I don't get it. I'm reading all the comments and most seems to be defending what are clearly some blatant lies. Of course there are things in there where we can argue if it is overly nitty that Elon says the guy is driving 61 when the guy says he was driving 55, but maybe we should focus on the stuff that was clearly a lie?
The reviewer was instructed to fully charge the car at a station, he did not, and was then surprised how low his range got. If I stopped at a gas station and put 5 gallons in, when I knew I needed 6 and faulted the manufacturer in a NYT review I shouldn't be allowed to be a journalist anymore.
The reviewer goes on to write about how cold it was after turning the heat down at 182 miles, when he actually turned the heat up, I mean, how does one even begin to explain? Oops, I thought to turn the heat down you turn the dial clockwise?
He then goes on to talk about how he set the cruise control to 55, when he went under 60 for about 15 total seconds in the first half of the trip. It looks like the cruise control MAY have been set to like 60-62mph, but why not use those numbers? Oh hey, because the ones he made up made tesla look worse, see the theme here? He later goes on to say he drove 45 while the graph clearly shows he never went below ~52.
How do you guys defend something like this? Are we just that okay with lying as a society now? I can pick out 5-6 blatant lies in this story, but apparently the fact that some of these are debatable makes it okay to lie in a bunch of other situations? How does that work?
The reviewer already said exactly how much he charged it up at each charging stop and why, so it's hard to really accuse him of lying about that. (Also, there's apparently no temperature control dial to turn at all, just software buttons on a huge center-console touchscreen with no tactile feedback.)
There's already too much pedantry on HN; please don't contribute to it. Broder clearly was able to control the temperature, whether it was via a rheostat dial or a touchscreen controller.
It's not pedantry. The comment I was replying to argued that of course it had to be deliberate because it's not like you could accidentally "turn the dial clockwise" - but it's quite a bit easier to accidentally tap a centimeter or two above where you aimed on an unfamiliar touchscreen.
Unfortunately, I suspect Musk gave Broder and the NYT a little too much ammunition with some of his weaker claims. That's certainly what their response will be, proudly refuting one or two things while dancing around the blatant lies.
The reviewer was instructed to fully charge the car at a station, he did not, and was then surprised how low his range got. If I stopped at a gas station and put 5 gallons in, when I knew I needed 6 and faulted the manufacturer in a NYT review I shouldn't be allowed to be a journalist anymore.
The reviewer goes on to write about how cold it was after turning the heat down at 182 miles, when he actually turned the heat up, I mean, how does one even begin to explain? Oops, I thought to turn the heat down you turn the dial clockwise?
He then goes on to talk about how he set the cruise control to 55, when he went under 60 for about 15 total seconds in the first half of the trip. It looks like the cruise control MAY have been set to like 60-62mph, but why not use those numbers? Oh hey, because the ones he made up made tesla look worse, see the theme here? He later goes on to say he drove 45 while the graph clearly shows he never went below ~52.
How do you guys defend something like this? Are we just that okay with lying as a society now? I can pick out 5-6 blatant lies in this story, but apparently the fact that some of these are debatable makes it okay to lie in a bunch of other situations? How does that work?