>>108751283
anon I have bad news... 90% of what Elon announces is fake and will never happen and the other 10% will be released 5 years too late

>>108751283
As someone who lives in an area where it's 0C or lower for about 8 months of the year and peaks around -40C, this is retarded garbage meme tier slop. Buy a roof scraper or just get a dark coloured metal roof. The last thing you want on your roof is a bunch of electrical components u

>>108751283
A regular new roof is already 20-40k+. That shit is going to cost far more than anyone can spend.

File: 1754389140026049.gif (815 KB, 498x275)

815 KB GIF

>>108751283

>>108751653
jam boy take

>>108751793
most of that price is a scam for the "labor" even though the laborers only see 10% of it. materials for an entire 20 square roof would only be 2000-8000.

>>108751952
All repair work is a scam. This is why you should DIY as much as possible to save money. Need a car repair? A few hundred for a part and then 3k for labor costs. It's all bullshit.

>>108751283
>Tesla Roof
Thanks, never had a house fire before, would be nice to experience

>>108751653
99%

>>108751283
Why would you want the snow off your roof, it's good insulation.

>>108752370
because the product also puts your power generation on the roof. it creates a problem and then solves it in order to sell you the solution. even though you could ave just built a superior ground mounted solar array.

File: img-2026-05-04-18-49-00.png (274 KB, 724x1905)

274 KB PNG

>>108751283

>>108751283
Yes, I'd like to double the cost of a house by the roof alone

>>108752376
The only benefit I can see is that you're not losing any space in your yard, but then again you can integrate solar with a garage or storage shed or pergola.
The tesla roof will certainly be more expensive and less efficient than traditional monocrystalline panels.

>>108751990
That's why Elon's building robots.

File: file.png (16 KB, 801x586)

16 KB PNG

>>108751283
Just put your PC in the attic

>>108752534
Which only his company will sell directly and repair. That means they set the prices, and you're fucked. He already fucked us with Teslas by getting an exemption passed for direct-to-consumer car sales.

>>108752556
In the winter, that would work. In the summer, the PC melts.

>>108751283
anon put regular black solar panels, that tiles are stupid unless you are in a historical protected are or something
and start by insulating the house

>>108752577
just switch positions then

>>108752472
I bet he'd be right about most of his predictions if it wasn't for regulations.
In 2016 there is no technical reason we can't have autonomous vehicles for 90% of the roads, it's all legislature taking decades and they get stalled by lobbyists.
His cars already exist and do work, they're also no legal to self drive here. Whos fault is that? His or the state.
Just sayin.

>>108752827
anon that is fucking bullshit he is making shit up

>>108752935
It's hard for me to humor that idea when the products actually exist.
We've been simulating vehicles, analysing them and roads, etc. for a long time not even considering automation. So the precident to build on was there long long before 2016. The fact the cars exist today and function also proves it can be realized not just theorized. Again I think the only thing holding this back right now, is the same thing holding it back 10 years ago. The law. Elon can and has built a self driving car. The law says you may not use it yet.

>>108752827
In 2026, his cars don't even have the hardware to be able to properly "see" in all directions.
Also lol, regulations. Anon, in EU, more and more assistance is not just allowed, it is now required.

>>108752998
>his cars don't even have the hardware to be able to properly "see" in all directions
Point being what? They seem to work without it. They already exist, this isn't speculation.

>>108753020
That's the point anon. They don't work. Outside of his presentation and his cult you can find Teslas regularly steer into pedestrians and ignore red lights.

>>108753075
I've been in multiple of them, they do work...
You can buy one today and use it. Just not everywhere.

>>108751283
Solar power to melt snow... doesn't everybody already have that?

>>108751283
>Tesla
Musk has been consumed by the AI mind virus. Anything that isn't directly related to AI will get shelved and shit on. He literally took every aspect of his companies and forced in AI as hard as possible.

>>108753340
I mean yeah? That's the obvious choice. Humans have limits, robots don't. Current progress with meatbags is an issue of scaling that doesn't exist with automation and AI.

>>108753086
Interesting, didn't know that. I'd like to know more. What state allows full autonomy in ordinary traffic?
Because if you're referring to the LVL 3 to 4 tech that existed for decades, that's neither new nor banned. What's banned is Tesla selling these as LVL 5.

>>108753424
I think you interpreted my post backwards. I'm saying the technology exists and you can buy it now, the laws prevent you from actually using it autonomously.
Meaning that from my perspective the predictions were accurate. He really did make the product and you really can buy it.
I don't think its fair to say he did not deliver on this just because the government doesn't allow it.
If I make a gun its still a gun I invented and manifested, even if it's illegal for you to own, sell, use, etc.
And I wouldn't fault the inventor for not being able to make home made guns legal country-wide overnight.

>>108753459
According to Musk, all Teslas are equipped with the HW and SW necessary for the LVL 5 full autonomy, so you are right that I can buy it. And you are right that the state forces me to use it as LVL 3-4 autonomy, being always ready to literally take the wheel. But technically, nothing stops me from using it as a LVL 5 autonomy, I just need to put something heavy on the wheel and perhaps the seat. It's just that... everyone who tried, very soon found out why it's a bad idea and why it is not allowed to be classified as LVL 5, regardless what Musk says.
The state being cunts doesn't mean anything since that's how they treat pretty much everyone. It makes zero sense for them to ban what is basically their driverless, green wet dream.
Musk is just a businessman. It's the same thing as with Starship and almost everything else he sells. Promises about 100t cargo, full-reusable, human-rated, flying anywhere for pennies. Then you'll find that all that necessary stuff that his genius optimized out was actually essential and the 100t are more like 40t (yet to be demonstrated).

>>108751916
WHERE'S MY ROADSTER ELON

>>108753533
I understand your point now.
I'm not intent on arguing with you, but I will say something for consideration.
I wonder if the problems you're highlighting with L5 would be problems today, if the law was different yesterday.
What I mean is, maybe they're not prioritizing getting that stable since you can't even use L3 yet in most of the country.
If you could, and it was a requirement, I imagine they would prioritize that.

Obviously I have no real idea or insight, but this is my speculation / rationale / excuse that I think is plausible enough.

But in any case, touching back on the original point. I just think it's a bit cheap or misguided to fault him on those timelines since he really did ultimately produce and deliver the products to a close enough degree imo.
Yes it may not be top tier, but it is a car that can drive itself in the places you probably need it to. I think that deserves SOME credit rather than none, you know?

>>108753580
And I think it is completely rational to call Musk a grifter in a thread that literally starts with a non-existent product that got him sued for fraud and shelling out millions. It's not timelines that are the problem. It's him implying or sometimes even clearly stating that he has some technology (like those non-existent roof tiles), then 10 years later being "Well, actually, no, but we're really close!" Just two more weeks on top of the 500 already spent on the "final touches" of a something that was stated to be complete at the very start.
Lying to your customers about your product being way ahead of the competition deserves no credit at all. On the contrary.

>>108753708
>in a thread that literally starts with a non-existent product that got him sued for fraud and shelling out millions
I would say that's fair, I just think your example wasn't the best one to use.

>'s not timelines that are the problem. It's him implying or sometimes even clearly stating that he has some technology (like those non-existent roof tiles), then 10 years later being "Well, actually, no, but we're really close!"
True and also fair, but hard for me to single him out on this.
I don't like or agree with the practice either, but I understand that there is likely no other option.
What else can he do when his job is to make new technology? He has to promise it, and has to be enthusiastic and optimistic about it.
He can't be like "we don't know if this is possible yet, and also we might waste investor money lol", then he'd actually produce nothing since he'd have no value to direct.
You are correct though, he does do the typical CEO / entrepreneur bullshit. But I don't think that's an Elon problem, I think that's a general problem with all the tops. Sam Altman and co do this plenty. Not an excuse, just saying I don't know many big players that even have a chance of making an impact, that doesn't play the market and ventures like that. Sucks there isn't more honest and transparency in corporations.

>>108752827
Oh look it's the communism has never been tried argument

>>108753781
Sorry, I don't understand what you meant.

>>108753786
>he would have been right if things would have been very different

>>108753809
That's not the point being made, you should see the replies. It's more nuanced than black and white and communism wasn't even on my mind.

>>108753755
Anon, he's not a Tesla founder, he didn't make any new technology, the original founders did that already. All he did was lie about autonomy and other great features that he didn't deliver (Cybertruck, Semi,...).
Sam is a similar grifter and Musk's success is partially why he's also allowed to fuck up world's HW supply and lobby for taxpayer money (something Elon is an absolute expert in).

File: 1658412317660.jpg (66 KB, 476x514)

66 KB JPG

>>108751916
said the pajeet

>>108752827
>it's all legislature taking decades and they get stalled by lobbyists.
Nigga he's the richest man in the world wdym lobbyists

>>108753020
They had some serious crashes just because Elon decided that a Lidar wasn't necessary anymore.

>>108753820
That's pushing too far into pedantry/semantics for me.
We can discredit most owners if we play that way. Yes it's their workers who do the real work. The directors direct. Elon decided to put workers on this task. Sure he didn't actually do anything himself, but that's less interesting of a topic.

>>108753833
People like to pretend that money is power, it isn't always.
What are the numbers anyway? He might have a lot as an individual but in this specific case him and his company are fighting against multiple other big industries. Like taxi, commercial trucks, literally anything vehicle related business that requires driving. Not to mention electric versus fuel brings him ire from that mob too.

>>108752534
>That's why Elon's building robots.
This is why Elon's making children. He's got like a football team already. The sperg needs something to do. ADHD is a helluva condition.

>>108753854
Pedantry was not the intention. What I'm saying that there are parts of his company that work, like electric cars made by original Tesla founders and reusable rockets made by NASA or the Panasonic battery tech. Then there are things that he came up with and/or commissioned, like those tiles, Autopilot, Semi, Cybertruck, Spaceship, Optimus, Hyperloop,...
I used to like his zero-fucks-given approach to things. But stuff like taking billions in taxpayer money by promising what you know you don't have the ability to do (Starship) is just stealing from everyone else and should not be celebrated.

File: SpaceX_Starship_ignition_(...).jpg (249 KB, 1280x1370)

249 KB JPG

>>108751653
Why doesn't Starship seem to work?
Isn't it just a big rocket? Big rockets have worked in the past.
Honestly, that one is of the most bizarre examples of his vaporware - as opposed to others this one should work in principle...

>>108751283
Use case? Prolly 10x more expensive than regular panels, more wiring, causing losses and more failure points, and is more labor to install. Also good luck replacing one of these.