There is usually a difference between "established" news and news from far left/right leaning sites in that sources are usually provided by "established" news which can be verified. Far left/right leaning sites often just source another far left/right site making the actual source (if any) very hard or impossible to find.
I was given a tour of Bloomberg in NYC about 2010 and none of the offices had doors, they said for transparency, and that unnamed sources were never allowed.
there's a difference between not publishing the source vs. not knowing who the source is...
I consider Reuters to be trustworthy, but ‘sounding like you know who are the sources’ is different than only using sources on record.
I agree. But it can work both ways.
Exactly. It doesn't take a SpaceX rocket scientist to realize that anyone who gets rehired will also be looking for a position elsewhere.
You may or may not agree, but I think Elon's pushback against Reuters specifically is on a couple of articles Tesla claim is misleading:
none. I usually read several osint-type channels on the same topic and, if interested, follow their leads. The Reuters article in question has anonymous sources only and even states that the M-T meeting was the one-on-one meeting, so nobody, other than M or T, can know for sure. However, that didn't make their editors to pause before placing the story to the very front page.
But your "exec and auditor" "friend" for sure knows what is going on here, and we're all dopes for believing the email Elon sent, which must be fake.
Of course, Musk could do what Reuters asserted he did, and also he could do a million other things. Logic should tell us that if the manager has issue with an employee, the manager can fire that employee. After doing so, there is no point firing the entire team. But if we decline Musk the ability of logical actions, then, logically, we shall conclude that the success of Musk businesses is due to his illogical moves. Right?
Are you saying he is illogical all the time? Could he just be really good at coming up with a business idea, so good that it succeeds despite his actions. I am not saying he has been a bit nuts forever, just recently. He has been right quite often, so now he thinks any idea he has is great. Add to that him getting rid of anyone whom might say “Just hold on a second…”. and you have someone with no guardrails. Historically not great.
They can't find an "expert" that have at least read the manual, even if they haven't played around with the UI in the actual car?
That same list shows a German car that does worse too (the ID.4), so it doesn't really prove anything. The test is a steady state 70mph test which doesn't test the same thing the EPA tests, especially when comparing to combined range. A car can get better or worse at 70mph than EPA depending on how they optimize the car (with regen optimization likely making the biggest difference, given that plays a big role in the combined cycle vs steady state). Critically, no publication has demonstrated Teslas can't meet the EPA cycle when driven like the EPA cycle.
