Topic: A Decentralized Roadmap To Compete With Elon Musk/Tesla: The Open Source Car - page 2. (Read 277 times)

I almost posted concerning modularization after  my second comment yesterday.

 I think modular car can also be built in decentralized manner. Anyone can build his/her own part as long as he meets the right/good standards required for building a safe, fast and efficient car.    Customers will just have to buy the modular Parts from different sources and assemble them together.    This would work better in decentralized and open source fashion.

That's not decentralization, that's idea crowdsourcing.
No matter what the crowd says, in the end, it's one guy or a group that takes the decisions, the people who come with a different project will simply look at their drawing boards and sigh, they will not be able to make their own car.
You could have got a better example from the new forum software that is in testing, everyone can come with ideas, can run the test, can post their feedback, does it make it a decentralized software or will the forum be decentralized? No!

Tell me what part of this is true for your examples:

I realized for the past years that you're sometimes over-enthusiastic about changes that can be done with the model bitcoin runs on but you have to understand that not everything in this world needs decentralization, a blockchain or a token and that some things are far better of without one.

I love that simpsons reference.  

Fate being what it is, I can give you at least 2 real examples of decentralized engineering significantly improving tesla's development process and products.  

There's an engineering channel on youtube called munro live that tore down different tesla cars offering commentary, analysis and advice for improvements tesla could make on their vehicles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQSQYQ44Qco

They removed the worst videos they had posted 1-2 years ago that showed the worst design choices tesla made in their cars. Long story short there was a long list of suggestions they made which were very embarrassing to Elon Musk and tesla. Instead of burying the criticism or resorting to lawsuits, tesla used the feedback to make better cars.

One of their suggestions for improvement was that tesla utilize a 48 volt based system, rather than the traditional 12 volt. This would allow tesla to use wires that were half as thick. Using only 50% of the copper, which could significantly decrease production costs. Another of their suggestions that improved tesla vehicles was a recommendation that tesla not use 3-5 different metal types to build their rear fenders.

Anyways if anyone wants a clear cut example of the advantages a decentralized approach to engineering can offer. Watch some of the videos posted in the munro live channel on youtube. They tear down vehicles and comment on the production and development process utilized to build cars/trucks. Its very surprising how much potential for improvement there is, in the production and manufacturing process with independent & decentralized review.

This makes zero sense to me at all. Tesla building something is both a secret before they do it because if they open source it that would mean that it would be stolen. However let's assume they do not share anything, and just let people do whatever they want to do, in that case people will not have the same amount of tech anyway, you have to be there and have the tech in order to perfect it.

There are tens of millions of business' all around USA and none of them open source their business to millions of people, they hire certain amount and that's it. A regular shop could open source their cafe to millions of marketing people and they would be so full that one shop can turn into 10000 shops in a year with that kind of marketing, but they are not, why? Because it costs them money, what gives Tesla the chance and right to use people that way and why would Tesla want to give their blueprints anyway? I think this would be a very very very bad idea.

Elon can claim that most of what they are releasing are open-source, especially the software and all that good stuff but I'm pretty certain they are keeping us out of the loop on some of the most important factors in building the cars and making it a successful one. Decentralization can take us a long way, no doubt about that, though some things work better centralized and I think electric vehicles is one of those few things. The idea of decentralized car-building might be viable on paper and produce genuine solutions on a more cost-effective way, but would the end-result be worthy enough to compete against Tesla? If huge car companies that have established their name in the industry for decades are struggling to get the perfect mix to compete against Elon's EVs, how can a decentralized army of manpower, ideas, and whatnot do it even better? Not that I'm underestimating the power of decentralization but on this instance, it'll really be a daunting task to everyone involved.

On the brighter note, decentralization can lead to some cool new ideas, though sticking up the pieces together is something a centralized organization can do better IMO.

First of all, most people would like an end product that would work well without having to do all those extra work of modding and such which of course probably would cost people alot more money then the standard product. Some younger generation would definitely love this because that means you are purchasing a mass produced product but you can mod it easily so the end product will differ with each another

There's definitely pros and cons though but somewhere in the future, we probably would have this kind of thing. Starting from smaller product such as mobile phone probably

The only thing is that people really don't care about how decentralized something is. As long as they can be more comfortable with it or earn a profit from it, it's fine. A decentralized car would not help in any kind of way.. perhaps a modular one would, but we're far off from it and cars themselves are quite customizable AFAIK.

Something people might be interested in is decentralized governance. I think if someone comes up with an idea to successfully create a decentralized government, it'd succeed tremendously.

On the contrary, I do not see any shortcomings in your point of view, I completely agree with you that decentralization of work will lead to more development and innovation, centralization leads to monopoly and stereotyping in ideas and impedes work, decentralization at work allows everyone to use their ideas and talents to develop the product, whether it is cars or others. There are millions of talented people who have distinct ideas for development and decentralization that allow all of them to share their ideas for product development.

Wondering if that problem can be solved by allowing everyone or every team to build part of the car they are specialized in, according to specifications... Customers could then buy the car parts and get them assembled into a car.

You could have multiple Teams building different parts of the car they are specialized in. One or few members of each team could have all the materials for building their own car part in one physical location while the rest of his/their team can observe and collaborate through live video.

One of the ways to fund such thing could be  through ICO, staking etc

And the new Tesla will look like this probably:


I wonder how much people will push this decentralization madness, I can't wait to hear when the army will be decentralized.


Costs and efficiency.
History has thought us that simple solutions are the best, people look for the best choice at the money value, if you want custom stuff you go to companies that build custom cars and pay the extra $, for mass producers this would be impossible while keeping a low price.
Having a product come in three hundred versions will put an enormous strain on the logistical chain to supply 1000 different optional packages for each car, making some of them a money pit, that's why all car manufacturers offer just a few options for the same element, not five hundred colors and not 10 types of seats or 20 headlights designs for the same model.
And those decisions on what to offer need to be taken in a centralized mode or there will be chaos, manufacturing a car is not the same as creating firefox add-ons.

For all product development, it is generally one brilliant mind and a team of people with designated responsibilities. That manpower issue is easily solved in a decentralized setup. That is why Open source manages to work so well.

Yet, when it comes to actually putting things like Engines, batteries, metal, motor windings, permanent magnets and all the other exotic/ expensive material needed for research and development, it is nearly impossible to recreate the allocation of capital and make all kind of tooling and experimental/ testing setup available at one place using only voluntary resources. I believe these things inevitably needs concentration of such resources all under one roof, Skunk works style.

First, a main part of modern car software is based on open source. Almost all, including Tesla, using Linux as base system. Also they use a ton of other open source libraries. It is always good to have an open source alternative, also to be able to shape the development to a certain degree. You can take the development of operating systems as an analogy. There are still Windows and MacOS, although there is Linux.

I think it's possible, and could be better than the centralized development if the right things are done, like applying the Bitcoin Ideals/principles in the decentralized development.
I think quality control shouldn't be ignored in decentralized developments... The development should be based on strong/good rules, and should be Merit-based too.
And ofcourse, you'll need to have very talented/skillful builders building working models together and getting rewarded for solving very useful problems.

This will be a short post on the power of decentralization in business as well as in cryptocurrencies.

Elon Musk and tesla have enjoyed considerable success and fame in their pursuit of crafting the perfect EV.

Automakers around the world are scrambling to keep pace, roll out new products and not fall behind. The problem they face is a business culture of top end complacency. Executives of large automotive companies are opposed to innovation and change. They only adopt new technology as Elon Musk and tesla force them to.

Which isn't to say tesla's approach is 100% perfect. While tesla's team is talented and innovative, there is one perhaps one critical component they're failing to harness due to their centralized nature.

In a nation like the USA there are 300+ million people who have money, manpower, ideas and talent. This perhaps vital resource may largely be unharnessed by tesla.

Technology and products are increasingly becoming more proprietary. To work on a modern car or truck often requires special diagnostic equipment. Only tesla certified personnel are allowed to work on tesla's with warranties and support sometimes being voided if tesla owners perform maintenance, repairs or mods on their own.

Question: could automobile corporations more effectively harness the collective resource of a population by decentralizing their development, maintenance and production models away from centralized monolithic models. To be more inclusive of local communities. Producing products designed to be open source hackable and moddable.

For analogies sake, if tesla has 1 thousand engineers in a centralized format. Could gains be made by decentralizing and opening select portions of their development process to millions of engineers, tinkerers and hackers around the world.

Is there anyone who would like to own a car or truck designed from the ground up to be open sourced. To make it as easy as possible to mod, hack, modify, repair without needing a certified professional. Don't forget movie franchises like the Fast and Furious arose out of the modding car scene. I don't know if there is a market for it today. But there definitely is a long history of hot rodding and modding with cars/vehicles which could be relevent.

Or are there perhaps significant flaws or shortcomings to open sourcing automobile technology which I am failing to acknowledge?