sell! sell! sell!

[PatsFan1283]

Tiz we talked about solar city awhile ago and I said I didn't think they would make it and the stock has tanked since. It got a huge bump after the Paris meeting but then faded back down because of low energy prices in general.

I do think it is probably a good buy after a flushout now though.

Just so much central planning/gov't intervention in that industry that a big player like them probably gets gifted a lot of favorable contracts and isn't subjected to market forces as much as they should be.

 

[tiznow]

Yeah solar smashed in general.. As is usually the case extreme volatility helps the major players and crushes the smaller guys

 

[tiznow]

Leave it to scientists/physcists to explain what is going on.. Ivy League inbred thought economists will just keep on digging and keep ramping up inequality till it explodes in a big way..

----------


[h=1]The Chilling Math of Inequality[/h]By Mark Buchanan
Economists have offered various explanations for the frustrating slowness of global growth, from excessive debt to a shifting balance of power bringing an end to an American century. A new analysis suggests there's one that deserves greater attention: the chilling effect of inequality.
Think of an economy as a large network of individuals and firms who make and use things, interact and exchange with one another. Any party can, in principle, transact with any other, buying and selling, the only constraint being the budget of the buyer. Economists have studied network models of this sort -- called random exchange economies -- to explore how normal trading activity might (or might not) make an economy approach equilibrium.
Now some European physicists have used such a model to examine a different question: How does a significant change in inequality affect the overall level of exchange? Their study makes use of some fairly abstruse mathematics coming from physics, developed precisely for messy network problems of this kind. What they find is troubling, although not all that surprising -- rising inequality tends to undermine exchange.
Income Inequality
The reason is quite simple. As inequality gets more pronounced, a larger fraction of the population faces more stringent budget constraints, and the spectrum of possible economic interactions open to them narrows. Fewer people have the wherewithal to engage in economic activity. This mathematical economy actually demonstrates a sharp transition, akin to the abrupt freezing of a liquid, as the level of inequality exceeds a certain threshold. Worryingly, the wealth distribution in the U.S. over the past few decades has been moving ever closer to this critical edge.
To be sure, the model is far from complete, and can only suggest possibilities. That said, it gets at the intricacies of exchange in a way that traditional macroeconomic models do not. Moreover, the effect of budget constraints on people's economic capabilities makes intuitive sense. There is every reason to believe that more realistic models would show a similar dynamic, changed only in minor details.
This inequality mechanism has nothing to do with ordinary recessions and the usual business cycle. Significant changes in the distribution of wealth take place much more slowly -- an attribute consistent with what many economists have identified as the different and more profound nature of the current global slump. The concept of secular stagnation that Larry Summers has popularized could have a number of contributing causes, including rising inequality.
If so, the inequality diagnosis opens up interesting possibilities for policy solutions. The researchers found another interesting effect -- a “trickle up” flow of wealth quite different from the usual “trickle down” picture of supply-side economics. In an economy with appreciable inequality, capital tends to flow from those with less to those with more, generating a cascade of transactions along the way. Hence, policy interventions aiming to spur economic activity should work better if they inject money into the system at the lower end, rather than from the top.
This fits with the argument that quantitative easing -- in which central banks purchase securities -- may ultimately be misguided. Such a policy is supposed to encourage spending by propping up the prices of stocks and bonds, which tends to boost wealth only at the top end of the distribution. Central bankers might have a more powerful and beneficial effect if they instead injected money directly into the accounts of citizens, who could then use it to pay down debts or spend as they like.
The idea of such "people's quantitative easing" is gaining popularity, and for good reason. It would more directly attack the budget constraints holding back the vast number of individuals on whom economic growth depends.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
To contact the author of this story:
Mark Buchanan at buchanan.mark@gmail.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Mark Whitehouse at mwhitehouse1@bloomberg.net

 

[tiznow]

At this point I'm just waiting for implosion for most part... Long gold related stuff.. Gold healthy pullback now after recent breakout.. Suggest Buying in low 1200s... some nibbling on other long term commodity plays

only way I see major upside on equity market from here is if they start helicoptering money to the masses ... Otherwise japense style stagnation at best will continue to reign... And dragbi + whatever fed does will only keep us flatish at best till reality catches up to us.. They've had to have pushed big corporation/Wall Street bias m&a mania flat revenues propped earnings nearly as far as they can.. Might be able to keep flatline/afloat a little while longer

 

[PatsFan1283]

Ackman your typical hedge fund sociopath with no real long-term skill at beating the market after fees. Just able to sell the dream, good looks, Harvard background, extremely charismatic, etc...Prescient timing given Trump's rise.

Also had an in with the moneyed NY jews that like to invest with their own. Madoff preyed upon this as well.

 

[tiznow]

Boggles my mind what new cars cost now especially when you factor in stagnant wages.. Much of the F and GM stuff a facade of easy credit patsfan.. Selling big expensive gas guzzlers to morons...

----------

[h=1]Unpaid subprime car loans hit 20-year high[/h]
March 15
NEW YORK
Americans with lower credit scores are falling behind on auto payments at an alarming pace.
The rate of seriously delinquent subprime car loans soared above 5% in February, according to Fitch Ratings. That's worse than during the Great Recession and the highest level since 1996.
It's a surprising development given the relative health of the overall economy. Fitch blames it on a dramatic rise in loans with lax borrowing standards that have helped fuel the recent boom in auto sales. More Americans bought new cars last year than ever before and the amount of auto loans soared beyond $1 trillion.
But research conducted by a group that tracks people's credit scores, TransUnion, suggests that plummeting oil prices is a factor in rising defaults because of the flurry of pink slips in the oil industry.

North Dakota, the epicenter of the shale oil boom and subsequent bust, experienced a 42% spike in seriously delinquent (60 days or more) auto loans during the fourth quarter, according to TransUnion.
Louisiana, another state hit hard by the oil crash, had the highest auto delinquency rate, while late payments in Texas and Oklahoma jumped about 14% apiece.
"We're seeing the impact of the oil slump causing economic shock. It's putting people and families in distress," said Jason Laky, TransUnion's auto and consumer lending business leader.
To cope with the crash in oil prices, American oil companies like Chevron(CVX), ConocoPhillips (COP) and Halliburton (HAL) have been slashing jobs aggressively.
By comparison, the overall U.S. economy continues to hum along, adding jobs at a healthy pace.
Related: Why the oil crash isn't a repeat of 2008
Fitch points out that the subprime end of the market is where there's increased competition to peddle loans. The ratings firm flagged an increase in loans to "borrowers with no FICO scores," lower downpayments, and extended term lending.
No wonder there was a 34% rise in subprime loan losses in February, though they remain below recession levels.
Related: Car buyers now owe $1 trillion on car loans
Fitch said auto loans to borrowers that have better credit scores remain "stable." Losses are below historical averages and Fitch expects the auto loan market, including the subprime section, to improve this spring as borrowers get flush with tax refunds.
"Losses in the overall auto finance industry are just incredibly low," said Lou Loquasto, automotive finance leader at Equifax.

Related: Hillary Clinton can't kill coal. It's already dying
Problems in subprime loans are bringing back bad memories of the mortgage meltdown that fueled the Great Recession. But there are major differences.
First, unlike mortgages during the housing boom, auto loans aren't sold as investment ideas that will make people rich. Most people know their vehicle will lose value over time.
Plus, auto payments are often much more manageable than monthly mortgage payments.
Consumers also have a long track record of prioritizing their auto payments because they simply can't afford to lose their car, which is their only way to reach jobs in most cases.
"You can always switch over and rent. But if you lose your car, you probably lose your job," said TransUnion's Laky.
Even if the auto-loan market isn't facing a repeat of the 2008 crisis, worsening subprime credit problems could make it harder to get car loans in the future.
"It could have a spillover effect," said John Bella, Jr., managing director at Fitch.

 

[PatsFan1283]

Yeah, I know auto loans is a big bubble.

That isn't why I was touting Ford and GM. They're investing in a lot of the newer technologies related to cars, whether it be electric or autonomous. GM bought a company that specializes in autonomous research last week, bought Lyft before that, has the Chevy Bolt coming out.....Ford teaming up with Google since Google isn't going to manufacture cars, it is a good partnership.

Obviously near-term they should struggle if recession hits.

 

[tiznow]

Ackman your typical hedge fund sociopath with no real long-term skill at beating the market after fees. Just able to sell the dream, good looks, Harvard background, extremely charismatic, etc...Prescient timing given Trump's rise.

Also had an in with the moneyed NY jews that like to invest with their own. Madoff preyed upon this as well.

Couldnt say it any better ..

 

[tiznow]

Yeah, I know auto loans is a big bubble.

That isn't why I was touting Ford and GM. They're investing in a lot of the newer technologies related to cars, whether it be electric or autonomous. GM bought a company that specializes in autonomous research last week, bought Lyft before that, has the Chevy Bolt coming out.....Ford teaming up with Google since Google isn't going to manufacture cars, it is a good partnership.

Obviously near-term they should struggle if recession hits.

I have my doubts they will be able to keep pace with tsla long term.. The infrastructure tsla building plus robotics won't be easy to copy I'm guessing... Gm and F will likely continue to meander to nowhere and follow the overall economy at best IMO not outperform it..

then driverless car stuff soooo far out at this point.. legalities alone will hold it back for a long time.. Plus I doubt many humans will be willing to give that control up anytime soon will take more generations to gain acceptance.. Hopping in car and driving wherever you please one of the few freedoms we have left at this point Ha

 

[PatsFan1283]

Yeah I'm not sure about that. It depends how big Tesla's early mover edge is. Everything I have read pretty much leads me to the conclusion the big boys just didn't feel like making 90k electric cars. Now that battery tech is catching up, they're getting into the game.

I guess it is probably true that the best young engineers would want to go to a company that they feel is changing the world like Tesla, but GM/Ford/Nissan do have big advantages in terms of logistics, supply chain, manufacturing.

Might be awhile before Tesla can sell 500k cars a year. I think Musk said by 2020 but that seems ambitious from where we are today and he has a history of missing self-imposed deadlines. The fact it hasn't hurt stock a testament to his showmanship.

 

[PatsFan1283]

I have my doubts they will be able to keep pace with tsla long term.. The infrastructure tsla building plus robotics won't be easy to copy I'm guessing... Gm and F will likely continue to meander to nowhere and follow the overall economy at best IMO not outperform it..

then driverless car stuff soooo far out at this point.. legalities alone will hold it back for a long time.. Plus I doubt many humans will be willing to give that control up anytime soon will take more generations to gain acceptance.. Hopping in car and driving wherever you please one of the few freedoms we have left at this point Ha

I don't think it is that far off in big cities. A lot of driver assisted tech is already here. Billions of research dollars being poured into self driving cars now.

Gov't just invested 4mill and seems very eager to help the industry along. Told all the automakers to come to them with any concerns as they don't want the regulatory process to be slower than the innovation.

Huge $ saver for younger people, college students, retirees, city dwellers. I mean, there is an immediate big market. Look at Uber, there is a market for that and with driverless cars the cost will be 15-20% of what it is now. Younger gen not as thrilled with driving when they can be on their mini-computers or laptops as well.

At this point with the financial mess we're in, a game changing technology is extremely necessary.

 

[tiznow]

That's what true invators/visionaries do set the bar very high and fail quite a bit.. They care not about failures and learn from them..

thats part of our overall problem as a global economy.. the Wall Street economy.. set bars low and use financial engineering with very short sighted goals... Very conservative approach..Rather than pumping everything u have into innovating and R&D like tsla and Amazon are doing

Apple a good example of a company that went from A to B... Now it's just run by the books mba types.. And it's on a road to nowhere now.. Phone gravy train will make it plenty of money but growth days are behind it.. Nothing in pipeline .. Other than whatever it decides to gobble up

 

[PatsFan1283]

There is actually a senate commerce committee hearing today about SDCs.

Big reason why innovation isn't what it should be is gov't is mostly lawyers and business execs. Very few scientists and engineers.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/...iving-car-evangelists-head-congress/81766224/

 

[tiznow]

Solar in the desert where it makes a ton of sense.. a good example of government and the old guard getting in the way..

-----------

[h=1]LAS VEGAS UTILITIES REALLY DON’T WANT THE STRIP TO GO SOLAR[/h]This story originally appeared on the Guardian and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration.
The glittering Las Vegas strip is not an obvious model for energy conservation.
Yet hidden above the glowing Eiffel Tower, neon resort awnings and a black pyramid that shines a beam of light into space, is one of the largest rooftop solar arrays in the country.
Twenty acres of sun-catching glass sit atop the Mandalay Bay convention center, and when new installations are complete, it will become the biggest rooftop solar array in the US.
In recent months, three of Nevada’s largest casino companies—MGM Resorts, Wynn, and Las Vegas Sands—have announced plans to buy and produce more renewable energy for their hotels, a move driven both by increasing demand for responsible energy use from the companies that rent their conference halls, and a surplus of cheap power from solar farms in Nevada and California.
“It’s no accident that we put the array on top of a conference center. This is good business for us,” said Cindy Ortega, chief sustainability officer at MGM Resorts. “We are looking at leaving the power system, and one of the reasons for that is we can procure more renewable energy on the open market.”
But there is a big shadow lurking over a rapid greening of the Las Vegas strip. Regulators will not let casinos simply walk away from the state’s monopoly utility provider, NV Energy.
MGM ResortsTogether, the casinos’ 15 properties account for 7 percent of NV Energy’s electricity sales, and if that income were lost, the utility says, its remaining customers would have to endure significant rate hikes. As a result, the public utility commission (PUC) of Nevada is demanding resorts pay tens of millions of dollars to leave NV Energy’s services, a December 2015 decision which one casino has appealed.
Las Vegas’s power drama captures an ongoing dilemma in the new energy economy. While corporations have been encouraged to go green, their efforts pass the burden of subsidizing old utility regimes on to retail consumers, which regulators cannot allow.
“They need to maintain the grid. You cannot let these utilities go bankrupt or else every business in the city dies,” said Bill Ellard, an energy economist for the American Solar Energy Society. “What will happen if they don’t maintain the grid properly and the transformers blow?”
In December, Nevada’s three-member PUC effectively destroyed a thriving rooftop solar industry by approving NV Energy’s request to drastically lower the rate at which solar users are compensated for excess energy they provide to the grid.
“This is what I call a death spiral for utilities,” said Ellard. “They make it hard to go solar because once you defect from them, that affects revenue. Then they increase rates on everybody else, forcing them to defect.”
MGM Resorts has already hurt utility profits though an ambitious energy conservation effort. In addition to building a solar array strong enough to power 1,000 homes for one year, the corporation is replacing 1.3m light bulbs in its properties with LEDs.
MGM ResortsBut to power multi-thousand-room resorts which house nightclubs, pools, theaters and slot machine-packed casinos would require more solar panels than the companies have rooftop space. They are consequently joining a trend in big energy consumers requesting to buy electricity outside the utility system.
“They are all very concerned with their bottom lines,” said Rebecca Wagner, a former member of Nevada’s PUC. “The energy market in the west is great right now, so they are seeking to curb costs by getting in that market.”
Cheap natural gas is probably driving the initiative more than anything else, Wagner says. But according to Ellard, the antipathy casinos have for NV Energy’s monopoly also previews the next phase in an energy economy where renewables are competitive with fossil fuel prices.
“It’s complex because it’s not just electricity,” he said. “It’s natural gas, wind, coal, smart grid, big data, oil—it’s all connected. We’re at this next change point where wind and solar [battery] storage and smart software are going to start to replace all those energy sources.”
If the resorts do decide to separate from NV Energy, it will still cost them a combined $126.5 million, a price set by the PUC which they say is necessary to prevent broad consumer rate hikes and to compensate the utility provider for losses incurred on power plants and other assets purchased with casino demand in mind.
The resorts have complained that this “exit fee” is too high—and perhaps even illegal. “The PUC has simply made up rules as it goes along so as to discourage any applicants from exiting [NV Energy’s] service,” Wynn lawyers stated in a January judicial appeal. (MGM and the Las Vegas Sands are considering their options.)
Wynn’s president, Matthew Maddox, also noted in PUC testimony that NV Energy is owned by Warren Buffett’s company, Berkshire Hathaway (based in Omaha, Nebraska), and is therefore, in his estimation, more concerned with maximizing profits than with maintaining Nevada’s grid. Maddox pointed out that their money doesn’t even stay in Nevada, saying: “it goes to Omaha.”
Data storage company Switch faced a similar situation last year when it announced plans to use 100 percent renewable energy to power its giant computer servers. NV Energy was not able to meet those energy demands, and the PUC said the company would have to pay $27 million to break up with the utility provider since its large data centers amounted to nearly 3 percent of NV Energy’s electricity sales. As a compromise, Switch is paying the utility company to build a new solar array in North Las Vegas to meet their sustainability goals.
MGM ResortsThe city of Las Vegas, too, is planning to use 100 percent renewable energy to power its municipal buildings, fire stations, city parks and streetlights by 2017. That would make Las Vegas the largest US city to achieve such a goal. But to get PUC approval, it also had to promise to buy most of the power from an NV Energy solar plant in nearby Boulder City. Nevadans are thus subsidizing NV Energy’s green investments while it lobbies against private rooftop solar installations by their customers.
MGM Resorts’s sustainability chief, Ortega, would not comment on her company’s wrangling with NV Energy and the PUC. But she did endorse the broad push toward sustainability as a way to combat notions that Sin City lacks a conscience. “The more we can dispel the myths around Las Vegas the better destination it is,” Ortega said.
“We have the ability to educate a wide variety of stakeholders on how we can exponentially reduce environmental impacts,” she added. “Las Vegas is the perfect place to do that because we have 40 million people come here every single year, and so what better place to start telling that story.”

 

[tiznow]

There is actually a senate commerce committee hearing today about SDCs.

Big reason why innovation isn't what it should be is gov't is mostly lawyers and business execs. Very few scientists and engineers.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/...iving-car-evangelists-head-congress/81766224/

I'll never be a fan of driverless cars.. Probably a generational thing and that inherent freedom won't matter to future generations.. Airplane flying statistically is way safer than cars.. The lack of control is what scares people...

Also Just know how "they" will bastardize the system with all the big interests and government involved.. Reason I'm also rooting for musk in transportation game as he seems to actually have a soul and care about plight of mankind .. Vs your typical mba by the book ceo just looking to get paid at whatever cost..

 

[tiznow]

Yeah I'm not sure about that. It depends how big Tesla's early mover edge is. Everything I have read pretty much leads me to the conclusion the big boys just didn't feel like making 90k electric cars. Now that battery tech is catching up, they're getting into the game.

I guess it is probably true that the best young engineers would want to go to a company that they feel is changing the world like Tesla, but GM/Ford/Nissan do have big advantages in terms of logistics, supply chain, manufacturing.

Might be awhile before Tesla can sell 500k cars a year. I think Musk said by 2020 but that seems ambitious from where we are today and he has a history of missing self-imposed deadlines. The fact it hasn't hurt stock a testament to his showmanship.

The old model of car selling with dealships is terrible too.. Jacks up prices to have a worthless middleman (but but but what are all those beautiful people going to do? Evolve or die).. Tesla disrupting that nonsense...

 

[PatsFan1283]

Yeah NV energy is owned by Buffett. They're fine with solar as long as they are producing it. Not homeowners/businesses. Sandoval a gov't that has been good with new cleantech obviously. Getting Tesla to build there, lot of other companies in northern NV in that space.

Solar/Storage for industrial/business market moving rapidly. Especially in the Southwest. Florida actually has terrible solar policies but that should change in the future. Goldwater's son actually does a lot of solar advocacy work.

If you want a decent podcast about clean energy, The Energy Gang by Greentech media is pretty good. A little too hippie greeny sometimes but they do cover what is going on with storage, solar, wind, self driving cars and government at state/fed level.

 

[PatsFan1283]

The old model of car selling with dealships is terrible too.. Jacks up prices to have a worthless middleman (but but but what are all those beautiful people going to do? Evolve or die).. Tesla disrupting that nonsense...

Yeah, well the reason that stays in place is because car dealerships are extremely influential at the state level. Most big dealerships with local businessme invest in little league teams, charities, etc...They hold a lot of sway. Keeps the $ in state with jobs, etc

I don't think Musk was gonna put the Gigafactory in TX regardless but TX doesn't even allow for direct to consumer.

That dealership model is so dead with the internet too. If driverless cars do end up disrupting car industry then I could see those dealerships just becoming the fleet stations where maintenance and charging is done.

 

[PatsFan1283]

As far as the ongoing utility/solar battle, my guess is eventually they come to agreement with a rate inbetween wholesale and retail. The utilities just make less $ long-term but make enough to maintain/improve grid. Maybe some type of solar fee goes toward doing that.

But in the sunbelt they won't be able to suppress the technology forever with how fast prices dropping and storage improving.

 

[tiznow]

Tesla ahead here too.. Tesla doesn't have to depend on others like lyft/Google/battery makers etc.. They are doing it all themselves with the best and brightest..

this is where I see automation key as far as near future.. making daily commute more bareable.. not necessarily a car doing everything.. Gives you control you want and takes away what you don't want.. Sounds like tesla understands this..

---------

How Autopilot Added Years to My Life

Every now and then a company introduces technology that truly is a “game changer” in how drastically different your daily life is impacted once you are introduced to it. I truly feel I am witness to the dawn of such technology, brought to us by the innovative company Tesla.
I can go on and on about the many features of my Tesla Model S (2015 90D) that make me smile every time I enter the vehicle, but the one feature that rises above all in this wonderful tech car is the Autopilot setting.
Life before Tesla

First, a little background on myself. I am a physician, and as such possess the classic “Type A” personality. Every day I have about a 35 mile commute which although can occasionally be relaxing, is more often than not quite frustrating, dealing with other drivers on the road that do not follow common courtesy (most often the drivers that insist solely on travelling in the fast lane while talking on the cellphone, etc all the while building what I call a parade behind them). I typically use cruise control on these commutes, however this often caused more frustration. With my former daily driver, I had to repeatedly disengage and engage the cruise control as I encountered these obstacles. It often caused me to overtake on the slow lane and darting back into the fast lane before I encountered a vehicle appropriately traveling on the right. I would often have to find myself needing to decompress when I first enter my workplace just from the buildup of stress from my morning commute.
Enter Tesla

Enter Tesla into my life and the impact was obvious from the very first day I drove to work. The adaptive cruise control was leaps and bounds superior to the standard cruise control I had been accustomed to, automatically slowing down when traffic dictates without any input from me and then resuming speed when traffic clears. In fact, if this was all that Tesla offered, it still would have eliminated 95% of the frustration of my morning and evening commutes and I would be an incredibly happy owner.
Introducing Tesla Autopilot

However Tesla went a giant step above and introduced Autopilot. I did not know what the act of driving did to one’s mindset even in the best of traffic conditions. Although it feels subconscious, when manually driving a car, your brain is processing so much information, calculating velocity, road conditions, curves ahead, etc so that you can stay in your lane of travel. These constant mental calculations running in the background do take a toll on your mental state (akin to a computer running many applications in the background which causes the overall computer performance to slow down).
With Autopilot, my car took over all the minutia of staying in one’s lane, driving in traffic, etc and allowed me to relax in a more supervisory role. It has taken out all the frustration. Tesla also was kind enough to eliminate a potential annoyance I see with other manufacture’s attempts at “autopilot” by giving us Autopilot with Lane Change ability. Currently, other manufacturers that implement some sort of Lane Maintenance capability in their cars, ONLY works by forcing you to stay in that particular lane. If you want to leave the current lane, the driver has to manually disengage this setting, change lanes, and then reengage the setting. I could see this cause frustration similar to what the standard cruise control feature did on my old car. With my Tesla, I just touch the indicator stalk and the car effortlessly goes into the lane I want, Autopilot engaged fully throughout.

The commute felt like it took half the time.
​

Such was the impact that Autopilot had on my commute, that the first day I drove to work, I actually almost missed my exit. True story. I could not believe how quickly the commute seemed to be and my exit seemed to come up from nowhere. Once I realized where I was, I had to make 3 lane changes to quickly get off into the exit ramp for my workplace, which luckily I did (the only stressful part of the entire drive). It was the same distance, but the commute felt like it took half the time and I was fully relaxed pulling into the parking lot. It truly is unbelievable when you get to free your brain from the complexities of driving on the interstate and allow it to actually enjoy the experience. I remember really listening to and enjoying the music playing and just observing more things around me than before when I had to have focus on just the actual task of driving.
There will always be naysayers whenever any new technology is first introduced. One criticism regarding Tesla’s Autopilot that I have heard is that you lose the fun of actually driving the car. My response to that is that Autopilot is not an all or none option. For the long tedious interstate/highway travel I am happy to let Autopilot take the wheel so that my senses don’t get dulled from the monotony of driving straight for miles (if there are drivers out there who consider that scenario fun, more power to them). But you can bet that I don’t let Autopilot have the fun when I am driving those beautiful winding road with many curves, which I am fortunate to have near my house. I grab the wheel and get the full driver’s experience with precise tactile feedback from the road. Autopilot: Best of both worlds.

If one car learns, they all learn

The most astonishing thing of all is that my version of Autopilot is considered a beta testing program by Tesla. As part of a community of Tesla owners, whenever Autopilot is engaged, that information is sent centrally and Tesla learns driving habits and improves mapping of those roads. When one car learns something, every other car gets that information and improves automatically, sort of like a hive mentality. Amazing concept and one I witnessed firsthand: On my first commute, there was a tricky portion of highway where two lanes became three, with no real markings on the road to divide the lanes for 500 feet or so. When my car first encountered that section, it did not know what to do and split the difference (essentially driving in the middle of the two unmarked lanes). I made a manual correction to get it back into the lane I wanted. The next day, and every day afterwards, the car anticipated this and correctly maintained proper lane control without any intervention. All it took was one experience and manual input from the driver and it learned proper driving behavior from then on. Amazing.

I will never have to settle for old technologyas my car ages.
​

If Autopilot is this good now, I can only imagine how great it will be in the future. The fact that I have a Tesla also means that when that version comes out, I will wake up one morning and my car will tell me I have an update to download, so I will never have to settle for old technology as my car ages. In fact, although I have only owned my car for 3 months, I have already downloaded an improved beta version of Autopilot with visibly noticeable improvements over the original version the car came with.
I applaud Tesla for pushing the technology envelope. They will always have a loyal customer in me.