davidrm

I'm trying my hardest to somehow summarize this story as a net positive, but to no avail. To me this reads like a badly written propaganda piece.

supervisory board of VW has 20 members, state of Lower Saxony appoints 2 (as a minority shareholder), workforce elects 7 among themselves, and 3 are trade union representatives also elected by the workforce.

no one is denying it's a for profit company, but its governance model doesn't really scream "neoliberalism". assuming you're from the US, (German) enterprises like VW are vastly different from what exists in the US, not just in the terms of their structure but also their influence on Germany and EU.

My favorite impact that I've had on my organization was the "no agenda, no meeting". It became a meme, minutes before the agenda-less meeting was supposed to take place someone would send it to a meeting chat or email, usually followed with ":)", especially if I were one of the attendees. In the rare cases I forgot to follow my own stubborn rule then it was a whole show, in hindsight, probably should've broken it at least once a quarter along with some penance to really help cement it.

However, I managed to "bully" everyone into following this simple rule because I had some influence in the organization; I was a manager of a large department. Unfortunately, interns will probably get an eye-roll for such suggestions, even if they reference their superior's rule.

My point is, don't send you colleagues this link, you will come off as rude. You'll get further by e.g. feigning surprise to the lack of agenda, and maybe you get to use that opportunity to spark a conversation about the importance of an agenda. If you're a manager and above, then by all means, use your influence to force it, it will make everyone's job easier in the long run.

Oh, as for the messages that contain only "hello", just ignore them, they will either solve their own problem or quickly jump to the point once they tire of waiting for your equally pointless response. Or just have a chat with your colleagues every once in a while, maybe they genuinely care about you and your cat.

(I'm going to assume you're serious). Only in the tech bubble could a hobby which is challenging and probably gruesome at certain points, be held against you. In any normal conversation a person who climbs literal mountains would be looked at in a positive light. Not saying it's the one defining quality you'd need to successfully run a company, but you somehow managed to place it at the completely wrong side of the proverbial scale. Of course, it's probably completely insignificant and uncorrelated, but I wouldn't be surprised to read that someone who plays a piano is also incompetent to run a company because ...I don't know, I guess I'll have to wait to read that one here soon.

4680 is a cylindrical cell format, the number you quoted refers to the cell itself, when packaged into a battery with busbars, cooling, etc., the gravimetric density on pack level for model 3 is around 125Wh/kg. the number listed by BYD is 150Wh/kg pack level density. the cells themselves are probably around 200-250, but they require less packaging effort due to the fact that the cell housing for prismatic cells already incorporates various mechanical and safety features.

i haven’t checked any of the numbers nor have i seen 3rd party analyses, but it definitely follows the trend: prismatics keep getting better and they might ultimately win the race once we get to solid state and thermal management “solves itself”

One would expect that a site dedicated to clean energy would know the difference between watts and watthours (i.e. power and capacity), on several occasions it claims that the capacity is X gigawatts instead of gigawatthours (GWh). It's hard to figure out what exactly is getting installed as the relation between the two is often different depending on the spec of the system.

have you read the article you linked? this literally repeats the same points I made, I don’t understand what you were trying to say.

That may be true for its fit and finish (panel alignments etc.), but the fact that they mastered vertical integration and supply chain management in less than 10 years is beyond amazing. Their powertrain (battery, motors, other hv components like charger etc) are first class and unparalleled in performance (and cost). We’ll see what Lucid will achieve in the next couple of years, their claimed (and validated) numbers such as range are very impressive, but for now, but Tesla has proven that it is a hardcore engineering company in a few important areas, there are others that need to catch up.

I don't know where you get your information, but you've completely missed what automotive software development looks like. The amount of verification and validation, and the number of standards (most of them are self-imposed, not a legal or homologation requirement) is absurdly high.

Here's a scenario. You're nominated to be an ECU supplier or a software sub-supplier for a VW brand, first thing they hit you with is requirements which span 1000 pages for a simple system (door, seat, HVAC), or 10x more for a more complex one (infotainment, engine ECU, "main" vehicle ECU etc.). 1 of those requirements is "SW shall comply with VW 8xxxxx norm" which is one of many VW norms that they deliver to you. The other requirement is "SW shall comply with KGAS", KGAS stands for "Konzerngrundanforderungen Software" which translates to "Group Basic Software Requirements", (group is VW), and both, you guessed it, are thousands upon thousands of requirements.

Then there's Functional Safety, or FUSA, which is a reference to ISO26262 (based on IEC 61508). Then there's also ASPICE (ISO/IEC 15504). New thing is UNECE R155 (cybersecurity). These three prescribe a very detailed development process commonly known as the "V model" for system and software development, which means you need to elicit requirements, define system requirements, system architecture, software requirements, software architecture and software detailed design. After that, you get to coding. For each of those there's a validation method: unit tests, software integration, software qualification, system integration and system qualification. ASPICE 4.0 has expanded to cover Embedded Hardware and Mechanical design as well. Other than the engineering processes they also cover other areas such as project management, configuration management, supplier monitoring, problem & change management etc.

Then come the external and internal audits, pardon, assessments. Your internal Quality department needs to monitor all engineering activities and report them to the customer, customer's Quality dept. will do their own audits, you and them will also hire an independent company to audit/assess you so that there's no bias.

BUT guess what - almost none of this is required for non mission critical software, so your infotainment is actually the only thing developed in a way you've described it. Brakes, ABS, ESP, Engine ECU or the EV powertrain (BMS, inverter etc.) are all written according to what I described above. There's no need for more bureaucracy, the automotive industry (especially German one) is very good at self-regulating and would make an average web developer throw up on his first day. Failures of the UX/UI in modern vehicles is just a business problem - guys who spent decades building and selling options like leather seats, and checking spreadsheets at the end of a fiscal period are still at the helm or their business processes still live on in those companies.

Yes, but that's not the e2e efficiency of the hydrogen powertrain, a 120kW hydrogen stack found in Hyundai Nexo is as big as an average petrol engine and its energy efficiency is somewhere around 45%, so it's not only the hydrogen tanks and the hydrogen inside it. If we're going to analyze the volumetric and mass efficiency and compare it to a BEV, then we need to take everything into the account.

Majority of hydrogen produced is made from processing oil, the energy efficiency of "green" hydrogen (electrolysis) is very poor and thus expensive.

I believe there's a strong chance of using hydrogen for long haul type of transportation, however, there are a lot of misconceptions about the technology and its general practicality.

I'm sure this article only tells 10% of the story from both sides, but the fact remains that some people entrusted him with his money and that his behavior made them uncomfortable, which ultimately made them remove him from the position. I find all of this unsurprising.

I partially agree with your comment, the math is fuzzy, and I'd say that saving 5 minutes per day is absolutely worthless, I don't care about that time, it's a rounding error. There's a cliff when doing this kind of math.

But I prefer to invert this thought experiment - my time isn't worth $x because I intend to use that time for something I can invoice, it's the amount you'd _have_ to pay for my time in order to incentivize me not to spend it walking around the park, watching a movie or whatever but rather do some marketable work.

So yes, I kind of know the value of my time, I'm willing to pay $x not to be bothered with some things, e.g. a washing machine. I don't care about spending +10 minutes when buying some item.