Pls! Elon was referring to the_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

Ianer
2021-08-24

Pls! Elon was referring to the current FSD 9.2 and not the FSD itself. Dont quote something out of the context!

Tesla’s Musk Says FSD Actually Not That Great. Why He’s Actually Wrong.<blockquote>特斯拉的Musk表示FSD实际上并没有那么好。为什么他实际上是错的。</blockquote>

Evaluating car companies’ claims about self-driving cars is getting harder, rather than easier. Now

Tesla’s Musk Says FSD Actually Not That Great. Why He’s Actually Wrong.<blockquote>特斯拉的Musk表示FSD实际上并没有那么好。为什么他实际上是错的。</blockquote>

免责声明：上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点，不构成本平台的任何投资建议。

推荐
最新

暂无评论

热议股票

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"data":{"magic":2,"id":834595374,"tweetId":"834595374","gmtCreate":1629812318098,"gmtModify":1633682277389,"author":{"id":3582704169214897,"idStr":"3582704169214897","authorId":3582704169214897,"authorIdStr":"3582704169214897","name":"Ianer","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6dfad3c43fd6d82b6a4f7c429853f818","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":11,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body>Pls! Elon was referring to the current FSD 9.2 and not the FSD itself. Dont quote something out of the context!</body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body>Pls! Elon was referring to the current FSD 9.2 and not the FSD itself. Dont quote something out of the context!</body></html>","text":"Pls! Elon was referring to the current FSD 9.2 and not the FSD itself. Dont quote something out of the context!","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/834595374","repostId":1162867085,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1162867085","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1629809990,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1162867085?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-24 20:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tesla’s Musk Says FSD Actually Not That Great. Why He’s Actually Wrong.<blockquote>特斯拉的Musk表示FSD实际上并没有那么好。为什么他实际上是错的。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1162867085","media":"Barrons","summary":"Evaluating car companies’ claims about self-driving cars is getting harder, rather than easier. Now ","content":"Evaluating car companies’ claims about self-driving cars is getting harder, rather than easier. Now Tesla CEO Elon Musk is casting doubt on his own company’s progress.<blockquote>评估汽车公司关于自动驾驶汽车的说法变得越来越困难，而不是更容易。现在，特斯拉首席执行官Elon Musk对自己公司的进展表示怀疑。</blockquote> Musk tweeted out Monday the latest versions of Tesla’s (ticker: TSLA) full self driving software–the best version of his company’s driver assistance features–is “actually not great.”<blockquote>马斯克周一在推特上表示，特斯拉（股票代码：TSLA）全自动驾驶软件的最新版本——马斯克公司驾驶员辅助功能的最佳版本——“实际上并不好”。</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/95ec0454d5d748a9de0735945ee972cb\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"871\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><blockquote></blockquote> It’s a surprising–and possibly odd–revelation. Manufacturers are racing to build the best autonomous vehicles, but for people without advanced engineering degrees, judging who has the best systems has become nearly impossible. Autonomous-driving features are just too new and the systems are changing too rapidly.<blockquote>这是一个令人惊讶的——也可能是奇怪的——发现。制造商正在竞相制造最好的自动驾驶汽车，但对于没有高级工程学位的人来说，判断谁拥有最好的系统几乎变得不可能。自动驾驶功能太新，系统变化太快。</blockquote> The job for investors, right now, isn’t to dissect tweets. It is to understand exactly who is saying what about car makers’ competing autonomous-driving systems. Learning the bull and bear arguments is enough for now. Figuring out who is leading and what it means for the stocks of the car makers can come later.<blockquote>投资者现在的工作不是剖析推文。这是为了准确了解谁在谈论汽车制造商竞争的自动驾驶系统。现在学习牛市和熊市的论点就足够了。弄清楚谁是领导者以及这对汽车制造商的股票意味着什么可以稍后再做。</blockquote> The highly anticipated&nbsp;Tesla(ticker: TSLA)&nbsp;A.I. Day&nbsp;was supposed to shed light on the topic of autonomous driving. Instead, it opened a Pandora’s box of questions that need answering.<blockquote>备受期待的特斯拉（股票代码：TSLA）A.I.这一天本应阐明自动驾驶的话题。相反，它打开了一个需要回答的潘多拉魔盒。</blockquote> What investors really wanted to know was when drivers will be able to text and drive safely on highways without fear of getting a traffic ticket. That answer wasn’t forthcoming. Instead, investors were asked to digest the importance of computer- designed self-driving simulations, machine learning, and cloud-based A.I. training technology. The detail was arcane.<blockquote>投资者真正想知道的是，司机何时能够在高速公路上安全地发短信和驾驶，而不用担心收到交通罚单。这个答案并没有出现。相反，投资者被要求消化计算机设计的自动驾驶模拟、机器学习和基于云的人工智能的重要性。培训技术。细节很神秘。</blockquote> Tesla bulls, however, came away from the event blown away by Tesla’s A.I. prowess and the improvements to its autonomous-driving features. New Street Research analyst&nbsp;Pierre Ferragu&nbsp;wrote Monday that Tesla is 10 years ahead of the competition in “real-world” artificial intelligence. He believes Tesla’s autonomous- driving subscription sales can generate about $23,000 in gross profit per vehicle over a 10-year span. That is significantly more than the roughly $7,000 in gross profit Tesla makes from selling a car.<blockquote>然而，特斯拉公牛队在这场比赛中被特斯拉的人工智能所震撼。实力及其自动驾驶功能的改进。New Street Research分析师Pierre Ferragu周一写道，特斯拉在“现实世界”人工智能的竞争中领先10年。他认为，特斯拉的自动驾驶订阅销售可以在10年内为每辆车带来约23,000美元的毛利润。这远远高于特斯拉销售汽车所获得的约7,000美元的毛利润。</blockquote> He rates Tesla stock at Buy and has a target of $900 for the stock price. Shares closed Monday at $706.30, up 3.8%.<blockquote>他对特斯拉股票的评级为买入，股价目标为900美元。周一股价收于706.30美元，上涨3.8%。</blockquote> Tesla bears, on the other hand, are convinced that Tesla’s claims about self- driving cars are overstated and that other companies are doing a better job developing self-driving technology.<blockquote>另一方面，看空特斯拉的人确信，特斯拉关于自动驾驶汽车的说法被夸大了，其他公司在开发自动驾驶技术方面做得更好。</blockquote> The bears’ belief is partly rooted in two reports from the research firmGuidehouse, which publishes automated-driving “leaderboards.” Tesla ranked dead last in the 2020 and 2021 reports.<blockquote>看空者的信念部分源于研究公司Guidehouse的两份报告，该公司发布自动驾驶“排行榜”。特斯拉在2020年和2021年的报告中排名垫底。</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/75c32dac9eacc1a076597ae098e1ea33\" tg-width=\"553\" tg-height=\"889\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><blockquote></blockquote> That might feel odd, given that Tesla CEO Elon Musk often talks about how advanced Tesla’s self-driving offerings are. But the Guidehouse rankings are partly based on vision systems and partnerships, two areas where Tesla doesn’t score well. The company doesn’t use laser-based radar, while other makers of self-driving cars do. And it doesn’t enter partnerships, doing everything in house.<blockquote>考虑到特斯拉首席执行官Elon Musk经常谈论特斯拉的自动驾驶产品有多先进，这可能会让人感到奇怪。但Guidehouse的排名部分基于视觉系统和合作伙伴关系，这两个领域特斯拉得分不高。该公司不使用基于激光的雷达，而其他自动驾驶汽车制造商则使用。它不加入合作伙伴关系，在内部做所有事情。</blockquote> It is possible that bulls and bears are both right and are talking past each other. Waymo, for instance, leads in the Guidehouse rankings. It has deployed fully autonomous robotaxis in Arizona. That is quite a feat.<blockquote>多头和空头有可能都是对的，并且正在互相谈论。例如，Waymo在Guidehouse排名中领先。它已经在亚利桑那州部署了全自动机器人出租车。这是一个相当大的壮举。</blockquote> Tesla’s systems aren’t good enough to be robotaxis. They qualify as level 2 autonomy, which means drivers must be engaged at all times. But the systems enabling the Waymo robotaxi can cost upwards of $100,000 per vehicle. That is too pricey for consumer vehicles.<blockquote>特斯拉的系统还不足以成为机器人出租车。它们符合2级自动驾驶资格，这意味着驾驶员必须始终参与其中。但支持Waymo robotaxi的系统每辆车的成本可能高达10万美元。这对于消费汽车来说太贵了。</blockquote> In October 2020,Consumer Reports&nbsp;ranked the automated-driving systems available to, well, consumers. Overall, Tesla’s automated driver system ranked second to&nbsp;General Motors(GM). Tesla scored highest on capability and ease of use, but ranked poorly on keeping the driver engaged.<blockquote>2020年10月，消费者报告对消费者可用的自动驾驶系统进行了排名。总体而言，特斯拉的自动驾驶系统排名第二，仅次于通用汽车（GM）。特斯拉在功能和易用性方面得分最高，但在保持驾驶员参与度方面排名较差。</blockquote> One reason for that low score might be that Tesla’s automated-driving systems aren’t “hands free” solutions. Drivers need to keep their hands on, or touching, the steering wheel to keep the system on. There are “hands free” systems that use interior cameras to make sure a driver’s eyes are on the road at all times.<blockquote>得分较低的原因之一可能是特斯拉的自动驾驶系统不是“免提”解决方案。驾驶员需要将手放在或触摸方向盘上以保持系统打开。有“免提”系统使用内部摄像头来确保驾驶员的眼睛始终在路上。</blockquote> Camera monitoring might be better than haptic steering-wheel feedback. That is a debate for car companies and regulators.<blockquote>摄像头监控可能比触觉方向盘反馈更好。这是汽车公司和监管机构的争论。</blockquote> Practically speaking, hands free and hands required isn’t the basis for competitive differentiation. All the systems on offer today, hands free or not, require drivers to be engaged 100% of the time.<blockquote>实际上，解放双手和需要双手并不是竞争差异化的基础。如今提供的所有系统，无论是否免提，都要求驾驶员100%的时间投入。</blockquote> Autonomous driving studies and reports will proliferate in coming years. Each will have different criteria for judging what is best. Eventually, investors will probably have to test out autonomous-driving systems for themselves. That way they won’t fall victim to ratings criteria that aren’t explicitly defined.<blockquote>自动驾驶研究和报告将在未来几年激增。每个人都有不同的标准来判断什么是最好的。最终，投资者可能不得不亲自测试自动驾驶系统。这样他们就不会成为没有明确定义的评级标准的受害者。</blockquote> Tesla stock is about flat so far in 2021. The&nbsp;S&amp;P 500&nbsp;and&nbsp;Dow Jones Industrial Average&nbsp;are up 19% and 15%, respectively.<blockquote>2021年迄今为止，特斯拉股价基本持平。标准普尔500指数和道琼斯工业平均指数分别上涨19%和15%。</blockquote>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Tesla’s Musk Says FSD Actually Not That Great. Why He’s Actually Wrong.<blockquote>特斯拉的Musk表示FSD实际上并没有那么好。为什么他实际上是错的。</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTesla’s Musk Says FSD Actually Not That Great. Why He’s Actually Wrong.<blockquote>特斯拉的Musk表示FSD实际上并没有那么好。为什么他实际上是错的。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nBarrons2021-08-24 20:59\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nEvaluating car companies’ claims about self-driving cars is getting harder, rather than easier. Now Tesla CEO Elon Musk is casting doubt on his own company’s progress.<blockquote>评估汽车公司关于自动驾驶汽车的说法变得越来越困难，而不是更容易。现在，特斯拉首席执行官Elon Musk对自己公司的进展表示怀疑。</blockquote> Musk tweeted out Monday the latest versions of Tesla’s (ticker: TSLA) full self driving software–the best version of his company’s driver assistance features–is “actually not great.”<blockquote>马斯克周一在推特上表示，特斯拉（股票代码：TSLA）全自动驾驶软件的最新版本——马斯克公司驾驶员辅助功能的最佳版本——“实际上并不好”。</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/95ec0454d5d748a9de0735945ee972cb\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"871\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><blockquote></blockquote> It’s a surprising–and possibly odd–revelation. Manufacturers are racing to build the best autonomous vehicles, but for people without advanced engineering degrees, judging who has the best systems has become nearly impossible. Autonomous-driving features are just too new and the systems are changing too rapidly.<blockquote>这是一个令人惊讶的——也可能是奇怪的——发现。制造商正在竞相制造最好的自动驾驶汽车，但对于没有高级工程学位的人来说，判断谁拥有最好的系统几乎变得不可能。自动驾驶功能太新，系统变化太快。</blockquote> The job for investors, right now, isn’t to dissect tweets. It is to understand exactly who is saying what about car makers’ competing autonomous-driving systems. Learning the bull and bear arguments is enough for now. Figuring out who is leading and what it means for the stocks of the car makers can come later.<blockquote>投资者现在的工作不是剖析推文。这是为了准确了解谁在谈论汽车制造商竞争的自动驾驶系统。现在学习牛市和熊市的论点就足够了。弄清楚谁是领导者以及这对汽车制造商的股票意味着什么可以稍后再做。</blockquote> The highly anticipated&nbsp;Tesla(ticker: TSLA)&nbsp;A.I. Day&nbsp;was supposed to shed light on the topic of autonomous driving. Instead, it opened a Pandora’s box of questions that need answering.<blockquote>备受期待的特斯拉（股票代码：TSLA）A.I.这一天本应阐明自动驾驶的话题。相反，它打开了一个需要回答的潘多拉魔盒。</blockquote> What investors really wanted to know was when drivers will be able to text and drive safely on highways without fear of getting a traffic ticket. That answer wasn’t forthcoming. Instead, investors were asked to digest the importance of computer- designed self-driving simulations, machine learning, and cloud-based A.I. training technology. The detail was arcane.<blockquote>投资者真正想知道的是，司机何时能够在高速公路上安全地发短信和驾驶，而不用担心收到交通罚单。这个答案并没有出现。相反，投资者被要求消化计算机设计的自动驾驶模拟、机器学习和基于云的人工智能的重要性。培训技术。细节很神秘。</blockquote> Tesla bulls, however, came away from the event blown away by Tesla’s A.I. prowess and the improvements to its autonomous-driving features. New Street Research analyst&nbsp;Pierre Ferragu&nbsp;wrote Monday that Tesla is 10 years ahead of the competition in “real-world” artificial intelligence. He believes Tesla’s autonomous- driving subscription sales can generate about $23,000 in gross profit per vehicle over a 10-year span. That is significantly more than the roughly $7,000 in gross profit Tesla makes from selling a car.<blockquote>然而，特斯拉公牛队在这场比赛中被特斯拉的人工智能所震撼。实力及其自动驾驶功能的改进。New Street Research分析师Pierre Ferragu周一写道，特斯拉在“现实世界”人工智能的竞争中领先10年。他认为，特斯拉的自动驾驶订阅销售可以在10年内为每辆车带来约23,000美元的毛利润。这远远高于特斯拉销售汽车所获得的约7,000美元的毛利润。</blockquote> He rates Tesla stock at Buy and has a target of $900 for the stock price. Shares closed Monday at $706.30, up 3.8%.<blockquote>他对特斯拉股票的评级为买入，股价目标为900美元。周一股价收于706.30美元，上涨3.8%。</blockquote> Tesla bears, on the other hand, are convinced that Tesla’s claims about self- driving cars are overstated and that other companies are doing a better job developing self-driving technology.<blockquote>另一方面，看空特斯拉的人确信，特斯拉关于自动驾驶汽车的说法被夸大了，其他公司在开发自动驾驶技术方面做得更好。</blockquote> The bears’ belief is partly rooted in two reports from the research firmGuidehouse, which publishes automated-driving “leaderboards.” Tesla ranked dead last in the 2020 and 2021 reports.<blockquote>看空者的信念部分源于研究公司Guidehouse的两份报告，该公司发布自动驾驶“排行榜”。特斯拉在2020年和2021年的报告中排名垫底。</blockquote> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/75c32dac9eacc1a076597ae098e1ea33\" tg-width=\"553\" tg-height=\"889\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><blockquote></blockquote> That might feel odd, given that Tesla CEO Elon Musk often talks about how advanced Tesla’s self-driving offerings are. But the Guidehouse rankings are partly based on vision systems and partnerships, two areas where Tesla doesn’t score well. The company doesn’t use laser-based radar, while other makers of self-driving cars do. And it doesn’t enter partnerships, doing everything in house.<blockquote>考虑到特斯拉首席执行官Elon Musk经常谈论特斯拉的自动驾驶产品有多先进，这可能会让人感到奇怪。但Guidehouse的排名部分基于视觉系统和合作伙伴关系，这两个领域特斯拉得分不高。该公司不使用基于激光的雷达，而其他自动驾驶汽车制造商则使用。它不加入合作伙伴关系，在内部做所有事情。</blockquote> It is possible that bulls and bears are both right and are talking past each other. Waymo, for instance, leads in the Guidehouse rankings. It has deployed fully autonomous robotaxis in Arizona. That is quite a feat.<blockquote>多头和空头有可能都是对的，并且正在互相谈论。例如，Waymo在Guidehouse排名中领先。它已经在亚利桑那州部署了全自动机器人出租车。这是一个相当大的壮举。</blockquote> Tesla’s systems aren’t good enough to be robotaxis. They qualify as level 2 autonomy, which means drivers must be engaged at all times. But the systems enabling the Waymo robotaxi can cost upwards of $100,000 per vehicle. That is too pricey for consumer vehicles.<blockquote>特斯拉的系统还不足以成为机器人出租车。它们符合2级自动驾驶资格，这意味着驾驶员必须始终参与其中。但支持Waymo robotaxi的系统每辆车的成本可能高达10万美元。这对于消费汽车来说太贵了。</blockquote> In October 2020,Consumer Reports&nbsp;ranked the automated-driving systems available to, well, consumers. Overall, Tesla’s automated driver system ranked second to&nbsp;General Motors(GM). Tesla scored highest on capability and ease of use, but ranked poorly on keeping the driver engaged.<blockquote>2020年10月，消费者报告对消费者可用的自动驾驶系统进行了排名。总体而言，特斯拉的自动驾驶系统排名第二，仅次于通用汽车（GM）。特斯拉在功能和易用性方面得分最高，但在保持驾驶员参与度方面排名较差。</blockquote> One reason for that low score might be that Tesla’s automated-driving systems aren’t “hands free” solutions. Drivers need to keep their hands on, or touching, the steering wheel to keep the system on. There are “hands free” systems that use interior cameras to make sure a driver’s eyes are on the road at all times.<blockquote>得分较低的原因之一可能是特斯拉的自动驾驶系统不是“免提”解决方案。驾驶员需要将手放在或触摸方向盘上以保持系统打开。有“免提”系统使用内部摄像头来确保驾驶员的眼睛始终在路上。</blockquote> Camera monitoring might be better than haptic steering-wheel feedback. That is a debate for car companies and regulators.<blockquote>摄像头监控可能比触觉方向盘反馈更好。这是汽车公司和监管机构的争论。</blockquote> Practically speaking, hands free and hands required isn’t the basis for competitive differentiation. All the systems on offer today, hands free or not, require drivers to be engaged 100% of the time.<blockquote>实际上，解放双手和需要双手并不是竞争差异化的基础。如今提供的所有系统，无论是否免提，都要求驾驶员100%的时间投入。</blockquote> Autonomous driving studies and reports will proliferate in coming years. Each will have different criteria for judging what is best. Eventually, investors will probably have to test out autonomous-driving systems for themselves. That way they won’t fall victim to ratings criteria that aren’t explicitly defined.<blockquote>自动驾驶研究和报告将在未来几年激增。每个人都有不同的标准来判断什么是最好的。最终，投资者可能不得不亲自测试自动驾驶系统。这样他们就不会成为没有明确定义的评级标准的受害者。</blockquote> Tesla stock is about flat so far in 2021. The&nbsp;S&amp;P 500&nbsp;and&nbsp;Dow Jones Industrial Average&nbsp;are up 19% and 15%, respectively.<blockquote>2021年迄今为止，特斯拉股价基本持平。标准普尔500指数和道琼斯工业平均指数分别上涨19%和15%。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/tesla-ai-autonomous-vehicle-technology-51629756011?mod=hp_LEAD_3\">Barrons</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/tesla-ai-autonomous-vehicle-technology-51629756011?mod=hp_LEAD_3","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1162867085","content_text":"Evaluating car companies’ claims about self-driving cars is getting harder, rather than easier. Now Tesla CEO Elon Musk is casting doubt on his own company’s progress.\nMusk tweeted out Monday the latest versions of Tesla’s (ticker: TSLA) full self driving software–the best version of his company’s driver assistance features–is “actually not great.”\n\nIt’s a surprising–and possibly odd–revelation. Manufacturers are racing to build the best autonomous vehicles, but for people without advanced engineering degrees, judging who has the best systems has become nearly impossible. Autonomous-driving features are just too new and the systems are changing too rapidly.\nThe job for investors, right now, isn’t to dissect tweets. It is to understand exactly who is saying what about car makers’ competing autonomous-driving systems. Learning the bull and bear arguments is enough for now. Figuring out who is leading and what it means for the stocks of the car makers can come later.\nThe highly anticipated Tesla(ticker: TSLA) A.I. Day was supposed to shed light on the topic of autonomous driving. Instead, it opened a Pandora’s box of questions that need answering.\nWhat investors really wanted to know was when drivers will be able to text and drive safely on highways without fear of getting a traffic ticket. That answer wasn’t forthcoming. Instead, investors were asked to digest the importance of computer- designed self-driving simulations, machine learning, and cloud-based A.I. training technology. The detail was arcane.\nTesla bulls, however, came away from the event blown away by Tesla’s A.I. prowess and the improvements to its autonomous-driving features. New Street Research analyst Pierre Ferragu wrote Monday that Tesla is 10 years ahead of the competition in “real-world” artificial intelligence. He believes Tesla’s autonomous- driving subscription sales can generate about $23,000 in gross profit per vehicle over a 10-year span. That is significantly more than the roughly $7,000 in gross profit Tesla makes from selling a car.\nHe rates Tesla stock at Buy and has a target of $900 for the stock price. Shares closed Monday at $706.30, up 3.8%.\nTesla bears, on the other hand, are convinced that Tesla’s claims about self- driving cars are overstated and that other companies are doing a better job developing self-driving technology.\nThe bears’ belief is partly rooted in two reports from the research firmGuidehouse, which publishes automated-driving “leaderboards.” Tesla ranked dead last in the 2020 and 2021 reports.\n\nThat might feel odd, given that Tesla CEO Elon Musk often talks about how advanced Tesla’s self-driving offerings are. But the Guidehouse rankings are partly based on vision systems and partnerships, two areas where Tesla doesn’t score well. The company doesn’t use laser-based radar, while other makers of self-driving cars do. And it doesn’t enter partnerships, doing everything in house.\nIt is possible that bulls and bears are both right and are talking past each other. Waymo, for instance, leads in the Guidehouse rankings. It has deployed fully autonomous robotaxis in Arizona. That is quite a feat.\nTesla’s systems aren’t good enough to be robotaxis. They qualify as level 2 autonomy, which means drivers must be engaged at all times. But the systems enabling the Waymo robotaxi can cost upwards of $100,000 per vehicle. That is too pricey for consumer vehicles.\nIn October 2020,Consumer Reports ranked the automated-driving systems available to, well, consumers. Overall, Tesla’s automated driver system ranked second to General Motors(GM). Tesla scored highest on capability and ease of use, but ranked poorly on keeping the driver engaged.\nOne reason for that low score might be that Tesla’s automated-driving systems aren’t “hands free” solutions. Drivers need to keep their hands on, or touching, the steering wheel to keep the system on. There are “hands free” systems that use interior cameras to make sure a driver’s eyes are on the road at all times.\nCamera monitoring might be better than haptic steering-wheel feedback. That is a debate for car companies and regulators.\nPractically speaking, hands free and hands required isn’t the basis for competitive differentiation. All the systems on offer today, hands free or not, require drivers to be engaged 100% of the time.\nAutonomous driving studies and reports will proliferate in coming years. Each will have different criteria for judging what is best. Eventually, investors will probably have to test out autonomous-driving systems for themselves. That way they won’t fall victim to ratings criteria that aren’t explicitly defined.\nTesla stock is about flat so far in 2021. The S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average are up 19% and 15%, respectively.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1540,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"EN","currentLanguage":"EN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":91,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ORIG"},"commentList":[],"hasMoreComment":false,"orderType":2}