ leak to external media.

<comment><USER105> Yes, but how is he to communicate to his employee to stay vigilant?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Somebody please hire me before I take a job in weapon development - <AUTHOR> Hello fellow HNers.
I am posting this from a throw-away account. I tried to anonymize most of the details here; I will of course give my full details to serious people who will contact me privately.
I'm a Python developer, and I live in a famously aggressive little country. I'm currently being offered to work in a big governmental firm responsible for weapon development for our military. Military power is a very high priority for my country, thus a lot of resources are given to these kind of companies, and thus I'm being offered very good salary and benefits for this job.
I don't really want to work there. Incidentally, I'm not a pacifist, but I would really prefer to avoid working with these kind of people. Also I wouldn't want to do all the security checks and be exposed to secret military information, etc.
Will anyone here be interested of hiring me? I'd be interested in working as a telecommuting freelancer.
About myself: I'm in my twenties, I've been programming Python for a few years, and I'm the developer of two open-source projects, whose code you could inspect freely when you'll contact me privately. I have some experience with Django and I can maintain a LAMP stack. I am also interested in scientific computing.
Here's my anonymous contact email: email@example.com
Thanks. <comment><USER2> You should hire me instead of him. I've been using python to do statistics and machine learning in a bioinformatics context for the last 15 years. Plus, if you don't, I'll kill this puppy. Isn't he cute? You wouldn't want to be responsible for his death, would you?

<comment><AUTHOR> Your criticism is right, this is a sensationalist appeal. Do you think I shouldn't have made it?

<comment><USER2> Do you think my satire contains a moral judgment?

(I hear you like to answer questions with questions over there.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Touche. Your satire was pretty funny.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I have a problem believing this is about Israel since:

a) Defense companies in Israel _do not_ offer "very good salary." In fact, it is a generally accepted fact that they universally offer lower salaries than civilian companies. This is offset somewhat by the benefits that stem from being a large and influential enterprise as well as the inherent governmental bureaucracy.

b) Engineers at Israeli defense firms don't tend to be particularly militaristic or in any way "these kind of people," and I know quite a few...

<comment><USER4> Maybe Taiwan, Korea or Singapore.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> OK, below is my honest, if a bit blunt, opinion.

You're not a rocket scientist, your skillset as described won't make a difference for Israel (?) military power. Either go for it and enjoy your pay, or if you have your principles, don't go for it and try finding a boring civilian job as all other non-rocket-scientists do . But the drama, it's not there.

<comment><USER6> Heh, when he said an aggressive little country the first thought that came to my mind was Georga.

<comment><USER7> Really? My first thought was Switzerland.

<comment><USER8> I assumed it was the US and "little" was sarcastic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The standard advice I've heard is: Work for defense companies to learn the technology, and then leave to transfer this technology toward peaceful (and often lucrative) applications. Swords into Ploughshares.

<comment><USER10> Speaking for the U.S. context only: once you have a security clearance, which will become necessary at some point for defence work, it becomes difficult to move out to non-classified work. On one hand, the pool of people with clearances is smaller than the general labor pool, so you can have a higher salary & benefits, therefore it's more attractive to stay at that kind of work. On the other hand, prospective employers outside defence likely do not have clearances and so cannot learn anything about what you did - this makes it difficult to leverage your experience when seeking to move to a new job.

I don't work in defence. That is just what I've heard from people who do as one of the reasons why it's hard to "rotate in, rotate out."

<comment><USER11> You are correct (IME) in your first point, about the difficulty of moving away from the high salary and benefits associated with cleared jobs, but not really on the second one.

Doing secure work means you can't take any confidential information with you when you leave, and it might slightly limit what you can talk about, but it doesn't mean you can't say _anything_ about the work you did. You can still talk about your role and skillset, usually about the languages and technologies (and COTS products) used.

Many government IT projects mandate security-cleared developers because the systems touch classified information, but that doesn't mean that the systems _themselves_ (their existence, basic design, etc.) are classified. There's really no difference between having a project like that on your resume, and any other commercial-sector project that's internal use only.

If you're working or considering working on a clearance-required project, it's not unreasonable to ask to talk with the security officer beforehand to clear up exactly what you'll be able to put on your resume and discuss after the fact ... and price yourself accordingly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Python and Django for missile control? For real?

      import sys, missile_lib
      destination = sys.argv[1]
      controller = missile_lib.Missile_control()
      controller.fire(destination)

</comment><comment><USER13> I'm trying to think of "famously aggressive" and "little", and all I can come up with is one of them Koreas.

<comment><USER14> Or Venezuela. But most likely Israel.

<comment><USER15> Venezuela aggressive?? Chavez speaks a lot, but that's about it. And it's not really a little country either, at nearly 1 million square kilometres.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Good move. I had a girlfriend whose father worked designing guidance systems for rockets. He couldn't speak a word about his job to his family, and it was apparent that his conscience struggled with the fact that his engineering handiwork was only good for killing people.

</comment><comment><USER17> I wouldn't want to hire someone who was willing to compromise his ethics simply for a "very good salary and benefits."

<comment><USER18> I don't know the whole story, but I have known very good, moral people who worked for companies that they didn't completely agree with ethically because they put their _family_ or their _health_ first. Ethics isn't always so simple. If "a very good salary and benefits" is the difference between being very sick or getting that surgery you need, or if it's the difference between sending your kids to a good school or a bad one.... Let's just say that I wouldn't be so quick to judge.

<comment><USER19> I completely agree with you and don't think you can just call a person 'bad' for working at a 'bad' company. But technically speaking, a lot, if not most, of the 'very good, moral' people you described don't leave the companies even when they are in a more stable and comfortable situation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> if someone gives you a better offer, can i have your defense job? sounds pretty cushy to me

<comment><AUTHOR> It is pretty cushy, and you don't need to wait for me to abandon it. But you must be a native of my country and a reasonably able Python programmer. If you are, send me a mail.

<comment><USER21> well what is your country? If this is a throw-away account I can't understand why you can't disclose that?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Here's a question: how do we know you haven't already been co-opted by your military establishment?

</comment><comment><USER23> 2 things first, you sound like a german during WW2. (hold the anger) I mean really, your saying you don't want to get paid to kill jews, but you want to get paid well for that skill set and no one else in your market will pay you what your 'worth 2nd /later

</comment><comment><USER24> I've never worked in defense. Can someone explain what "these kind of people" means?

<comment><USER25> I don't know exactly what the poster meant by "these people", but my own experience having worked at a defense contractor was that the facility I was at (which designed and made missles), all of the managers were upset that there wasn't presently a war going on. I suspect that the past few years have been better for morale there.

Every day they would have meetings going over global hot spots and assess whether there was any chance that the U.S. would have to intervene, and therefore purchase more armaments from them. This was not an objective, collective discussion, but a pleading.

I found that at least at that particular company, by and large, "these kind of people" were shitbags.

I will say, that contrasted with work I've done with other defense contractors in the ensuing years, they are not all uniform.

<comment><USER26> Strange, since most of the US big money spending is mostly unrelated to the wars. They didn't start the F-22 when the war in Iraq broke out, the new aircraft carriers are rolling out to replace ones that are getting old, not ones that got sunk ... etc.

<comment><USER25> That's less true of "perishable" items like munitions.

Generally, the US Government has a set stockpile (which may increase or decrease based on policy changes, but is usually static).

This company made guided missiles (very expensive, medium to long range), and needed the existing stockpile to be depleted (which is a nice way of saying that they needed things to be blown up).

Other divisions of the company I'm sure were working on different kinds of projects, the contracts for which weren't as contingent on being in a skirmish.

There's a difference between having a contract to develop and design an F-22 (which thankfully occurs before they are needed in warfare) and to actually build replacement F-22's (such as when they are shot down).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> So, in order to do the 'right' thing, we have to make you a counter offer? Is that how this works?

Everyone! Mail me money so I don't have to enable murder!

</comment><comment><USER28> Is it the UK?

<comment><USER29> Aggressive _maybe_ , but by which standards is the UK "little"?

<comment><USER30> Area? Population? It's certainly not large.

<comment><USER29> By world standards it's not large, but among its immediate neighbours it's one of the largest countries: third by population in the EU and one of the larger by area.

I'd think places like Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, or even Austria would get called little much before UK, to say nothing of the smaller countries like Iceland or Luxembourg. I don't think many people in the UK would describe it as little either.

<comment><USER31> Guys, it obvious he's from the Vatican.

<comment><USER32> Of course! The particle accelerator.

But the morals? This would have to be the biggest weight on this matter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> How's Israel this time of year?

<comment><USER31> Don't think it's Israel, he would have already spent time in the military if he was Israeli.

<comment><USER31> The down voting is really strange.

If he is Israeli, and in his mid twenties then he has already served in the IDF, likely in a CS capacity. Also if he was Sherut Leumi, then I wouldn't think he would apply for a military contract job in the first place. Furthermore, its especially difficult for people with highly desirable backgrounds like CS or engineering to get Sherut approval.

My only point was that an Israeli in their mid twenties has already served in the military and if they have, or plan to get a degree in CS, they have served in the military in a capacity relating to CS or engineering.

Of course it's totally possible that I'm wrong and he is from Israel.

Just out of curiosity, anyone have any explanations of the down voting? Don't really mind, I just find it kind of bizarre.

<comment><USER34> The only explanation I can think of for you being downvoted is, well, ignorance. Perhaps HNers are not familiar with Israel's policy of mandatory military service and thought your remark was somehow prejudiced.

As far as small aggressive countries that _aren't_ Israel, how about Georgia, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia, or Greece?

<comment><USER35> Was trying to figure it out too. The problem is the dual criteria:

famously aggressive + develops their own military technology.

Who is known for developing their own military technology? US, Russia, China, Britain, France, Germany, Sweden, Israel, North Korea, Iran, Iraq (the last two only if WMD accusations are true)...?

Pretty much everyone else buys their military technology from China, Russia, US, France, or Israel, be it AK47s, F15s, or silkworm and exocet missiles.

So, which among the countries that manufacture military hardware are famously aggressive? Well, lately that's pretty much the US and Israel. Maybe Russia with the Chechen and Georgian thing, and maybe China with Tibet and threats vs. Taiwan. North Korea, but is anyone there actually allowed to learn English much less programming?

'Little' I also took to be diminutive, not literal.

<comment><USER36> I'm fairly certain Pakistan also develops its military hardware in house, it is a a large weapon exporter after all.

<comment><USER31> see those were my two guesses: Taiwan or Pakistan.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Hire me. I have no morals.</comment>


Tesla selects Nevada for battery plant - <AUTHOR> http://news.yahoo.com/ap-source-tesla-selects-nevada-battery-plant-200941469.html

<comment><USER2> This isn't a spam post (I've been on HN for 4+ years and have good karma, see my profile)...

But for those who want to keep up with Tesla in a simple and easy way, I recently started a weekly email newsletter ([http://teslaweekly.com](http://teslaweekly.com)) that highlights the most notable Tesla news along with additional commentary. You can see the 1st edition at [http://teslaweekly.com/issues/1](http://teslaweekly.com/issues/1) .

<comment><USER3> Good luck keeping your domain, as it would seems it is trademark infringing.

<comment><USER4> Author seems to be well-meaning, so I hope that... no, I _expect_ Tesla to play nice with him. It would be a really sad thing if they litigated.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm glad to see they've finally made a decision. Harry Reid had expressed some concern [1] that Musk might have been playing Nevada with no real intention of building the Gigafactory there, so it's all well that it panned out.

On an unrelated note, for anyone interested in tracking Tesla's supercharger progress, they have a map of current and planned stations across the three continents they've expanded into. [2] I enjoy checking it occasionally to see how much progress they've made.

[1] [http://www.businessinsider.com/harry-reid-elon-musk-might- be...](http://www.businessinsider.com/harry-reid-elon-musk-might-be-playing- nevada-2014-8) [2] [http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger](http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger)

<comment><USER6> Playing? How?

<comment><USER7> Playing a state, in this context, would be securing regulatory concessions and tax incentives from Nevada without any intention of building a factory there. Those concessions could then be used as bargaining chips in the state in which they intended to build the plant.

<comment><USER6> It costs Nevada nothing if they don't actually build there. That's just negotiation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Basically, it's as close to California's engineering center as possible without having to deal with the expensive manufacturing environment that is California. Plus a huge incentive. Nice work, Tesla.

The part about proximity to lithium & renewable energy is just PR fluff... but it can make you feel good when you are paying a few hundred dollars less for your car.

</comment><comment><USER9> From the article:

>At present, demand for electric vehicles is small. Through August, automakers have sold just over 40,000 fully electric cars this year, up 35 percent from a year ago.....

At present, the _supply_ of the electrical vehicles is low, and Tesla for one cannot keep up with the demand - as evidenced by the 5-month waiting list for a new Tesla model S. The new factory will drastically increase the supply, and we can expect the demand to grow further as the prices for electrical vehicles are reduced.

</comment><comment><USER10> "Tesla has said it would need about 10 million square feet"

Wow, that's big! Reno always made sense - structurally cheaper than CA, but closer to the Fremont factory than even Los Angeles.

Also, I hate business tax incentives, but $500M for a $5B factory + 6500 jobs is not terrible.

<comment><USER11> It's hell in winter to get to Reno via 80 though. The highway can close a lot.

I'm not sure about the rail lines, but I can imagine a lot of delays in infrastructure in winter either way. At least for a Fremont-LA line, you won't hit those snags in winter.

<comment><USER12> I would joke about adding a hyperloop between Reno and the Bay Area :-) Actually rail is pretty reliable through there, more so than the highway.

<comment><USER13> I know here in Canada rail is far more reliable in winter than highway. Raised rail lines tend to stay clear of snow build up. Snow on the rails isn't a big issue, its more the build up that bottoms out the train.

I doubt these will be being shipped by truck given the quantities we're dealing with. I also would not doubt an improvement in the infrastructure for a corporation bringing 6500 jobs and $5bn into the economy.

<comment><USER14> There's a really cool snowblower train that plies Donner Pass between Sacramento and Reno:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItdRfvYHPAY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItdRfvYHPAY)

<comment><USER15> "Cool" is the word to describe it, especially in the middle of all that snow.

There's an example of that kind of rail-clearing engine in Skagway, Alaska. I saw it there just over a month ago. That snow machine isn't used anymore--an historic museum piece on exhibit--but close up it is impressive.

<comment><USER16> Maybe they'll finally start running Capitol Corridor trains to Reno? That would be lovely in the winter for heading up to Tahoe for skiing...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Did someone find out about this early? At around 4pm, there was a momentary ~$8 stock in the price of TSLA in after-hours trading.

[http://i.imgur.com/WOoJI1v.png](http://i.imgur.com/WOoJI1v.png)

<comment><USER18> The uptick occured at 4:14pm ET, which is _exactly_ when the news was first published at [http://www.autonews.com/article/20140903/OEM05/140909950/tes...](http://www.autonews.com/article/20140903/OEM05/140909950/tesla- to-locate-gigafactory-in-nevada-report-says) (Automotive News were the first ones to learn about it and published the article at 4:13pm).

<comment><USER13> Either someone's really fast, or I'm guessing this is autotraders that pick up on keywords.

<comment><USER19> Most hedge funds these days use tools to trawl news and social media sites so they can react quicker to news. I'm sure old school investment firms aren't far behind.

<comment><USER20> It's hardly most hedge funds that do this. But there are a few that do, and since price is determined on the margin, it only takes a few to move the price.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Worth pointing out that at least two of the competitors against Nevada, Arizona and Texas, have laws on the books prohibiting direct sales (as opposed to going through a dealership). I'm sure that was a factor.

<comment><USER22> Tesla could have used the factory as a leverage to remove those laws.

<comment><USER21> I think they tried with Arizona. As far as I know, it didn't happen.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Nevada and Lithium:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Peak,_Nevada](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Peak,_Nevada)

If the goal is to reduce the cost of production, nevada has a terrific 'local' source of lithium, which probably counted for something.

<comment><USER24> Cheap geothermal and solar power. No state income tax. Close proximity to aerospace and defense employees and vendors. Reasonably close to Tesla. And, yes, close to major lithium deposits.

<comment><USER4> And, to remind everyone, Musk actually called various mining operations directly and secured some very good deals.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Super news for Nevada! This is a state that really needs some jobs outside of the casino industry.

<comment> vhost- Agreed! I'm a native Nevadan that left Reno for tech. But my parents definitely need jobs :).

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> For those interested, there will be a live stream announcement from Gov Sandoval at 4PM PST [http://gov.nv.gov/](http://gov.nv.gov/)

</comment><comment><USER27> I wonder if this will do anything to help turn Reno into more of a tech employment center in its own right.

<comment><USER28> It already is! Reno has changed quite a bit over the past few years. There are more and more small tech companies springing up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> no individual or income taxes, how much did that weigh in the decision, or did Harry Reid weigh in?

<comment><USER30> Apple also received/is receiving additional incentives [1] for their new iCloud data centers which are being built near where Tesla is planning to put the gigafactory (the plot of land is already graded for the factory).

For those interested, Katie Fehrenbacher from Gigaom did some great coverage last month of what is happening out here RE: Tesla and Apple.[2]

1\. [http://www.areadevelopment.com/newsItems/8-3-2012/apple- iclo...](http://www.areadevelopment.com/newsItems/8-3-2012/apple-icloud-data- center-sparks-nv-262722.shtml) 2\. [http://gigaom.com/2014/08/10/the-changing- face-of-reno-why-t...](http://gigaom.com/2014/08/10/the-changing-face-of-reno- why-the-worlds-biggest-little-city-is-attracting-apple-tesla/)

<comment><USER28> They broke ground on the gigafactory's pit and foundation a few months back.</comment></comment></comment>


Phase Velocity versus Group Velocity: Wave Dispersion - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIqKG5TiSYs <comment><AUTHOR> Observation:

Group velocity -- can potentially be much faster -- than any of its constituent, individual phase velocity components, from other individual waves...

Conversely, it should be possible to construct a relatively fast moving group velocity wave -- by means of commingling two or more much slower individual waves...

Also -- apparently by adjusting phase (all of the above occurs by phase adjustment), you could also get a backwards-traveling group velocity wave, even though the constituent individual phase velocity waves are forward moving...</comment>


task_t considered harmful: security design flaw in iOS/macOS kernel - <AUTHOR> https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2016/10/taskt-considered-harmful.html <comment><USER2> What an absolutely amazing tour-de-force of a devastating design flaw in all versions of macOS and iOS and tvOS and watchOS!

The negotiations detailed in the bug report timeline about meetings between "senior apple and google leadership" for keeping this secret past the general deadline really underlines that.</comment>


Is Instagram app crashing for anyone else? - <AUTHOR> Keeps crashing for me on Android (Nexus 6P) <comment><USER2> Same here too. Crashes frequently on Android when scrolling through the feed.

</comment><comment><USER3> It does. Whenever I am going through the stories. Started a few days ago.</comment>