I known someone who has been to the Tesla Model 3 production line. He said it was very advanced compared to other production lines and that was part of the issue. Advanced means theoretically better, but it also means more risky to get going, lots of unknowns and new things. Apparently it is filled with ex-Toyota people.
Yes, supposedly there is plenty of exploration going on in making the process more automated than it usually is. Unsurprisingly, and not unlike software, bringing about masses of issues of things not working out-of-the-box.
It will probably be great in the end, but stressful if the guy doing the exploring is you.
Why does advanced mean theoretically better? From what I've seen from industry discussions, other companies seem to believe that Musk is automating processes at such a high cost that it would be more cost effective to actually employ humans to do those steps.
It usually does mean theoretically better. HOWEVER.
The fly in the ointment is that increased automation usually only makes sense if you need to produce more cars and can tolerate delays as automation kinks are worked out (some of which may actually require changes in the car design).
If you're making 100,000 cars per year per factory line, then very high automation doesn't make a lot of sense, and humans can often be more cost effective (from an opportunity cost perspective). But if you're producing 1,000,000 cars per line, then a lot of automation which wouldn't make sense at lower numbers now all of a sudden does.
Tesla is developing some of this automation tech for a 500,000 per year Model 3 line, but where the full automation will really hit its stride is in the Model Y which is supposed to hit 1,000,000 per year from a single factory line. Model Y is supposed to have several design simplifications and modifications to enable more automated production.
Why is "sleeping in a sleeping bag on the factory floor." a good thing?
It seems utterly ridiculous to me. A good night's sleep is a must to be most effektiv at any task. In addition you can't tell me Musk can't get a bed in his office.
There is a romanticized narrative of the founder that sleeps under their desk sacrificing every moment to make their dream come true; where their success comes from the extent of stress and hardship they were willing to absorb while their competitors didn't go to such lengths and are now left in the dust.
The rational mind knows that getting proper rest lets you work closer to your optimal and 5 hours of work at 100% is better than 20 hours at 20%. That's not as good of a story though and the optics themselves have marketing value so it may balance out in the end.
If you've ever worked on a project that you were truly committed to get in on time, you may have felt the high that comes from complete dedication to a task. I feel like founders may be experiencing that, but on steroids and all the time. When you're in the midst of it, all other priorities slip away. Its awesome but not sustainable, nor very healthy for relationships unless you're careful and/or have understanding friends and family.
I guess what I'm saying is that it isn't a conscious sacrifice as much as a feeling that one can't really get any rest until some kind of progress has been made.
Okay, you're right. I thought they were. But, someone clicking on a link to pornhub pretty well knows what to expect; someone clicking on a link to jwz.org probably isn't expecting someone's nuts on their screen. I'd figure there are at least a few folks here browsing from work environments that would frown on that, and at least a few other folks who find it petty and obnoxious, like me.
Which CEO would be more likely to get you to make personal sacrifices:
1. The one who sleeps on a sleeping bed and says that you are tremendously valuable to the future of the company.
- or -
2. The one who says that remote workers are slackers, cancels remote work, and then builds a comfortable nursery right next to their comfortable office.
This isn't about whether a sleeping bag (probably an exaggeration anyway) is the most optimum solution to the "sleep at the office" problem, it is about what is the optimum solution to the "help my workers understand that I empathize with their current situation" problem.
I think we forget about the importance of that last problem sometimes.
> Which CEO would be more likely to get you to make personal sacrifices:
The thing is, the sacrifices demanded of employees by their employers are often non-negotiable, so it doesn't really matter either way. If you're a factory floor worker, you are not "tremendously valuable to the future of the company," your value to the company is specified to the penny and it's likely much less than the value of the equipment you're operating.
The billionaire who can destroy your livelihood on a whim sleeping on the factory floor doesn't really change anything for you the worker.
Are the workers' salaries competitive? How good is their insurance? Will they be expected to put in arbitrary blocks of six day, twelve hour shifts or can they reasonably have a life outside work? How accommodating is the company with school, maternity leave, lateral training? What is the company's history of harassment, OSHA violations, etc? These things matter. Pointless shows of solidarity and "empathy" really don't.
All of your points are valid and I agree with them.
But do you really think this is about retaining factory line workers? Or is it about retaining the managers and engineers responsible for building out the line and getting it running? My guess is that it is the latter and that most of those employees do have choices as to where they are employed.
His goal is not to be an effective worker, but to be an inspiring leader. By sleeping at the factory he shows everyone there that he views this as a truly high priority issue.
> Why is "sleeping in a sleeping bag on the factory floor." a good thing?
Who said that quote? Nobody in any of the videos on the linked page said it.
I assume "sleeping on the factory floor" means sleeping at the factory, in a camp-bed, or similar. "The factory floor" is a synecdoche for "the factory".
That phrase is also a modern aphorism, an allusion to the many inspiring stories of an entrepreneur's will and dedication to commercial success. Edison slept in his lab, for instance.
On a side note, your use of "synecdoche" reminded me that I should make a more systematic effort to introduce my daughters to the uses and benefits of figures of speech. Thank you.
They aren't trying to raise capital right now and probably won't until around the end of the year. And if they were trying to, I'm not sure that this would be a good way to do it.
Sure it is. It's public information how bad at their core business of making cars Tesla is. Musk is trying to show that they're getting better at this we promise please give us more money.
Good luck with that strategy. Do you really think sleeping in a sleeping bag on the floor of a factory that produces ~150k cars/year (current run rate) will impress investors? That really isn't the strategy, I can promise you that.
> "sleeping in a sleeping bag on the factory floor."
Where did he in this article used the word "sleeping bag"? (I'm assuming you are quoting him?)
And the reasoning for him sleeping at the factory is obvious to me. To create a sense of camaraderie and show that his intention is to push the whole company as opposed to not being sympathetic to the workers hardships and pushing them for the gain of the CEO.
On a separate note. It seems to me that ycombinator's readers are more likely to run with any Tesla related news to put a negative spin on it (no matter what the news) to pursumably show that they are not "fan boys" or that they are smarter and more critical in their thought process than the mainstream Elon admirers. I would rather see unbiased analysis. Not just one that goes against the more prevalent ideology no matter what.
He didn’t say it was good. But he is right in that if others are putting in the long hours, having the CEO share the pain rather than hang out in the Bahamas is better for “esprit de corps”.
Musk isn’t going hungry any time, but it’s easier for reputation for any employee to leave Tesla and join some other venture than it would be for Musk.
(I don’t think this should be taken as an argument that we should feel bad for the rich and that the rich shouldn’t pay their fair share at all.... In fact the opposite is true: the very rich are primarily focused on relative reputation, so you can happily tax them all without any reduction in relative reputation).
I'd like to consider the general atrophy on a macro scale of the manufacturing capabilities in the US. My theory is that because we outsourced the making of so many things to so many other places (China), we generally lost the skills necessary to make things. Not to say that really advanced things aren't actually made in the US. It is more to say that the general population of able bodied workers do not have the skills and knowledge their ancestors did when it came to working in a factory. It is that actual work - the day in day out grind - that fosters innovation. Other comments point out that the Tesla factory is generally staffed with ex-Toyota folks. Why is that? Because Toyota has been pushing the envelope in Japan making all kinds of interesting things and developing a mentality of manufacturing innovation all along the way.
I absolutely agree with this. Trying to build a hardware product in a prior startup I owned, finding capable manufacturers without spending several thousand dollars to fly to China was extremely difficult. In addition, there is now a severe lack of knowledge related to manufacturing considerations when making design decisions because of this. This is an expensive price to pay that's not necessarily included in many free trade benefit analyses.
Some nice PR plays by Elon. Our general is sleeping on the floor! Hey Elon, please wake up I need to sweep here. It is quite Henry V @ Agincourt-esque. Honestly I am cheering for Elon to succeed since he has become a symbol of western innovation.
