8 ms·

Driving back and forth in front of the damn charger speaks for itself. Straws. You maybe holding some. EDIT: Two words. Occam's Razor. Your explanation is

Driving back and forth in front of the damn charger speaks for itself. Straws. You maybe holding some. EDIT: Two words. Occam's Razor. Your explanation is so tangled that an entire battalion of Viet Cong could hide in it.

mythrowaway0 14y ago
Speaks for not being able to find the charging point in the parking lot, perhaps? Don't forget that Musk formulated his assertion of Broder's motivation based on a data log of the car traveling between 5mph and 15mph for 0.6 miles. That sounds almost exactly like my average journey to find a parking spot at the mall. But no, you're right, let's assume a long-term New York Times veteran lied in the paper, intentionally. That's a safer explanation in the face of your call for Occam's Razor...
- veemjeem 14y ago
  John Broder does have an affinity for writing articles about big oil. I don't exactly want to assume he was paid under the table to denounce electric cars, but it's odd for a writer to have 90% of their articles being related to oil: http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/b/john_m_broder/index.html http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/peopl... On Feb 8, 4 days before the controversial tesla article, he wrote one about how poorly the Chevrolet Volt & Ford Transit performed. I think he already decided on the tone of the article before he drove the Tesla. His other articles about oil drilling claim that they help with job creation... you be the judge.
  - twoodfin 14y ago
    How is that odd? Energy issues are his beat.
    - CapitalistCartr 14y ago
      Energy is more than Oil, gasoline, and internal combustion engines. A failure to recognize that by a NYT reporter is odd.
      - twoodfin 14y ago
        Huh? He writes about many, many other energy-related topics. Just page through his stories. Climate, natural gas, EPA regulations, wind tax credits ... http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/b/john_m_broder/index.html http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/peopl... That this guy could be repeatedly accused here of being an industry shill reflects much more poorly on hn than on him.
        foobarqux 14y ago
        Do those articles have a negative or positive sentiment for the large incumbent industries like oil?
  - Nrsolis 14y ago
    I've had two experiences with the press. I have many friends who have also had far more interaction with the press than I have. I will tell you this: Both times I made it into the paper, my feeling while giving the interview was that the reporter was writing the story their way despite what I was saying. I was asked leading questions, questions that asked me to come down on one side or another of a complex issue. I was asked repeatedly the same question in different ways to elicit a response that would support a conclusion I didn't agree with. My friends confirmed my suspicions when they saw the articles that were written. If you dont think that a significant percentage of the articles you read in the paper are pushing a particular viewpoint despite contrary evidence, I'd like a little of what you are smoking. Just in case you were asking, one of the reporters I'm talking about works for the New York Times. This is the article I was talking about: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/18/national/18harvard.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/18/national/18harvard.html?pa...
  - protomyth 14y ago
    > His other articles about oil drilling claim that they help with job creation... you be the judge. Since I live in ND, we have lots of oil drilling going on, and the Dec 2012 unemployment rate was 3.2% compared to the national rate of 7.8%; I would find that a factually true statement.
    - roc 14y ago
      And how's that scale when we're talking about a population larger than 700k residents? Just because something is factually true in a narrow context does not mean it remains factually true when abstracted to a generality.
      - protomyth 14y ago
        Texas seems to be doing fine too and they have a bit of a population. The line you quoted is factual. Oil employees a lot of people and generates a lot of money.
        niggler 14y ago
        It's sad to see any factual criticism of electric vehicles being interpreted as support of big oil. It's not a religion!
        roc 14y ago
        Again, "a lot" is a statement that is only true in context. And particularly given that Oil's ability to employ is completely dependent upon geological formations that no-one has any control over, it's disingenuous to try to generalize it beyond the context where it's true.
        protomyth 14y ago
        Farming is geographically limited and it is a rather large employer in the US. Oil has a effect on more industries than just energy. Tesla would not be able to build their cars with oil products. It's disingenuous to not look at actual employment numbers and reach of industry when trying to say something factual isn't.
  - smackfu 14y ago
    >he wrote one about how poorly the Chevrolet Volt & Ford Transit performed Is the claim that they are actually doing very well, and he was incorrect in his article? Or that he is biased merely for writing an article based on negative facts?
    - dllthomas 14y ago
      The notion was that a pattern of articles that tend to support the same group should raise our estimate of a bias in favor of that group. All of them could be perfectly accurate, incidentally - consider a journalist who investigates 100 stories for every one he publishes and only publishes those that are favorable; while none of the articles would contain actual falsehoods, clearly this is a bias. Whether that's the case here is a much deeper question that I can't answer from my extremely limited skimming of the available media and this thread.
- newhouseb 14y ago
  Here's a satellite view of the rest area with the charging stations: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=milford+travel+plaza&hl=en&ll=41.246226,-73.009523&spn=0.002869,0.001907&sll=41.184855,-73.199158&sspn=1.035587,0.97641&t=h&hq=travel+plaza&hnear=Milford,+New+Haven,+Connecticut&fll=41.24627,-73.009147&fspn=0.001283,0.001907&z=19 https://maps.google.com/maps?q=milford+travel+plaza&hl=e... The street view here is outdated but I'm pretty sure you would see them immediately as you exit off the highway and, end to end, the rest area is about 0.25 miles. I don't think there's any other way to accumulate 0.6 miles in this rest stop without driving around in circles.
  - pbreit 14y ago
    So one circle would do it like, say, if he missed the first right turn and continued straight?
- Robin_Message 14y ago
  It doesn't seem likely the reporter lied intentionally - or at least, not consciously. However, didn't we see that long apology yesterday about how easy it is to lie to yourself and others, even when truth is everything to you? This is why we have double blind medical trials etc. – because people are biased and can't help but lie to keep their preconceptions true.
- raverbashing 14y ago
  It's a valid point, but if he did really have difficulties in finding the charging station he should have said so.
- enraged_camel 14y ago
  What does his being a veteran have anything to do with his affinity to lie? The main factor that affects someone's likelihood of lying is whether they think they can get away with it. Broder most likely knew that the car was logging data. However, he probably didn't know just how detailed the logging was, and assumed it was too rudimentary to refute the kind of story he was cooking up in his head before he even started the drive.
- crusso 14y ago
  let's assume a long-term New York Times veteran lied in the paper, intentionally If anything, I think that some veteran reporters get full of themselves and become unafraid of slanting things according to their biases as they get older. Look at the trouble Dan Rather got into at the end of his career because he was determined to sink George W. Bush.
- jasonlotito 14y ago
  If this was the only discrepancy, I'd be more skeptical. However, there are a large number of problems with the reporting. Large enough that said reporter has an obligation to respond. > let's assume a long-term New York Times veteran lied in the paper What you are asking us to believe than is that Musk faked all this data. Because if he didn't fake the data, then the NYTimes story still doesn't add up, regardless of speculation on his activities. Furthermore, you are asking us to believe that numerous other reviews by respectable, veteran reports, were wrong. Maybe this report is the one man speaking out against a large conspiracy of a company and numerous reporters. But it's on him to prove now.
anonymouz 14y ago
Can be entirely harmless: The car displays 0 miles range, and he is at the charging station. Why not try to figure out how much reserve he still has before it shuts down? He didn't report negatively about this either.
- maushu 14y ago
  Yes, this would make sense, but he didn't mention it though.
  - arrrg 14y ago
    Why should he?!
    - dllthomas 14y ago
      Pushing a battery too far can affect its characteristics. What tradeoffs Tesla made in the protection circuitry (is it more important to protect the battery's lifespan or get you to your destination this time?) is interesting, but getting at it that way could well change the outcome of the current test if they've opted to stress the latter.
      - arrrg 14y ago
        Ok, now you are nitpicking. That is such an irrelevant aside.
        dllthomas 14y ago
        I have definitely done things to batteries, in devices with poor protection circuitry, that have lopped off a good portion of the time that the battery would hold a charge. Since the ultimate complaint was how short a time the battery held a charge, it doesn't seem irrelevant at all. If I'm complaining about a leaky bucket, the fact that I did something that may have added holes is highly relevant. Looking at the data Musk posted, it doesn't seem to have likely been the cause here, but that data wasn't available when the article was written.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
drostie 14y ago
Maybe, but I do think Occam's Razor favors the "expected 90, saw 50 in bad lighting, misread it as 90, could not misread it when it dropped to 45" explanation over both the "battery suddenly dropped from 90 to 45" explanation and the "NYT reporter saw 50, lied his butt off and said it was 90 to tech support for no reason, then ran with the lie in his article because he's a shill for oil and hates electric." Driving back and forth in front of the charger doesn't seem quite so crazy given the distances involved. The distance the Tesla logs for is ~0.5 miles at a speed of ~10mph, but that's only 3 minutes of malfeasance, if it's anything at all. And I'm not sure it's malfeasance -- because it's certainly not led to anything in the report. Maybe he wanted to park and get some food but then remembered that the charging takes a while and did it in opposite order. That could take 3 minutes easily off.
- neuralnetwork 14y ago
  Digital displays are easier to read in bad lighting, not harder. So it's impossible to have misread 5 as a 9 at night.
  - criley 14y ago
    False. It's possible to misread anything at any time in any condition. It is impossible to prevent all misreading, human error will always occur.
  - drostie 14y ago
    You're right -- it's not impossible but it might have been difficult. I hadn't checked out the interior and so I was not sure what sort of display one looks at to see the remaining range; there is one which suggests that you can see it right under the odometer: http://images.thecarconnection.com/lrg/2012-tesla-model-s-display-screen-photo-flickr-user-jurvetson_100393720_l.jpg http://images.thecarconnection.com/lrg/2012-tesla-model-s-di... ...in which case there is not much of an excuse for that type of thing. On the other hand there is a screen which gives the same information but would be very easy to misread, especially if there were glare: http://elonmusktesla.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/tesla-model-s-review-2/ http://elonmusktesla.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/tesla-model-s-... But yeah, it's not like I was thinking, some display with LCD/LED style digits where a 5 is just one line away from being a 9. You are very correct in that regard.
arscan 14y ago
Or maybe Hanlon's razor applies instead: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- omni 14y ago
  Given the repeated circles in the parking lot, we'd be talking about near-unprecedented levels of stupidity.
  - digerata 14y ago
    "I am NOT going to park more than 4 spots away from the door!" How many times do you see people circling the parking when 20 feet away is a spot to park? But I don't care, this story is B.S., the guy totally was trying report on his agenda and not the facts.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
  - danielweber 14y ago
    Musk's emphasis is "drove in circles for over half a mile." I read that as "drove in circles for over half a mile." I.e., not really enough to make it conk out. There are other things in Musk's post that make me worry about Broder's reporting, but not this.
  - arscan 14y ago
    Apparently he was driving in circles looking for the charging station, which was difficult to see in a dark parking lot: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/02/elon-musk-new-york-times-tesla-test-drive.html http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/02/elon-musk-new-y... We'll just have to wait for this "detailed rebuttal" for more information. This is extremely entertaining.
  - bobwaycott 14y ago
free652 14y ago
I can attack Musk easily: a) Lincoln tunnel isn't in NYC's downtown. Even Holland isn't. NYC downtown generally defined as below Canal St. So how NYT reporter drove through it, I have no idea. b) .5 mile is too short for driving back and forth. I can easily walk .5 mile in under 10 minutes. c) As the _average_ temp setting was 72F... So the next statement is funny, the NYT reported turned the temperature up to 74F? From what? The average temperature? That doesn't make any sense at all.
- mimiflynn 14y ago
  In NYC, downtown is anything that is down from the part of town you are referencing. Realistically, if the drive drove from the Lincoln tunnel and down the west side hwy, he would be driving downtown. Anyway, to anyone outside of NYC, downtown is where the streets are crazy and one way and lots of business takes place... so, really, by that definition, anywhere below Central Park can be considered 'downtown'... especially if you are uptown.
  - free652 14y ago
    Driving downtown, not THROUGH it. Driving THROUGH downtown means driving THROUGH downtown, not going towards downtown. So Musk made a minor mistake, so the NYT reporter made few minor mistakes. I don't see lies, just two different sides of the same story. Of course the NYT reporter could have driven downtown and take FDR uptown, but I don't see any prove of that. That would make a little sense if you took Holland, but not Lincoln tunnel.
    - mimiflynn 14y ago
      minutia. my point was: its minutia. You're other points are meaningful, though.
    - VonGuard 14y ago
      The nerve of that New York Times reporter for wanting to go through New York.
- combray 14y ago
dclowd9901 14y ago
Tesla says he spent five minutes driving around a parking lot. I don't know about you but in a busy station, I've spent far longer trying to find an open spot.
- jcc80 14y ago
  Article states it was a small lot with only 100 total spaces. Not exactly a mall parking lot.
cube13 14y ago
>Two words. Occam's Razor. Your explanation is so tangled that an entire battalion of Viet Cong could hide in it. Tesla's logs show that the range dropped from 90 to 30ish at mile 400. It shows that Broden was 100% correct.

mythrowaway0 14y ago

Speaks for not being able to find the charging point in the parking lot, perhaps? Don't forget that Musk formulated his assertion of Broder's motivation based on a data log of the car traveling between 5mph and 15mph for 0.6 miles. That sounds almost exactly like my average journey to find a parking spot at the mall. But no, you're right, let's assume a long-term New York Times veteran lied in the paper, intentionally. That's a safer explanation in the face of your call for Occam's Razor...

veemjeem 14y ago
John Broder does have an affinity for writing articles about big oil. I don't exactly want to assume he was paid under the table to denounce electric cars, but it's odd for a writer to have 90% of their articles being related to oil: http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/b/john_m_broder/index.html http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/peopl... On Feb 8, 4 days before the controversial tesla article, he wrote one about how poorly the Chevrolet Volt & Ford Transit performed. I think he already decided on the tone of the article before he drove the Tesla. His other articles about oil drilling claim that they help with job creation... you be the judge.
- twoodfin 14y ago
  How is that odd? Energy issues are his beat.
  - CapitalistCartr 14y ago
    Energy is more than Oil, gasoline, and internal combustion engines. A failure to recognize that by a NYT reporter is odd.
    - twoodfin 14y ago
      Huh? He writes about many, many other energy-related topics. Just page through his stories. Climate, natural gas, EPA regulations, wind tax credits ... http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/b/john_m_broder/index.html http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/peopl... That this guy could be repeatedly accused here of being an industry shill reflects much more poorly on hn than on him.
      - foobarqux 14y ago
        Do those articles have a negative or positive sentiment for the large incumbent industries like oil?
- Nrsolis 14y ago
  I've had two experiences with the press. I have many friends who have also had far more interaction with the press than I have. I will tell you this: Both times I made it into the paper, my feeling while giving the interview was that the reporter was writing the story their way despite what I was saying. I was asked leading questions, questions that asked me to come down on one side or another of a complex issue. I was asked repeatedly the same question in different ways to elicit a response that would support a conclusion I didn't agree with. My friends confirmed my suspicions when they saw the articles that were written. If you dont think that a significant percentage of the articles you read in the paper are pushing a particular viewpoint despite contrary evidence, I'd like a little of what you are smoking. Just in case you were asking, one of the reporters I'm talking about works for the New York Times. This is the article I was talking about: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/18/national/18harvard.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/18/national/18harvard.html?pa...
- protomyth 14y ago
  > His other articles about oil drilling claim that they help with job creation... you be the judge. Since I live in ND, we have lots of oil drilling going on, and the Dec 2012 unemployment rate was 3.2% compared to the national rate of 7.8%; I would find that a factually true statement.
  - roc 14y ago
    And how's that scale when we're talking about a population larger than 700k residents? Just because something is factually true in a narrow context does not mean it remains factually true when abstracted to a generality.
    - protomyth 14y ago
      Texas seems to be doing fine too and they have a bit of a population. The line you quoted is factual. Oil employees a lot of people and generates a lot of money.
      - niggler 14y ago
        It's sad to see any factual criticism of electric vehicles being interpreted as support of big oil. It's not a religion!
      - roc 14y ago
        Again, "a lot" is a statement that is only true in context. And particularly given that Oil's ability to employ is completely dependent upon geological formations that no-one has any control over, it's disingenuous to try to generalize it beyond the context where it's true.
        protomyth 14y ago
        Farming is geographically limited and it is a rather large employer in the US. Oil has a effect on more industries than just energy. Tesla would not be able to build their cars with oil products. It's disingenuous to not look at actual employment numbers and reach of industry when trying to say something factual isn't.
- smackfu 14y ago
  >he wrote one about how poorly the Chevrolet Volt & Ford Transit performed Is the claim that they are actually doing very well, and he was incorrect in his article? Or that he is biased merely for writing an article based on negative facts?
  - dllthomas 14y ago
    The notion was that a pattern of articles that tend to support the same group should raise our estimate of a bias in favor of that group. All of them could be perfectly accurate, incidentally - consider a journalist who investigates 100 stories for every one he publishes and only publishes those that are favorable; while none of the articles would contain actual falsehoods, clearly this is a bias. Whether that's the case here is a much deeper question that I can't answer from my extremely limited skimming of the available media and this thread.
newhouseb 14y ago
Here's a satellite view of the rest area with the charging stations: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=milford+travel+plaza&hl=en&ll=41.246226,-73.009523&spn=0.002869,0.001907&sll=41.184855,-73.199158&sspn=1.035587,0.97641&t=h&hq=travel+plaza&hnear=Milford,+New+Haven,+Connecticut&fll=41.24627,-73.009147&fspn=0.001283,0.001907&z=19 https://maps.google.com/maps?q=milford+travel+plaza&hl=e... The street view here is outdated but I'm pretty sure you would see them immediately as you exit off the highway and, end to end, the rest area is about 0.25 miles. I don't think there's any other way to accumulate 0.6 miles in this rest stop without driving around in circles.
- pbreit 14y ago
  So one circle would do it like, say, if he missed the first right turn and continued straight?
Robin_Message 14y ago
It doesn't seem likely the reporter lied intentionally - or at least, not consciously. However, didn't we see that long apology yesterday about how easy it is to lie to yourself and others, even when truth is everything to you? This is why we have double blind medical trials etc. – because people are biased and can't help but lie to keep their preconceptions true.
raverbashing 14y ago
It's a valid point, but if he did really have difficulties in finding the charging station he should have said so.
enraged_camel 14y ago
What does his being a veteran have anything to do with his affinity to lie? The main factor that affects someone's likelihood of lying is whether they think they can get away with it. Broder most likely knew that the car was logging data. However, he probably didn't know just how detailed the logging was, and assumed it was too rudimentary to refute the kind of story he was cooking up in his head before he even started the drive.
crusso 14y ago
let's assume a long-term New York Times veteran lied in the paper, intentionally If anything, I think that some veteran reporters get full of themselves and become unafraid of slanting things according to their biases as they get older. Look at the trouble Dan Rather got into at the end of his career because he was determined to sink George W. Bush.
jasonlotito 14y ago
If this was the only discrepancy, I'd be more skeptical. However, there are a large number of problems with the reporting. Large enough that said reporter has an obligation to respond. > let's assume a long-term New York Times veteran lied in the paper What you are asking us to believe than is that Musk faked all this data. Because if he didn't fake the data, then the NYTimes story still doesn't add up, regardless of speculation on his activities. Furthermore, you are asking us to believe that numerous other reviews by respectable, veteran reports, were wrong. Maybe this report is the one man speaking out against a large conspiracy of a company and numerous reporters. But it's on him to prove now.

anonymouz 14y ago

Can be entirely harmless: The car displays 0 miles range, and he is at the charging station. Why not try to figure out how much reserve he still has before it shuts down? He didn't report negatively about this either.

maushu 14y ago
Yes, this would make sense, but he didn't mention it though.
- arrrg 14y ago
  Why should he?!
  - dllthomas 14y ago
    Pushing a battery too far can affect its characteristics. What tradeoffs Tesla made in the protection circuitry (is it more important to protect the battery's lifespan or get you to your destination this time?) is interesting, but getting at it that way could well change the outcome of the current test if they've opted to stress the latter.
    - arrrg 14y ago
      Ok, now you are nitpicking. That is such an irrelevant aside.
      - dllthomas 14y ago
        I have definitely done things to batteries, in devices with poor protection circuitry, that have lopped off a good portion of the time that the battery would hold a charge. Since the ultimate complaint was how short a time the battery held a charge, it doesn't seem irrelevant at all. If I'm complaining about a leaky bucket, the fact that I did something that may have added holes is highly relevant. Looking at the data Musk posted, it doesn't seem to have likely been the cause here, but that data wasn't available when the article was written.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

drostie 14y ago

Maybe, but I do think Occam's Razor favors the "expected 90, saw 50 in bad lighting, misread it as 90, could not misread it when it dropped to 45" explanation over both the "battery suddenly dropped from 90 to 45" explanation and the "NYT reporter saw 50, lied his butt off and said it was 90 to tech support for no reason, then ran with the lie in his article because he's a shill for oil and hates electric." Driving back and forth in front of the charger doesn't seem quite so crazy given the distances involved. The distance the Tesla logs for is ~0.5 miles at a speed of ~10mph, but that's only 3 minutes of malfeasance, if it's anything at all. And I'm not sure it's malfeasance -- because it's certainly not led to anything in the report. Maybe he wanted to park and get some food but then remembered that the charging takes a while and did it in opposite order. That could take 3 minutes easily off.

neuralnetwork 14y ago
Digital displays are easier to read in bad lighting, not harder. So it's impossible to have misread 5 as a 9 at night.
- criley 14y ago
  False. It's possible to misread anything at any time in any condition. It is impossible to prevent all misreading, human error will always occur.
- drostie 14y ago
  You're right -- it's not impossible but it might have been difficult. I hadn't checked out the interior and so I was not sure what sort of display one looks at to see the remaining range; there is one which suggests that you can see it right under the odometer: http://images.thecarconnection.com/lrg/2012-tesla-model-s-display-screen-photo-flickr-user-jurvetson_100393720_l.jpg http://images.thecarconnection.com/lrg/2012-tesla-model-s-di... ...in which case there is not much of an excuse for that type of thing. On the other hand there is a screen which gives the same information but would be very easy to misread, especially if there were glare: http://elonmusktesla.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/tesla-model-s-review-2/ http://elonmusktesla.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/tesla-model-s-... But yeah, it's not like I was thinking, some display with LCD/LED style digits where a 5 is just one line away from being a 9. You are very correct in that regard.

arscan 14y ago

Or maybe Hanlon's razor applies instead: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
omni 14y ago
Given the repeated circles in the parking lot, we'd be talking about near-unprecedented levels of stupidity.
- digerata 14y ago
  "I am NOT going to park more than 4 spots away from the door!" How many times do you see people circling the parking when 20 feet away is a spot to park? But I don't care, this story is B.S., the guy totally was trying report on his agenda and not the facts.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
- danielweber 14y ago
  Musk's emphasis is "drove in circles for over half a mile." I read that as "drove in circles for over half a mile." I.e., not really enough to make it conk out. There are other things in Musk's post that make me worry about Broder's reporting, but not this.
- arscan 14y ago
  Apparently he was driving in circles looking for the charging station, which was difficult to see in a dark parking lot: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/02/elon-musk-new-york-times-tesla-test-drive.html http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/02/elon-musk-new-y... We'll just have to wait for this "detailed rebuttal" for more information. This is extremely entertaining.
- bobwaycott 14y ago

free652 14y ago

I can attack Musk easily: a) Lincoln tunnel isn't in NYC's downtown. Even Holland isn't. NYC downtown generally defined as below Canal St. So how NYT reporter drove through it, I have no idea. b) .5 mile is too short for driving back and forth. I can easily walk .5 mile in under 10 minutes. c) As the _average_ temp setting was 72F... So the next statement is funny, the NYT reported turned the temperature up to 74F? From what? The average temperature? That doesn't make any sense at all.

mimiflynn 14y ago
In NYC, downtown is anything that is down from the part of town you are referencing. Realistically, if the drive drove from the Lincoln tunnel and down the west side hwy, he would be driving downtown. Anyway, to anyone outside of NYC, downtown is where the streets are crazy and one way and lots of business takes place... so, really, by that definition, anywhere below Central Park can be considered 'downtown'... especially if you are uptown.
- free652 14y ago
  Driving downtown, not THROUGH it. Driving THROUGH downtown means driving THROUGH downtown, not going towards downtown. So Musk made a minor mistake, so the NYT reporter made few minor mistakes. I don't see lies, just two different sides of the same story. Of course the NYT reporter could have driven downtown and take FDR uptown, but I don't see any prove of that. That would make a little sense if you took Holland, but not Lincoln tunnel.
  - mimiflynn 14y ago
    minutia. my point was: its minutia. You're other points are meaningful, though.
  - VonGuard 14y ago
    The nerve of that New York Times reporter for wanting to go through New York.
combray 14y ago

dclowd9901 14y ago

Tesla says he spent five minutes driving around a parking lot. I don't know about you but in a busy station, I've spent far longer trying to find an open spot.

jcc80 14y ago
Article states it was a small lot with only 100 total spaces. Not exactly a mall parking lot.

cube13 14y ago

>Two words. Occam's Razor. Your explanation is so tangled that an entire battalion of Viet Cong could hide in it. Tesla's logs show that the range dropped from 90 to 30ish at mile 400. It shows that Broden was 100% correct.