I think you're missing the point of my post. He said driverless cars would put rideshares out of business. If they're out of business, you can't reduce your cost of ownership by letting them use your vehicle (because they're out of business).
Yes. However if they own the vehicle, they can collect a larger amount of revenue. Right now they are sharing the profit with the owner of the vehicle. If they own the vehicle they control both sides and can collect the profit on both sides. In addition to this, if they can pool their buying power, they can negotiate fleet rates with automakers to drive their cost down even further and see a larger percentage of profit on the ownership side. This compounds when you leverage economies of scale with regard to maintenance and repairs.
My apologies, I did not follow up. I disagree that driverless cars would put Uber/Lyft out of business. They still have a viable business model where they provide transportation for those who do not wish to invest in a private driverless vehicle.
I understand that What y’all are missing is that cars are not free and maintenance is expensive $5 billion worth of $40k robotaxis is probably enough for half of Texas
No one is missing that but that cost is already part of the system. They're just paying it indirectly to the drivers.
I almost put uber/new company that has an app that lets you share your car but figured you'd understand what I meant. I'll be more specific when responding to you in the future. THF explained it much more clear than I could have.
EV vs Gas powered Electric Vehicle Electricity is about $.11/kWh in Florida Vehicle has 136 mile range (for simplicity) Electric vehicles typically consume 34kWh to travel 100 miles. That equates to $.04/mile + Maintenance is minimal (Wipers, Tires/Rotation, Brakes although much less frequently) $5.44 or $.04/mile Gas Powered Let's say the vehicle gets 34 MPG and goes 136 miles --> 4 gallons 1 Gallon costs $2.65 x 4 gallons = $10.60 or $.078/mile So you're saving almost 50% in fuel.
He's clearly lying, tho.... https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/05/23/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-emails-employees-about-delivery-goals.html
Another article that goes into Starlink/the launch: https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/05/...rlink-broadband-satellites-deployed-in-orbit/ Starlink in general: https://www.techradar.com/news/ever...out-spacexs-starlink-plans-for-space-internet
Except Hughesnet satellites operate at a way higher altitude, roughly 22,000 miles above earth, which makes it slow. Starlink, Oneweb, etc would operate in low earth orbit therefore closer and able to deliver faster speeds, for example Starlink will be roughly 340 miles above earth. Not including a more comprehensive network of satellites.
It’s just faster global internet at potentially fiber speeds. Starlink won’t be used for cars either, the receiver terminal is too large. It may provide Internet to ships and planes though.
""This quarter, as with Q3, shipment of higher priced Model 3 variants (this time to Europe and Asia) will hopefully allow us, with great difficulty, effort and some luck, to target a tiny profit." I remember that e-mail, too.
That's bullshit fantasy and more vaporware crap from him. The numbers don't add up from that blog post. Satellite internet currently can't and very likely won't be able to provide speeds remotely close to what they say "could" happen. Plus who is going to pay for the $200 US box in foreign countries in rural areas that don't already have or possibly even want broadband internet? If that $30-50 billion US annual revenue number is correct then there'would be around 12 million+ people paying a very expensive monthly fee for internet service. That's not likely to happen. Not to mention as the blog points out having to replace them on a very regular basis.
Satellite internet is currently still pay-by-the-minute. There's a company down here in Florida that's relatively tiny doing it and they make hundreds of millions a year with a fraction of the market. They focus on private airplanes and US military pretty much exclusively and their latency is bullshit compared to Starlink / OneWeb / etc (who are demonstrating low orbit latency comparable to US cable modems). I can't imagine the general masses going back to minute charges, so the cost will certainly collapse, but I wouldn't underestimate demand. If Starlink can in fact provide global cable modem speeds it's probably not that far off of an estimate as a reach goal. It's basically comcast+spectrum (guesstimate)
Residential satellite internet from Hughes/Dish/etc. is based on a data plan. It’s technically unlimited, but it slows to dialup speed after you’ve used your 5/10/20GB allotment, and at that point it’s useless. We had it for over a year and finally switched to a mobile hotspot because we were fed up with it.
Honestly, Starlink or any of the others don't even have to be as good as cable or DSL. I'll drop those fuckers in a heart beat as soon as theres an alternative just out of principle.
Hot take. Comparing current satellites that operate at a much higher altitude and in a different manner is not really indicative of future performance. Aside from what everyones commented above, I live in California and am 10 minutes away from a town of 100k. My internet service and cell coverage both suck and I amongst many others would be in the market for satellite internet. Also where did you read them having to replace them on a regular basis?
If someone wants to read something more in depth heres a paper looking at SpaceX's FCC proposal in regards to latency from a professor at the University College of London Delay is Not an Option: Low Latency Routing in Space Mark Handley, University College London http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10062262/7/Handley_hotnets.pdf
Although I will say when I saw this, while cool, I got a little bummed out thinking of the future and how the novelty of finding a couple satellites in the night sky will be lost upon my kids who will no doubt see hundreds a night in the future.
It is cool and they are only in a line like that initially, they will use their thrusters and space out over a few days. I might try and take a look tonight if we get clear skies and see if I can spy them.
Gogo is on its way out. Most aircraft are upgrading to the Viasat systems for better bandwidth and reliability than the gogo cellular networks.
This is a really big deal... one company just decided that this was ok and here we are... also this may be a dumb question but why do they need lights?
Those might not be lights. They could be from their propulsion or possibly sunlight reflecting off of panels.
Yea I think it’s just sunlight reflection. Some random twitter thread with the best discussion I've seen on this. But it’s not just Starlink; there’s Oneweb, Telesat, and Amazon wants to get involved. Plus whatever asian companies want to get involved. They will obviously disperse into a grid which means we won’t see so many so close, but it is indicative of our future. No matter what there will be more objects in the nights sky.
By the sounds of it yes, Originally it was visible by the naked eye but as they've gone higher up in altitude some people say it can only be seen by binoculars or telescope. They still have to do a dozen more launches so you will have future chances to see it I'd assume.
I was just in Leiden myself but didn't see those things. I highly recommend the town though. Also at the Hamburg airport they advertise non stop the 2 minute pickup by a tesla once you land. The train system is wonderful here though so no need for a rental.
IB upped the margin requirement to 50% on Tesla yesterday Looks like someone might’ve gotten margin called after hours yesterday. Stock dipped from 190 to 175 then back to 190 really quickly AH