/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7503558

>/sci/ hate musk

lol no

We hate him because of his fanboys flooding /sci/ with his pointless autistic threads with.
Also because he's a hack.

>>7503566

>We hate him because of his fanboys

well I don't know another man who deserves more love and respect than him

>>7503668
> everything he does fails and explodes in catastrophic ways
> I don't know another man who deserves more love and respect than him
1/10

>>7503566
>...he's a hack.
This.

>>7503694
that looks closer than anything I've ever seen for a full rocket landing in earth gravity and atmosphere, pretty cool IMO, and looks like it's still needs refinement but that it's well on its way

>>7503694
big badda boom!

>>7503694
You're acting like what he's doing has ever been done before and that failure can't happen. You're a twat.

>>7503694

>everything he does fails and explodes in catastrophic ways

He is in space business, crashes and explosions is part of the deal there. And he has pretty good rate of success on his flight record.

>>7503566
>we hate him
>we
speak for yourself

>>7503668
>>7503863
>>7503937
>>7503938
>>7503940

musk shilling intensifies

>>7503668
>>7503937
>>7503938

See these same ass melonusk drones ? The guy doesn't have one single successful achievement and they can't say anything that will make him respectful in any way.
This guy is a joke that thinks hes NASA or something and he will keep failing until he dies.
Can't wait for his next fireworks show though, I must admit it's very enjoyable to watch his rockets go boom.

>>7503940
Oh I'm sorry. We hate him except for these 3-4 desperate muskfags.
Fix'd :^)

>>7503948
>we
see >>7503940

I wasn't implying that I love elon musk. i'm saying that only niggers speak for other people.

i hate him because his billions of dollars somehow regrew his hair and improved his face

>>7503943
I'm sure Elon is taking your critiques very seriously and is changing his business practices as we speak.

>>7503944
>what is paypal, tesla, spacex
yeah dude putting a rocket in LEO, creating and selling mass-made electric cars that get the best ratings that any vehicle has ever gotten in history is no big thing. i'm sure you do that in your spare time, yeah?

>>7503558
wow.
look at his facial features.
how can you not pity this cortisol plagued man?

>>7503952
that's really all of the musk-hate in a nut-shell.

>>7503558

What is going on here, who are these antimusk shills? On every other board every mention of Musk name brings colossal wave of adoration but it looks like sci board that should love him most hate him, wtf.

>>7503961
He's steve jobs.

>>7503956

> rocket in LEO

even russians was doing it for roughly 50 years before musk

>>7503961
he grew his hair back so chromedomes have to actually try to shill that he's a loser, with his billions of dollars and great projects that nobody else has had the balls+money to do.

it's pretty ridiculous to take anyone that shits on elon musk seriously.

>>7503963

This.

/thread

>>7503956
> implying anyones comments was ever a factor of his explosive future full of failures

Anyone knows whens his next fireworks show ?

>>7503558

he is entrepreneur not a scientist, so he lacks features that I respect in peoples most

Envy is literally the only reason anyone here hates him.

>>7503984
Yeah. We can't explode rockets like he does :(

I don't hate him but I also don't like the marketing surrounding Tesla. I understand that it's basically the proper business approach but still, everybody was made to think that Tesla basically solved the electric car problem when in fact they simply used the same technology that was available forever to make a $80K semi-luxury car.

Meanwhile Mitsubishi, Nissan and Renault all have electric cars in the below $35k range. They actually seem much closer to creating an electric car for the common man than Musk is.

>>7503976

you only respect scientists?

>>7504005

What Tesla has accomplished is making an electric car that people actually want for non-altruistic reasons. Since that is the only way they'll ever start to replace IC engines, I'd say they deserve the credit they get (excluding the most extreme hype). Instead of being a compromise for the sake of the environment, the model S is the best reviewed car of all time.

>>7504005

>Mitsubishi, Nissan and Renault all have electric cars in the below $35k range

all of them is hybrides tho, musk working on pure ev. also this is was part of his business strategy, create luxury car first and car for common man after that, Tesla 3 will be pretty much affordable. Actually my biggest concern is how his lithium ion battery will behave in cold climate, my smartphone lasts like 3 hours in -25 C.

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/05/elon-musk-the-worlds-raddest-man.html

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/06/how-tesla-will-change-your-life.html

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/08/how-and-why-spacex-will-colonize-mars.html

>>7504021

You're looking at it from a very simplistic and stupid perspective.

Ferrari and Bugatti also make cars people want to buy. Does that mean that everyone is now just driving sports cars? No.

Aesthetics are not really the crucial factor in stopping people from buying electric cars. The crucial factors are range and cost. And they are tied together. If you increase range like Tesla did, you also have to increase cost.

And Tesla didn't solve the range/cost problem any more than an other electric car manufacturer did. They simply increased the cost until they got usable range. Something that anyone could have done.

They might have brilliant packaging and good battery management but other than that they didn't really have an breakthroughs. The hype they get doesn't really justify what they actually accomplished.

>>7504035
>stupid
and discarded

>>7504005

wasn't tesla the first commercial car with lithium-ion batteries?

He's a great engineer.

>>7504005
>>7504035
>mfw ee
>mfw i know you have no idea what you're talking about
it tastes good

>>7504035

If you think it's about "aesthetics" then you know nothing about cars or are very disingenuous or both.

>Why does /sci/ hate this Elon Musk?
In general /sci/ doesn't, it's just the people who have nothing else to do when their IQ and Jacob Barnette threads get deleted

>>7503558

more like Elon The Meme Musk

Melon husk

>>7504043

Yes, Panasonic 3.7V 18650s same as in your laptop. They did something unorthodox there. Instead of focusing on battery development, they found the cheapest most ubiquitous lithium-ion cell a put most of their effort into building effective active battery management and monitoring.

Whereas most others where using prismatic cells and trying to fit as much of them as possible into as small of a space as possible with much less battery management.

>>7504049

Being an EE doesn't make you an expert on everything that electrical. Tesla doesn't just hire everybody with an EE degree.

I don't really see how Tesla's range per cost is all that much of a noteworthy development. Their battery costs $30,000 which is as much as the i-Miev costs. If you compute the range/cost it is only slightly better than that of the i-Miev and that latter is an old car by now and it's probably easier to fit more range for cheaper on a larger expensive car than it is to fit it on a small city car.

>>7503943
lolwat
nvm denial will always be seen as confirming shill-Ness
yes I'm totally a musk-shill

>>7504070
Shills are the people that intentonally misinform poeple for their own agenda or to sell them something which is usually against their own interests. So accepting that you're a shill doesn't mean you get to keep your credibility.
All your current and future posts go into the trash this instance :^)

>>7504069

Amateurs are already building battery packs with 150km range for around $12,000 which is very close to the range/cost that Tesla are getting and most accomplish it without much in terms of battery management besides a smart charger and some heating around the outside of the battery pack.

BTFO ULA shills

>>7504098
ULA ?

>>7504099

I assume he means United Launch Alliance. Now strangely enough this thread is mostly about Tesla so I don't really know why he posted that.

>>7504069

OK so this article does seem to imply that the cells aren't standard:

>This success hasn’t come from a breakthrough but from the close partnership between Tesla Motors and the major battery cell supplier Panasonic. Since 2008, the cost of Tesla’s battery packs has been cut approximately in half, while the storage capacity has increased by about 60 percent. Tesla didn’t attempt to radically change the chemistry or materials in lithium-ion batteries; rather, it made incremental engineering and manufacturing improvements. It also worked closely with Panasonic to tweak the chemistry of existing battery materials according to the precise needs of its cars.

http://www.technologyreview.com/review/534866/why-we-dont-have-battery-breakthroughs/

>>7504106
>>7504098
Whats ULA got to do with Melonusk ?

>>7504117

Don't know, don't care. I'm really only in this thread because I want to get some understand of what Tesla is or isn't doing.

For all the press Tesla gets I cannot find many blog articles that go in detail on the engineering in the Model S. All you find is stupid articles for laymen.

>>7504126
I really hate Musk shills but I'll explain why I would buy a Tesla if I was in the market for a car atm:

1. Safety - these things are really well engineered and have amazing safety. I'm not aware of any other cars that beat them

2. Range - I'm fairly sure they have the largest range, no?

3. Support - they have an incredible warranty and other perks from Tesla itself that go way beyond what other car companies offer, like free charging at Tesla superchargers

I've heard the affordable model they are going to release soonish ( Elon time, remember here) will offer all of the same perks, or at least many of them.

>>7504128

The market they are currently in doesn't really interest me. I think even though it's growing, it will always be relatively niche.

It's the family car market that I'm interested in and that's where I start doubting what Tesla can actually achieve. I think I can appreciate the Model S for what it is.

Now to make the "Toyota Corolla" EV they would need to reach a $25,000 price point.

Their battery currently costs $30,000 and the article above claims that managed to reduce the price by half and increase capacity by 60% since 2008.

So in 7 years.

So let us give them another 7 years. That's 2022.

And assuming they are just as lucky as they were they would now have a battery that costs 15$ and with a range of 700km. Now who really needs that much range?

Let's half that. 350km is plenty for a commuter. And let's also half the price. $8000 is a good estimate I think as the battery management system does not scale down linearly.

OK, maybe if they continue at this current rate and assuming the article is correct then they do have a shot at making a 350km range, $25,000 car.

>>7504128

so basically after you stated that you hate shills you started shill yourself, nice try

>>7504149
All good points, which is why despite the fact well be buying an electric car and Tesla looks nice now, I'm not expecting Tesla to necessarily be competitive when we buy a new car in 5-6 years.

>>7504150
I'm not shilling, those are all things you can read up on consumer reports. I'm not making any wild claims, just from what I've heard as a casual consumer that is why they are appealing.

>>7503558
because him and the rest of the SV jokers are the reason engineering isnt the cushy job it used to be. fuck working 65-70 hrs/week at shit pay for someone else's dream

Tesla-batteries are known to blow up, causing injury to the people inside.

>>7504170
That's really just the industry standard right now, and has been for more than ten years.

My sister started working as an architectural engineer in 2013, and from the start it was 70-80 work weeks.

Just doing fucking architecture shit, nothing intense or particularly time sensitive like a national defense project or space shit.

Being an engineer would suck.

>>7504172
This isn't true dude, and you know it. I'm no Tesla fan but try to use actual criticisms.

Teslas are also known to catch fire, releasing potent climate pollutors directly into the atmosphere.

>>7504182
see
>>7504176

>>7504182
no they aren't and you can't prove that they are. IC cars catch on fire on a daily basis.

>>7504185
http://www.wired.com/2014/03/tesla-feds-armor/

>>7504192
We're already ahead of your slow brain. You're wrong.

http://www.nfpa.org/research/reports-and-statistics/vehicle-fires/vehicle-fire-trends-and-patterns
>In 2003-2007, U.S. fire departments responded to an average of 287,000 vehicle fires per year

keep shilling, though.

Tesla is heading for bankruptcy.

>>7504035
people like you shouldn't reproduce, you miss the point completely

>>7504170

Good point, but is it really their fault or not?

Is it mostly the H1-Bs driving down salaries of just stupid recent American graduates accepting shitty pay because they are brainwashed?

>>7504197

So what ? Your link has nothing to do with this discussion.

>>7504205

Did you have some other point besides: Tesla made a cool car for $80,000?

I'm not disputing that.

>>7504213

Tesla will certainly made affordable ev (35000) in next 5 years.

>>7504208
>muh tesla fires
it's easy to see that you're switching goal posts. kindly admit yourself to a mental institution.

>>7504215

>Tesla will certainly made affordable ev (35000) in next 5 years.

says who?

Teslas are not cool. They overheat, and this is what ignites the battery, causing the powerful explosion, which in turn releases the climate pollutors into the atmosphere while killing the pilot.

>>7504222
see >>7504197

>>7504217
No, your post doesn't address anything about that tesla fire at all.

>>7504227
the fact that they are negligible and makes anything your saying negligible is what it does

you're argument is discarded because it's intellectually dishonest.

>>7504215

>certainly

OK that's a bit of over confidence I think.

IF they manage to shave off enough cost by smoothing the manufacturing of the cells then they can reduce the battery price by 30%.

So then their battery will cost 21,000 leaving $14,000 for everything else which is enough to build a budget car.

And consider that $35,000 is not really affordable for most people still.

>>7504232
What? The wired article showed that the fire was the driver's fault, and that Tesla made their car even better to prevent insanely retarded cases like that from happening again

The Tesla doesn't look or sound like a real car. It's awful.

>>7504243
>changing goal posts this obviously
you're not a good troll, m8.

>>7504247
I'm not trying to troll or shill and I think you are confused

>>7503668
Jacque Fresco does

Elon Musk is a communist.

>>7504090
im not accepting that I'm a shill, I'm pointing out the stupidity you impose via sarcasm.
I'm not following Elon musk nor am I a fanboy, my mild point is that I'm intrigued by what he is doing and see some pretty cool shit being done, and he seems to be putting his money where his mouth is at least on my cursory glance, which is something I find heartening since most corporations and businesses don't even dare to venture toward space nor make attempts at a fully privatized space program

>>7504290
FYI SpaceX isn't trying to make a fully privatized space program, they will definitely take NASA's money whenever they can and NASA money for the foreseeable future is the ONLY thing keeping that company in existence.

>>7504197
this is anecdotal but a lot of people I've met have admitted to lighting their own cars on fire to have insurance pay them off

>>7504300
makes sense, so not fully privatized but still partially private and conducting research into furthering the space industry. still works for me

>>7504315
Yeah SpaceX certainly wants to make money wherever, their first private funds have come from satellite launches. Hopefully the next phase we see are cheaper visits to space to commercial stations for tourism.

>>7504300

Beside previously it was Boeing and Lockheed Martin getting all the contracts anyway.

It's not like NASA was doing everything in house.

Competition is good.

What's bad is when the government expects the private market to go into long term risky ventures.

Also what might potentially be bad is that previously Boeing and Lockheed were eager to embark on more difficult missions as long as the government paid the tab. That meant they were more risky and that meant potentially more awesome developments.

Now SpaceX is being more down to earth and realistic and that saves the government money but it also reduces the amount of awesome projects that might be selected.

What I mean is that NASA will say, we need to go to Mars. And the NASA engineers along with the contractors will come up with various project proposals. And Boeing and some NASA engineers might opt for some giant nuclear powered spaceship that is a more risky venture and then SpaceX will say, nah, let's use this 60 year old technology. It will work better and be cheaper.

And SpaceX will get the job done for cheaper.

And we will get to Mars.

But we won't have the nuclear powered spaceship.

>>7504330
>...we will get to Mars.
No we won't. Mars is a death trap.

>>7504343
And so is the Tesla.

>>7504343
Are you the same asshole that was on /pol/ spouting that yesterday?

>>7504330
>And SpaceX will get the job done for cheaper.

Congress isn't going to use the Falcon Heavy over the SLS, the SLS is their pet pork project.

>>7504347

top kek

>>7504353
Also of note, the FH will never compete with even the smallest SLS for tonnage to orbit.

>>7504330
haven't we already had nuclear powered spacecraft proposed and repeatedly shot down by NASA and the big govs for being unsafe and risking radioactive material raining down on the planet?
I'm pretty sure it was proposed already and every time it gets shot down because they say so and only allow tiny reactors for powering satellites and rovers etc?
could be wrong but yeah

>>7504365
Even RTGs are pretty much all gone. They've not approved new ones in years in the US. Our long term probes are pretty much not going to happen unless they approve of new RTGs.

>>7504365

I just used it as an example of one disadvantage that SpaceX has.

>>7504360

>tonnage to orbit.

nobody cares about tonnage, everybody cares about price per kilo to orbit. It can easily be that 2 FH flights will be cheaper than 1 SLS flight.

>>7504414
So what? If it can't even lift what the SLS if lifting, no one will care. The components for Mars aren't going to be light enough for the FH to even get it into orbit.

>>7504416

I seriously doubt that there will be such single large chunks among components for Mars, because how you are going to assemble this large heavy shit there without sophisticated technologies we here on Earth have. I think all equipment will be highly granular.

>>7503944

You can't be serious.

Revolutionizing three industries isn't an achievement? Tesla single handedly jump started the electric car market with the release of their battery patents. SpaceX has forced both ULA and Arianespace to begin developing their own comparable reusable launch system in order to even remain competitive. Solar City is giving Americans the opportunity to generate green energy which they can use or sell, something Europeans have been able to do for years.

You can choose whether or not to sperg out about Musk on an Internet forum. But denying that Musk is a great man is just plain ignorance.

>>7504428
You're wrong about that. The Falcon Heavy might be able to do the Orion CEV to orbit, and probably could. That's its likely only position unless we want to send up some other supplies, or probes, or something.

The components for a Mars mission just to send a single team are so heavy it will take 6 SLS launches to do it, and I do believe that's with it in its fully upgraded state.

Also, again, NASA/congress are going to want to use the SLS whenever possible. Don't count on them using the FH over the SLS.

>>7503558

he views himself and humans as simple computers, this is an outdated and proved to be wrong attitude

>>7503961
He's basically the business equivalent of popsci people. Only women and idiots like Musk because they're the only ones dumb enough to think his ideas will work

>>7503558
All of Elon Musk’s businesses are FUNDED BY THE TAX PAYERS.. aka YOU!

That evil motherfucker is a the biggest welfare queen in the world! He became billionaire by getting tax handouts from government.

Fuck him!

> Elon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidies

>Los Angeles entrepreneur Elon Musk has built a multibillion-dollar fortune running companies that make electric cars, sell solar panels and launch rockets into space.

>And he's built those companies with the help of billions in government subsidies.

>"He definitely goes where there is government money," said Dan Dolev, an analyst at Jefferies Equity Research. "That's a great strategy, but the government will cut you off one day."

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html#page=1

>>7504702
>what is NASA
>what are all public universities
>what are any public research facilities
thanks for the laugh though

>>7504450
>Tesla single handedly jump started the electric car market with the release of their battery patents.

1. Release is a bit much. They said, "Take our word. We will let you use our patented technology without problem". They didn't put them in public domain. Technically they didn't do shit.

2. I don't know of any single application of those patents. I don't think they jump started anything with them.

>>7504033
>all this dick riding
topkek

>>7503558

Because he didn't give that guy a second chance.

He asked Musk personally to get a second chance, to be let on the team, but he was turned down in public.

How cruel.

>>7504766
those wait but why articles are the biggest pieces of shit aren't they?

>>7504728
>>what is NASA
SHITHEAD, how can you compare government and public institutions to private companies? NASA's not get rich off your tax money, that faggot Musk is.

Fucking shithead. GTFO!

because he is a faggot who pretends to know physics with just a BS degree

BS, geddit?

>>7504746
>Implying that isn't the same thing when it comes to business and making money.

>spend all your time wishing billionaires gave a fuck about science
>derp derp switch the DoD budget with NASA! We need faster progress!
>rich guy comes along
>spends his money in an honest attempt to advance the frontiers of science in the most interesting way he can
>you hate him for it

That sound about right?

>>7504800
what a gay answer

>>7504900
>GET OFF MY BOARD
kek stay mad

>>7503558

didn't he married same girl twice? don't seem like wise decision to me, like he was trying go to the same river twice.