Elon Reveals Optimus Academy in 3 Hour Interview / New Tesla Product Line Incoming ⚡️
发布时间 2026-02-05 23:18:39 来源
Welcome to Electrified, it's your host, Dylan Luminus. Elon gave us a nearly three hour interview with Dwarkech Patel and John Collison, the co-founder of Stripe. And man, listening to this one has me changing my mind a bit about Tesla and SpaceX merging. Elon's plans are quite literally not of this world. And we did actually get some new timelines. Like Tesla's pedal to the metal max production of it going as fast as possible to get AI5, Tesla AI5 chip design, interproduction and enriching scale, you know, that'll probably happen second quarter issue of next year, hopefully. And then AI6 would hopefully follow less than a year later. So it's not exactly clear if he was talking about Q2 next year, hopefully for production or scale, but I would stick with production for now.
欢迎来到《电气化》，我是你的主持人，Dylan Luminus。Elon给我们带来了近三个小时的采访，参与者还有Dwarkech Patel和Stripe的联合创始人John Collison。听完这次采访，我对特斯拉和SpaceX合并的看法有了一些改变。Elon的计划真的是超乎寻常。这次我们还获得了一些新的时间表。比如特斯拉正在全力以赴地加速推进AI5，即特斯拉AI5芯片的设计、投产和扩展，可能会在明年第二季度实现。然后AI6预计会在不到一年后跟进。虽然不太确定他是在说明年第二季度的生产还是扩展，但我暂时倾向于认为他指的是生产。
For anyone still doubting Tesla plans full vertical integration for solar panels and the cells, here you go. Both SpaceX and Tesla are rolling towards a hundred gigawatts here of solar cell production. How low down the stack like from policy looking up to the wafer to the final panel? I think you got to do the whole thing from raw materials to to to finish the cell. Now if it's going to space, it's actually the cost it costs less than it's easier to make solar cells that go to space because they don't need glass or they're not much glass and they don't need heavy framing because they don't have to survive weather events.
对于仍然怀疑特斯拉计划对太阳能电池板及电池实现全垂直整合的人，这里有一点信息。SpaceX和特斯拉正在向着每年生产一百吉瓦太阳能电池的目标迈进。从政策层面一直到晶圆再到最终的面板，每个环节都要涉及。我认为你得从原材料开始做到电池成品。如果是用于太空的太阳能电池，实际上成本会更低，因为在太空中制作太阳能电池更简单，因为它们不需要玻璃，或者只需很少的玻璃，也不需要承受恶劣天气的重型框架支持。
There's no weather in space. So it's actually a cheaper solar cell that goes to space than than it's done the one on the ground by far the cheapest and most scalable way to generate to generate tokens is space. It's not even close. It'll be in order of magnitude easier to scale and chips aside of order of magnitude. Well if the point is you want to be able to scale the ground is just what you just want. Feeling it hit the world big time on power generation. They already are. So the solar panels that will go to space will be a bit different and actually easier and cheaper to manufacture which is part of why Elon reiterated that he thinks by far the cheapest place to put these data centers will be in space in less than 36 months, probably closer to 30 months.
太空中没有天气，因此将太阳能电池发送到太空实际上比在地面上要便宜得多。从太空生成代币是最经济且最具扩展性的方式，这一点毫无疑问，几乎没有可比性。扩展到太空会容易一个数量级，这要比仅在地面做要简单得多。如果你想要扩展能力，地面只是一个选择，而太空可在能源生成领域产生巨大影响，这种影响正在逐步显现。因此，将要发射到太空的太阳能电池板会有些不同，而且制造起来实际上更简单、更便宜。这也是为什么埃隆重新强调，他认为在不到36个月甚至可能接近30个月内，将数据中心放置在太空中才是最经济的选择。
And then from there it'll be ridiculously better to put them in space. He really believes the only way to scale intelligence is going to be in space because people are already hitting the wall of electricity generation. Elon mentioned a new potential product line for Tesla down the road which actually has to do with gas turbines. Like the turbines are sold out through 2030. Have you guys considered making your own? I think in order for in order to bring enough power on line I think SpaceX and Tesla will probably have to make the turbine blades the veins and blades internally.
然后，从那里开始，把它们放入太空会变得极其有利。他真的相信要扩展智能的唯一途径是在太空，因为人们在电力生产方面已经遇到了瓶颈。Elon提到了特斯拉将来可能推出的新产品线，实际上与燃气轮机有关。比如说，燃气轮机的订单已经排到了2030年。你们考虑过自己制造吗？为了上线足够的电力，我认为SpaceX和特斯拉可能需要自己内部生产燃气轮机的叶片和叶片（翼片）。
Which is the blades or the turbines? Limiting factor you can get everything except the blades what they call the blades and veins. You can get that 12 to 18 months before the veins and blades. The limiting factor of the veins and blades and there are only three casting companies in the world that may make these and they're massively backlogged. So on a gas turbine the veins are the part that does not actually rotate. Their primary function is to accelerate and direct the gas flow onto the following row of blades.
哪个是限制因素，是叶片还是涡轮？限制因素在于叶片和涡轮叶片。你可以在12到18个月之前得到除叶片和涡轮叶片以外的所有部件。叶片和涡轮叶片是限制因素，全世界只有三家铸造公司能够制造这些部件，并且它们的订单积压严重。在燃气涡轮中，涡轮叶片是不旋转的部分，它们的主要功能是加速并引导气流到下一排叶片上。
So the veins make sure that happens at the optimal angle and speed. And then of course it's the blades that actually rotate. They extract that energy from the gas and convert it into rotational mechanical energy. And why is production so backlogged? Well there are a few reasons but the main one is the materials required are prone to delays because you need a very specific advanced material to actually endure these extreme temperatures. And further the demand for these gas turbines has exploded to drive all of these data centers. And only three companies drive 70% of the production in the industry.
静脉（导流叶片）确保以最佳角度和速度进行运作。当然，真正旋转的是叶片。叶片从气体中提取能量，并将其转换为旋转的机械能。那为什么生产被严重推迟呢？主要有几个原因，其中最主要的是所需材料容易导致延误。因为你需要特定的先进材料才能承受极端温度。此外，燃气轮机的需求急剧增加，这些需求主要用于驱动各个数据中心。而且，这个行业中有三家公司占据了70%的生产份额。
Mitsubishi heavy industries GE, Vernova and Siemens energy. And there's also labor shortages as making these components requires highly skilled workers. If you're still wondering why Elon's planning to take SpaceX public despite the headaches. It makes in general a statement for us about the depths of the capital markets between public and private markets. There's obviously a lot more capital available in the public markets than private. I mean it might be at least at least it might be a hundred times more capital but at least at what when will the time.
翻译如下：
三菱重工、通用电气（GE）、Vernova 和西门子能源。此外，由于制造这些组件需要高技能的工人，因此也存在劳动力短缺问题。如果你仍在纳闷为什么埃隆计划让 SpaceX 公开上市，尽管这带来了许多麻烦。这通常向我们表明了公共市场和私人市场之间资本市场的深度。显然，公共市场比私人市场可获得的资本要多得多。我是说，至少可能多一百倍的资本，但至少要等到什么时候才会实现。
In my opinion I think XAI has been very quiet about what it's working on on the human emulator side, the digital optimist as we've referred to it in weeks past. And if XAI can figure this out, the scale of this addressable market is incomprehensible. On par with or potentially exceeding the physical optimist. So if you have a human emulator you can basically create one of the most valuable companies in the world overnight. And you would have access to 20s dollars per year. It's not like a small amount. I mean if you take something as simple as say a customer service. If you have to integrate with the APIs of existing corporations, many of which don't even have an API. So you've got to make one. And you've got to wait through legacy software. That's extremely slow. If however if AI can simply take whatever is given to the outsourced customer service company that they already use and do a customer service using the apps that they already use, then you have you can make trash headway in customer service which is I think 1% of the world economy is something like that.
在我看来，我认为XAI在其人类模拟器方面的工作一直相当低调，这就是我们过去几周所提到的“数字乐观主义者”。如果XAI能解决这个问题，那么这个市场的潜力将是难以想象的。其规模可与（甚至可能超过）实体优化者相提并论。因此，如果你有一个人类模拟器，你基本上可以在一夜之间创建全球最有价值的公司之一，并且能够获得每年数十亿美元的收益。这不是一个小数目。比如说，仅仅是客户服务这一简单领域，你需要与现有公司的API集成，而许多公司甚至没有API，所以你得自己创建一个，并且要面对非常缓慢的传统软件。如果AI能直接接收这些公司已经使用的外包客服公司的信息，并通过他们现有的应用程序进行客户服务，那么你在客户服务领域将取得巨大进展，而客户服务大约占全球经济的1%左右。
It's close to a trillion dollars all in for customer service. And there's no there are no barriers to entry. It's just you can just immediately say what will outsource it for a fraction of a cost. And there's no integration needed. I think we see a path to doing. I mean I think I know I think I know the path to do this because it's kind of the same path that tells the user to create self-driving. You know instead of driving a car it's driving a computer screen. So all of Tesla's learnings with FSD for the cars will not only transfer to optimists but will transfer to the digital optimists for XAI and this human emulator future. Elon then doubled down on the importance of the physical hand for optimists. There really are only three hard things for human e-robots. The real world intelligence, the hand and scale manufacturing. I haven't seen any even demo robots that have a great hand like with all the degrees of reading over a human head but Optimus will have that. Optimus does help that.
这项服务的整体成本接近一万亿美元。进入这一领域没有任何障碍，你可以立刻决定以不到一部分的成本外包出去，而且不需要进行任何整合。我觉得我们已经找到了实现这一目标的方法。这有点像引导用户创建自动驾驶一样，只不过不是驾驶汽车，而是操控电脑屏幕。特斯拉在研发自动驾驶技术时积累的经验，不仅会转移到他们的智能机器人上，还会应用于XAI和这个人类模拟未来的数字优化。埃隆还强调了实体手对智能机器人的重要性。对人形机器来说，真正的挑战只有三个：现实世界的智能、手部功能和规模化制造能力。目前我还没有见过任何示范机器人拥有像人类手一样灵活的手，不过Optimus会具备这种能力。Optimus在这方面有所帮助。
We had to read where to design custom actuators, basically custom sign motors, gears, pharylectronics, controls, sensors, everything had to be designed from physics first principles. There is no supply chain for this. Will you be able to manufacture those at scale? Yes. Is anything hard except the hand from a manipulation point of view or once you've solved the hand are you good? From an electric mechanical standpoint the hand is more difficult than everything else combined. Human head turns out to be quite something but you also need the real world intelligence. Intelligence that tells us to work for the car applies very well to the road line and a bunch of things that we've done for the car are applicable to the road line. So we'll use the same Tesla AI chips in the road line as the car. We'll use the same basic principles. It's very much the same AI.
我们必须学习如何设计定制的执行器，基本上就是定制的信号电机、齿轮、光电装置、控制系统、传感器等一切都必须从物理学的基本原理开始设计。这个领域没有现成的供应链。你能大规模制造这些吗？可以。从操作角度来说，除了机械手之外还有什么难的吗？或者一旦你解决了机械手的问题，其他的就都没问题了？从机电角度来看，机械手比其他部分加起来都更复杂。人类的头部也很复杂，但同时也需要真实世界的智能。用于汽车的智能可以很好地应用到道路条线上，我们为汽车开发的许多东西也适用于道路条线。因此，我们将在道路条线上使用与汽车相同的特斯拉AI芯片，遵循相同的基本原则。这基本上是同样的人工智能。
You've got many more degrees of freedom for a robot than you do for a car. What we're going to need to do is build a lot of robots and put them in kind of like an Optimus Academy so they can do self-plate in reality. We're actually pulling that out. We're going to have at least 10,000 Optimus robots, maybe 20 or 30,000 that are doing self-plate and testing different tasks. Tesla has quite a good reality generator. A physics accurate reality generator that we're making this for the cars will do the same thing for the robots. You actually have done that for the robots. So you have a few tens of thousands of humanoid robots doing different tasks and then you've got you can do millions of simulated robots in the simulated world and you use the tens of thousands of robots in the real world to close the simulation to reality gap, close the simutorial gap.
机器人拥有比汽车更多的自由度。我们需要做的是制造大量机器人，将它们放在类似于“Optimus学院”的地方，让它们在现实中进行自我训练。实际上，我们正在实施这个计划。我们计划至少拥有1万台Optimus机器人，可能会有2万到3万台，这些机器人将进行自我训练并测试不同的任务。特斯拉拥有相当出色的现实生成器，这个物理精确的现实生成器是为汽车设计的，现在我们也将它应用于机器人。这样一来，我们就能有数万台人形机器人执行不同任务，同时在模拟世界中拥有数百万个模拟机器人。我们利用真实世界中的数万台机器人来缩小模拟与现实之间的差距，即缩小“模拟-真实”差距。
GROC would orchestrate the behavior of the Optimus robots. That's how you want to build a factory. Then GROC could organize the Optimus robots, give them sign them tasks to build the factory for to produce whatever you want. Well, will these first billion Optimus's of some eye do like bottle their highest and best used be? I think that you would start off with simple tasks that you can count on them doing well. But in the home or in factories, like the best useful robots in the beginning will be anything, any continuous operation. It's only 24 by 7 operation because they can work continuously. What fraction of the work are going to do your factory? That is currently done by humans. It's going to gen 3, do. I'm not sure. Maybe it's like 10-20%. Maybe more. We would use, we would not reduce our head count. We would increase our head count to be clear. But we would increase our output.
GROC 将会协调 Optimus 机器人的行为。这就是你想要建造工厂的方式。然后 GROC 可以组织 Optimus 机器人，给它们分配任务，以便为生产你想要的产品建造工厂。那么这些最初的十亿个 Optimus 的最高和最佳用途是什么呢？我认为你应该从可以确定它们能很好完成的简单任务开始。在家庭或工厂中，最有用的机器人一开始可以胜任任何需要持续操作的任务。因为它们可以24小时不间断地工作。那么在你的工厂里由机器人完成的工作占多少比例呢？目前是由人类完成的。可能是第三代机器人来完成。我不确定。也许是10-20%。可能更多。需要明确的是，我们不会减少员工数量，而会增加员工数量。但我们会提高产量。
How do you design a chip for space? What changes? Well, I guess you want to design to be more radiation tolerant and run at a higher temperature. So, roughly if you increase the operating temperature by 20% in degrees Kelvin, you can cut your radiator mass in half. Running at a higher temperature is helpful in space. But neural nets are going to be very resilient to bed flips. So, most of what happens for radiation is random bed flips. But if you've got a multi-trolling parameter model, you'd get a few bed flips, it doesn't matter. Millions of wafers a month. That's the plan with tariff app. Millions of wafers a month. Of advanced process notes. It could be some number of north to the million I think. You're going to do the memory too. You're going to make a memory fat? I think the tariff app is going to do a memory. It's going to do logic memory and puncture. So, no, we could just flounder and failure to fear. It's like success is not guaranteed.
如何设计用于太空的芯片？需要做哪些改变？我猜您需要设计得更加耐辐射，并能在更高温度下运行。大致来说，如果您将操作温度提高20%（以开尔文计），就可以将散热器的质量减半。在太空中，以更高的温度运行是有帮助的。不过神经网络对于“位翻转”会非常有弹性。大多数的辐射问题都是随机“位翻转”。但如果您有一个多参数模型，出现一些“位翻转”也无关紧要。每月生产数百万片晶圆，这是“tariff app”的计划。每月数百万片晶圆，采用先进工艺节点。可能会有某个数量达到百万。我想您也得处理内存部分。您打算让内存变得庞大？我认为“tariff app”将在内存方面发挥作用，涉及逻辑内存和打孔。因此，失败的可能性是存在的，成功并不能保证。
Since we want to try to make something like 100 million, we need 100 gigawatts of power and that chips that can take 100 gigawatts. So, cool it. Yeah, by 2030. So, I'm very glad that Elon said success is not guaranteed here to a broader audience. But overall, it was a very solid interview. I'll have the whole thing linked below. I need to get this off my chest real quick. When someone or something gets big, the competition will attack. We've seen it with Tesla. It happens all the time. Which is exactly what's happening with AG1. All I'm going to say on the matter is that calling out a four-week random control trial and expecting clinical level benefits for something like AG1 in that time frame is crazy. Plus, it totally ignores how AG1 was clinically shown to enrich the gut microbiome over a 12-week period, which is still a very short timeline in the grand scheme of things.
由于我们想尝试赚取类似1亿美元的收入，我们需要100吉瓦的电力和能承载100吉瓦的芯片。所以，冷静一点。是的，到2030年。很高兴Elon对更广泛的观众说成功并不保证，但总体来说，那是一次非常扎实的采访。我会把整个采访链接附在下面。我得赶紧说出我的想法。当某人或某事变得很大时，竞争对手就会攻击。我们在特斯拉身上见过，这种情况时常发生。现在，同样的事情发生在AG1身上。关于这一点，我只想说，指望一个为期四周的随机对照试验能在AG1这样的产品上产生临床级别的益处是非常不现实的。而且，这完全忽略了AG1在为期12周的试验中，经临床证明能够丰富肠道微生物群，尽管在宏观来看这还是一个非常短的时间框架。
The 75-plus ingredients of the next gen formula does have five probiotic strains, but this is a long-term nutrient optimization play, not a short-term panacea. And I can tell you from experience, impacting your gut biome takes months, even with targeted therapy. So, just don't let someone with competing products lead you astray. Do your own research and try things for yourself. Because while AG1 does sponsor the channel, I generally feel better with it as a regular part of my life than when I don't. Full stop. And I'm guessing some of you right now are in that dreaded winter energy slump season, and AG1 can help to support consistent energy and focus levels. So, it's not just for immunity support. And don't forget about their AGZ to help support quality sleep.
这款下一代配方中确实含有超过75种成分，包括五种益生菌菌株，但这更多是一种长期的营养优化方案，而不是短期的灵丹妙药。根据我的经验，即使是有针对性的治疗，影响肠道微生物环境也需要几个月的时间。所以，不要被那些有竞争产品的人误导。请务必自己做研究并亲自尝试。虽然AG1确实赞助了这个频道，但我发自内心地觉得，把它作为我生活的一部分，总体感觉要比不用时好得多。现在正值大家讨厌的冬季能量低迷期，AG1可以帮助您维持良好的精力和专注力。因此，它不仅仅是用来支持免疫力。别忘了还有 AGZ，可以帮助提高睡眠质量。
So, if you want to support the channel and more importantly, your own health, if you had to drink AG1.com slash electrified, linked below, you'll get three free AG1 travel packs and three free AGZ travel packs. Plus, free vitamin D3K2 and an AG1 welcome kit with your first AG1 subscription order. Now, on this whole Tesla and SpaceX thing, I needed to take some time to sit with everything happening in the Musconomy. I just have to check out for a bit to not allow the public opinion to sway my thinking so I could think through this and come up with a list of considerations for all of us.
所以，如果你想支持这个频道，更重要的是支持你自己的健康，你可以访问链接AG1.com/electrified。通过这个链接购买，你将获得三个免费的AG1旅行装和三个免费的AGZ旅行装。此外，还有免费的维生素D3K2和一个AG1欢迎套装，适用于你的首次AG1订阅订单。关于特斯拉和SpaceX的事情，我需要花点时间来理清思路，以免被公众意见影响。这样我才能冷静思考，并为我们大家整理出一个考虑事项的清单。
The prevailing sentiment is about 80% of people think Tesla and SpaceX merging is either very likely to happen or a done deal. And many still think it's going to happen before a SpaceX IPO. But let's just walk through some things first. My goal is not to persuade you one way or another. I will share my personal thoughts at the end, but I just want to inform everyone on everything that needs to be considered ahead of a potential SpaceX and Tesla merger. I shouldn't need to explain that this would be the most consequential development in Tesla's entire history. So we need to approach it with due diligence and careful thought rather than relying on emotions and hype from the community. There would be a vote before something like this happens, so I just want to arm everyone with what needs to be factored in before we make our decisions.
普遍的看法是，大约80%的人认为特斯拉和SpaceX合并要么非常有可能发生，要么已经板上钉钉。而且，许多人仍然认为这会在SpaceX上市之前发生。但让我们先梳理一下相关事项。我的目标不是要说服你支持或反对。我将在最后分享我的个人想法，但我只是想在潜在的SpaceX和特斯拉合并之前，让大家了解需要考虑的一切。我不需要解释这将是特斯拉历史上最重大的发展。因此，我们需要以应有的谨慎和深思熟虑来对待，而不是依赖社区的情绪和炒作。在这样的事情发生之前会进行投票，所以我只是希望大家在做出决定前能考虑到所有需要的因素。
And this is in no particular order because everybody values certain things differently. Let's start with national defense and security. SpaceX has numerous contracts signed with NASA over the years for crew and cargo transport, lunar landers and so on. These contracts over the years likely exceed $10 billion. SpaceX also has Department of Defense contracts for launches, Starsheel, Starlink and cargo, also totaling over $10 billion. And if you see different funding numbers, it's likely because of reporting and how organizations classify contracts versus subsidies. And don't forget, XAI has a deal with a Department of Defense to integrate GROC. Other federal agencies have agreed to integrate GROC and Department of Energy is working with XAI for a Genesis mission focused on security and evasion.
这没有特定的顺序，因为每个人对事物的看重程度不同。我们先从国家防卫和安全开始。多年来，SpaceX与NASA签订了许多合同，用于载人和货物运输、月球着陆器等。这些合同多年来可能超过了100亿美元。SpaceX还与国防部签订了发射、Starsheel、Starlink和货物运输的合同，总额也超过了100亿美元。如果你看到不同的资金数字，这可能是由于报告方式和各组织对合同与补贴的分类方法不同。此外，XAI与国防部签有协议，整合GROC。其他联邦机构也同意整合GROC，能源部正在与XAI合作开展一个名为Genesis的任务，重点在于安全和规避。
And for SpaceX and XAI, I'll just refer to this new entity as SpaceX for now. This is just the beginning. As we push more intelligence and energy harnessing into space and as Starship launches increase in frequency, things will continue to shift and SpaceX will continue to be a critical part of national defense. Now, you've likely seen people say a Tesla and SpaceX merger can't happen because of Tesla's operations in China or you've seen other people saying, yeah, it's no big deal, just look at Boeing. The problem is both of those approaches are lazy. Boeing is a major US defense contractor with deep ties to NASA and the Department of Defense as well as intelligence agencies while also having significant operations in China. But here's the difference. Boeing has a clear firewall between its defense operations and commercial divisions.
对于SpaceX和XAI，我暂且将这个新实体称为SpaceX。这只是开始。随着我们将更多的智能和能源转移到太空中，并且星际飞船发射频率的增加，事情将继续变化，SpaceX将继续在国家防御中扮演关键角色。你可能已经看到有人说，特斯拉和SpaceX合并是不可能的，因为特斯拉在中国的业务，或者看到另一种说法，认为这没什么大不了的，就像波音一样。问题在于，这两种看法其实都很懒惰。波音是美国主要的国防承包商，与NASA和国防部以及情报机构有着密切联系，同时也在中国有重要业务。但区别在于，波音在其国防业务和商业部门之间有明确的防火墙区分。
SpaceX, on the other hand, does not have that same separation, at least not yet. And further, Boeing's operations in China are largely through suppliers and joint ventures, not full-blown manufacturing hubs. And we know Gage Shanghai is exactly that for Tesla, a wholly owned mega operation that produces over half of Tesla's global output, with deep integration in China's ecosystem. This to say, Tesla would have to take meaningful reorganization steps to push a merger through which could take months just due to national security clearances alone. And now it's not inconceivable to think that Tesla could sell its Chinese operations, but I have a hard time believing Tesla would want to give up its foothold in the biggest EV market in the world. That's currently racing toward autonomy. That supplies meaningful volume across the EU. It's the factory where Tesla deploys new technology first. It's the factory with the lowest manufacturing cost for Tesla by far.
相对而言，SpaceX还没有实现这样的分离，至少目前还没有。此外，波音在中国的业务主要是通过供应商和合资企业进行的，而不是全面的制造基地。而特斯拉在上海的超级工厂正是这样一个大规模的全资运营，其产量占特斯拉全球总产量的一半以上，并深度融入中国的生态体系。这意味着，如果特斯拉想推进合并，需要采取重大重组措施，仅国家安全审查就可能需要几个月的时间。虽然现在想象特斯拉可能出售其中国业务并不是不可能，但我很难相信特斯拉愿意放弃其在全球最大电动车市场的立足点。目前这个市场正向自动化快速发展，为欧洲市场提供大量产品。这也是特斯拉首先部署新技术的工厂，并且与其他工厂相比，这里的制造成本最低。
And this is just one consideration. I think it's clear there are significant challenges and potential trade-offs. They're certainly not insurmountable, but things we all need to be thinking through. Next up would be raising capital. This is the driving force behind all of this for Elon in my opinion. The numbers he throws around will require trillions of dollars over the long term. SpaceX, XAI, and Tesla all need money. We're talking hundreds of billions of dollars over just the next few years. So, a sound question, what's the best way for all three companies to do that? And just know, generally speaking, reverse mergers happen because they're faster and easier than an IPO. They don't happen because it's the optimal way to raise capital.
这只是一个需要考虑的因素。我认为很明显，目前存在重大的挑战和潜在的权衡。这些挑战虽然并不是不可克服的，但我们都需要认真思考。接下来要做的是筹集资金。我认为，对于埃隆来说，这正是这一切背后的推动力。他所提到的数字在长期内需要数万亿美元。SpaceX、XAI 和特斯拉都需要资金。在未来几年里，我们谈论的是数千亿美元的资金需求。那么，一个很重要的问题是，这三家公司该如何最好地筹集这些资金？一般来说，反向并购之所以发生，是因为它比首次公开募股（IPO）更快更简单，而不是因为它是筹集资金的最佳方式。
But here's the thing, this wouldn't even be a reverse merger. This would likely be a stock for stock acquisition with Tesla as the surviving entity if it were to happen before a SpaceX IPO. Usually, a reverse merger has a private company merging into a small shell company to quickly list its stock without an IPO where SpaceX would remain as the surviving entity. So inherently, reverse mergers don't actually raise money at all. It is just a restructuring of ownership. But with that technical nuance out of the way, I'll refer to this hypothetical new company if a merger did happen as X with Tesla merging with SpaceX. In the event these companies merged, whatever the mechanics, they would then need to either issue new shares or go to banks and take on debt.
但问题是，这甚至不会是一次反向并购。如果在SpaceX进行首次公开募股（IPO）之前发生这种情况，这很可能是一次股票换股票的收购，而最终存续的公司将是特斯拉。通常情况下，反向并购是指一家私人公司与一个小规模壳公司合并，以便在没有首次公开募股的情况下迅速上市，并且SpaceX将是存续实体。因此，从本质上来说，反向并购实际上并不能筹集资金，而只是所有权的重组。但在解决了这一技术细节之后，我暂且将这个假设中的新公司称为X，即特斯拉与SpaceX合并的公司。如果这些公司合并了，不论具体操作如何，他们将需要发行新股票或向银行借债。
And before that, Tesla would need to issue new shares to buy out SpaceX investors, which yes, is dilutive to the tune of maybe 50%. And you can pause the screen if you want to read through the example I shared on X or how that would work. The numbers are not up to date, but the mechanics would be the same. But yes, SpaceX would likely require Tesla to pay a premium over whatever the current market value is, meaning Tesla has to issue more shares. So if SpaceX wants a valuation of 1.5 trillion for easy math and Tesla's value at 1.5 trillion, Tesla would have to double the outstanding share count to buy out SpaceX. So Tesla investors would go from owning 100% of Tesla to owning 50% of the new company X.
在此之前，特斯拉需要发行新股票来收购SpaceX的投资者，这将导致稀释，幅度可能高达50%。如果你想了解我在X上分享的例子或运作方式，可以暂停视频查看。虽然数字不是最新的，但基本原理是一样的。不过，是的，SpaceX可能会要求特斯拉支付比当前市场价值更高的溢价，这意味着特斯拉需要发行更多股票。为了便于计算，如果SpaceX希望估值达到1.5万亿美元，而特斯拉的估值也是1.5万亿美元，那么特斯拉就需要将流通股数量翻倍才能收购SpaceX。因此，特斯拉的投资者持有的特斯拉股份将从100%降到新公司X的50%。
Then after that, let's say X was valued at $3 trillion, the new company. If X then did a 5% secondary offering, it would raise about $150 billion dollars minus fees, which yes, is dilutive, but it's far more money than SpaceX would raise in an IPO on its own. And it's more than Tesla is likely going to want to take out as debt from banks. But it's also true that the diversified revenue streams of X would likely make it easier for X to raise debt at better prices. Now, you'll have some people focusing on the 5% dilution that the market would have to absorb, call it 350 million new shares based on the new X company float that would be sitting around 7 billion shares.
然后，假设X这家公司估值为3万亿美元。如果X公司接着进行5%的二次发行，它将筹集约1500亿美元，减去手续费后，这确实会导致股份稀释，但这比SpaceX单独进行IPO能筹集到的资金多得多，也超过了特斯拉可能想从银行借取的债务数额。不过，X公司的多元化收入来源可能会让它更容易以更好的条件进行债务融资。不过，也会有人关注市场需要吸收的5%稀释股份，基于新X公司总市值约为70亿股计算，这相当于3.5亿股新股。
And yeah, that would result in some downward pressure on the stock price in the short term. But it would be dilutive across a much bigger base of SpaceX and XAI investors, not just Tesla. But clearly, this is all hypothetical. The demand for this new X company is likely to be historic as a merger like this would be unprecedented. And for long-term investors, we shouldn't care so much about short-term fluctuations. We should be asking if we like the prospect of these three merged entities getting $150 billion dollars to start putting to work in a scenario like that.
是的，这会导致短期内股价的一些下行压力。但这种压力将在更大的投资者基础上产生稀释效应，不仅仅是针对特斯拉的投资者。然而，这一切都是假设。对这家新成立的 X 公司的需求可能会历史性地高涨，因为这样的合并是前所未有的。对于长期投资者来说，我们不应该过于关注短期波动。我们应该考虑的是，是否看好这三家公司合并后，能有1500亿美元资金投入运作的前景。
And on this point, we have to consider the alternatives too. If Tesla and SpaceX stay separate, there's likely going to be Tesla investors selling their Tesla stock to buy the SpaceX IPO. I don't think it would be massive like others are saying as many investors have waited five years for what we're about to see with Tesla. But some will undoubtedly sell some Tesla stock and rebalance their portfolios.
关于这一点，我们也必须考虑其他选择。如果特斯拉和SpaceX保持独立，可能会有特斯拉的投资者卖掉他们的特斯拉股票去购买SpaceX的IPO。我认为不会像其他人所说的那样大幅度，因为很多投资者已经等待了五年，期待看到特斯拉即将发生的事情。但毋庸置疑，有些人会卖掉部分特斯拉股票来重新平衡他们的投资组合。
And there's always the scenario that Tesla and SpaceX could merge after a SpaceX IPO. Many people are saying right now that would be way harder, but I actually don't think that's true. I think it's just a talking point that then gets paraded around by the community. Mergers of large public companies means the valuations are already tested by the market, which actually leads to avoiding all of these valuation disputes where mergers with a private company can arise.
有一种可能性是，在SpaceX上市之后，特斯拉和SpaceX可能会合并。很多人现在认为这会非常困难，但我其实不这样认为。我觉得这只是一个在社区中传来传去的话题而已。大公司的合并意味着它们的市值已经经过市场检验，这实际上避免了与私人公司合并时可能出现的估值争议。
Example, how much should we as Tesla shareholders be willing to pay for SpaceX when we don't really know anything about its actual revenues or profits? And the same could be said for XAI. But as a public company, that all changes and things become transparent. Now it's true, public mergers may require some more governance, but it also protects these companies from lawsuits and fiduciary disputes because of that extra layer of monitoring.
例如，当我们作为特斯拉的股东时，如果我们对SpaceX的实际收入或利润一无所知，我们应该愿意为其支付多少？同样的话也可以应用于XAI。但成为上市公司后，情况就会改变，一切变得透明。 当然，上市公司可能需要更多的治理，但这也为公司提供了一层额外的监督保护，以免遭受法律诉讼和信托责任纠纷。
And all of the public filings make things much more predictable and less up for debate. So there may be some extra steps after a SpaceX IPO, but it's really not that big of a deal. That's why lawyers and advisors exist. And actually, the main merger and acquisition risks like overpaying and regulatory blockers are much lower when both companies are public because of that transparency.
所有的公开文件使得情况更加可预测，不再有太多争议。因此，即使SpaceX上市后可能会有一些额外的步骤，但这真的不是什么大问题。这也是律师和顾问存在的原因。实际上，由于公开透明，当两家公司都是上市公司时，像支付过高的收购费用和监管阻碍这样的主要并购风险会大大降低。
So just remember to think through these things on your own, don't just hear something and then adopt it because of who said it. And for me, I happen to think this popular narrative that a post-SpaceX IPO merger with Tesla is too hard is nonsense, in my opinion. And I think it might even face less challenges than trying to ram it through before a SpaceX IPO, because again, it has the benefit of removing that valuation debate, which brings me to another point the conglomerate discount, which just means a diversified company with multiple sometimes unrelated businesses gets valued by the market at less than the sum of its individual parts.
所以，请记住要独立思考这些事情，不要仅仅因为某人说了某句话就盲目采纳。就我个人而言，我认为在SpaceX首次公开募股（IPO）后与特斯拉合并过于困难的这种流行说法是无稽之谈。我甚至认为这种情况可能比在SpaceX IPO之前强推合并面临的挑战更少，因为这样可以避免关于估值的争论。这引出了另外一个观点，即“企业集团折扣”。这意味着一个拥有多元化业务（有时是无关业务）的公司在市场上的估值往往低于其各个部分独立估值的总和。
This is because investors and analysts struggle to model and value complex companies, which leads to analysts overlooking things and it's precisely why many of them prefer pure play stocks that focus on one industry. All that to say, conglomerates historically have traded 10 to 20% below what standalone businesses could be valued at in the market individually. And yes, you guessed it, that's why companies will spin off parts of their business to unlock the full valuation potential.
这是因为投资者和分析师常常难以为复杂的公司进行建模和估值，这导致他们容易忽视一些因素。这正是为什么许多人更喜欢专注于单一行业的纯业务股票的原因。总的来说，历史上，综合性企业的交易价通常比独立的企业估值低10%到20%。没错，这也是为什么有些公司会拆分业务，以便释放其全部估值潜力。
One great example I think many of you will know was GE. It was in aviation, healthcare, energy and so on and it traded at a discount for years, because analysts couldn't figure out what to do with it, so they sat on the sidelines. Then GE decided to spin off into three separate focused companies and the combined market cap after the spin-off was about $180 billion higher than it was as one giant company, which unlocked over 60% more value.
我想许多人都知道一个很好的例子，那就是通用电气（GE）。它曾涉足航空、医疗保健、能源等领域，并且多年来的股票被低估，因为分析师不清楚如何评估这家公司，所以一直持观望态度。后来，GE决定将业务拆分为三家独立专注的公司，拆分后的总市值比原来作为一个整体公司时高出了约1800亿美元，释放了超过60%的更多价值。
And there are plenty of other examples like this, so once the hype dies down around this new X company, the valuations might settle materially lower than where they would be if they stayed separate. And further, in the case of Tesla and SpaceX, SpaceX is likely to be a cash burning furnace along with XAI for the foreseeable future. Now long-term, you know, 7-10 plus years, of course I think the upside is incredible, but we cannot overlook the significant cash drag that this company would be for Tesla, when will SpaceX and XAI actually be profitable?
这样的例子还有很多，所以一旦围绕这家新X公司的热潮消退，估值可能会比它们分开时显著下降。此外，在特斯拉和SpaceX的情况下，SpaceX很可能会在可预见的未来成为一个烧钱的项目，同时XAI也不例外。现在从长期来看，比如7到10年以上，我当然认为其潜力是巨大的，但我们不能忽视这家公司对特斯拉的巨大资金拖累，那么SpaceX和XAI到底何时才能实现盈利呢？
The big SpaceX push data centers in space Elon himself is saying that won't be the best path for another two to three years, and all of that SpaceX upside hinges on Starship being successful at scale. Wish her you could argue as likely, but I don't think it's a guarantee, and on what timeline. So for me, it would just be a big adjustment. I know Tesla liked the back of my hand, in and out, up and down.
SpaceX大力推动将数据中心搬到太空，但Elon本人表示，这可能在未来两到三年内不会是最佳路径，所有这些SpaceX的潜在好处都依赖于Starship的大规模成功。虽然可以说这很可能发生，但我并不认为这是个保证，也不知道具体的时间表。对我来说，这将是一个大的调整。我对特斯拉非常了解，不论里面外面、上上下下。
And for me, I cannot say the same for SpaceX or XAI, largely because we just don't have enough data on these companies. So I can't be dogmatic about the current financials or future potential of SpaceX or XAI until we get more data. Which again, is why it's actually reasonable to want this company to become public before we actually vote on a mega merger like this.
对我来说，我不能对SpaceX或XAI说同样的话，主要是因为我们对这些公司的数据还不够。因此，在我们获得更多数据之前，我无法武断地评论SpaceX或XAI的当前财务状况或未来潜力。这也是为什么在我们对这样的重大合并进行投票之前，希望这家公司公开上市是合理的。
Something else to consider is what happens to Elon's new pay package at Tesla. What happens with that in the event of a merger with SpaceX? We can all speculate, but if it gets wiped out or replaced, then that needs to be factored into the equation. And don't forget, if this merger happens after a SpaceX IPO in a year or two, there's a world where SpaceX would be acquiring Tesla, and SpaceX is the surviving company. So for that Tesla incentive plan, the market cap targets would have to be changed, operational milestones need to be changed, vesting timelines, having another shareholder vote, and so on.
需要考虑的问题还有马斯克在特斯拉的新薪酬方案。如果特斯拉与SpaceX合并，这个方案会怎样呢？大家都可以猜测，不过如果这个方案被取消或替代，那就需要在考虑时加以权衡。另外，如果合并在SpaceX一两年后上市后发生，可能会出现SpaceX收购特斯拉并成为存续公司的情况。因此，特斯拉的激励计划中，市值目标、运营里程碑、授予时间表都需要更改，还可能需要再进行一次股东投票等等。
Personally, I think in that event, the most likely outcome would be an amended pay package for Elon, with some new milestones on the SpaceX XAI side as well. And sure, ultimately that could be a good thing. It's just right now, we don't know. And I do think it's unlikely, but there is a world where that Tesla pay package just gets outright cancelled. So despite me thinking that's unlikely, it's a non-zero probability.
就我个人而言，我认为在那种情况下，最可能的结果是为埃隆修改薪酬方案，并在SpaceX XAI方面设定一些新的里程碑。当然，最终这可能是件好事。只是现在，我们还不知道。我确实认为这种可能性不大，但也存在特斯拉的薪酬方案被完全取消的可能性。尽管我认为这种情况不太可能发生，但其概率并非为零。
And so look, this is clearly not an exhaustive list, but I just wanted to put a little bit out there to hopefully get everybody thinking a bit deeper and thinking for themselves. Just because most people want to own SpaceX too, as fans of Elon, doesn't mean that this whole thing is a no-brainer. And let's be real, most people are just thinking this. I don't want to sell my Tesla stock to have to buy SpaceX in an IPO where I'm going to be bid up by the banks. And of course, I understand that I'm in a similar boat.
所以，请看，这显然不是一个详尽的清单，但我只是想分享一些观点，希望能激发大家更深入地思考，并且自己独立思考。即便大多数人作为Elon的粉丝想拥有SpaceX的股份，也不意味着这件事情就毫无难度。说实话，大多数人都这么想：我不想为了购买SpaceX的IPO，而卖掉我的特斯拉股票，因为银行会抬高价格。当然，我也明白我面临着类似的困境。
But if that's your only consideration here, I just think it's a bit short-sighted. Because again, even if no merger happens before the IPO, Elon can still try offering something for Tesla shareholders like we talked about on Monday. And a few other thoughts, I do think it's silly to make the argument that Elon wants to merge to avoid four more hours every year of conference calls. Yes, Elon wants to streamline, but he's not going to merge to multi-trillion dollar companies because he wants to avoid quarterly calls.
但如果这是你唯一的考虑，我认为这有点目光短浅。因为即使在IPO之前没有合并，埃隆仍然可以尝试给特斯拉股东提供一些好处，就像我们周一谈到的那样。另外，我认为说埃隆想要合并只是为了每年避免新增四个小时的电话会议，这种说法有点可笑。是的，埃隆的确想简化流程，但他不会仅仅为了避免季度电话会议就去合并价值数万亿美元的公司。
And yes, two separate public companies may require a bit more paperwork and governance, but guys, Elon is not doing that. He obviously has teams of people, and he just responds to put out fires when he's needed, which he would be doing the same way, so from Elon's perspective, he's still going to have roughly the same amount of fires, the same amount of problems to put out whether these companies stay separate or merge.
当然，两家独立的上市公司可能会需要更多的文件和治理，但大家放心，埃隆并不会亲自去处理这些。他显然有团队在帮忙，而他只是会在需要的时候出面解决问题，无论公司是分开还是合并，对他来说需要处理的麻烦和问题大致是一样的。
Another thing to think about, why would Tesla have invested in XAI if Elon knew that Tesla was just going to merge with SpaceX all along? Now, maybe it happened in things at SpaceX and XAI really did progress in a matter of days, but I'm not buying that. I think the most likely scenario is Tesla wanted to get into XAI, a piece Tesla investors that clearly wanted it, before XAI got acquired by SpaceX, knowing that SpaceX is likely to go public on its own, and then if a merger with Tesla ever happens, it'll be after that SpaceX IPO.
另一个需要考虑的问题是，如果马斯克一开始就知道特斯拉会与SpaceX合并，为什么特斯拉还要投资于XAI呢？也许SpaceX和XAI在短时间内取得了进展，这些事情确实发生了，但我对此持怀疑态度。我认为最可能的情况是，特斯拉想要进入XAI领域，以满足那些明显希望这样做的特斯拉投资者，因为他们知道SpaceX有可能会自行上市。如果特斯拉与SpaceX合并，可能也会在SpaceX首次公开募股（IPO）之后才会发生。
So, despite what everybody is saying, I personally think that's the most likely outcome if a merger happens at all. It would be after a SpaceX IPO. And then if and when a vote happens, all votes that are not submitted or not cast would count as Nose in this case, so make sure you can vote your shares. But of course, everybody is just guessing here myself included. At the end of the day, anything can happen, and we do have to trust that Elon, the executives at all companies, the inside investors, and Elon's advisory team will find the best path forward.
所以，尽管大家都在议论纷纷，但我个人认为，如果合并真的发生，这种情况最有可能出现。而且这会是在SpaceX首次公开募股（IPO）之后。如果届时确实进行投票，所有未提交或未投票的票数在这种情况下将被算作反对票，因此请确保你能够投出自己的股份。当然，我们所有人都只是在猜测，包括我自己。最终，什么事情都有可能发生，我们确实需要相信Elon、各公司的高管、内部投资者以及Elon的顾问团队会找到最佳的前进道路。
No matter what the outcome is, there will be pros and cons. And really, to think that any of us knows better than that group of people is actually ridiculous. The conversations are being held now with lawyers and regulatory bodies and those will determine the optimal route, and all we can do as shareholders is respond accordingly. To inform ourselves as best we can so when the time comes for a vote, we have the knowledge we need.
无论结果如何，总会有优点和缺点。事实上，认为我们比那一群人更了解情况是不合理的。目前的对话正与律师和监管机构进行，他们将决定最佳路线，而作为股东，我们所能做的就是根据情况做出回应。在投票时，我们需要尽可能了解信息，以便做出明智的决定。
And for me, for the next five years, I might actually lean toward preferring just Tesla exposure. But when I start thinking about the next 10 to 15 years, then I start wanting more SpaceX exposure as well. So a lot of where you land on this will come down to timelines. And like I said, I would have a lot of work to do personally to understand SpaceX and XAI on a level like I do Tesla.
对我来说，在接下来的五年内，我可能会更倾向于只关注特斯拉。但是当我开始考虑未来10到15年时，我就开始希望对SpaceX也有更多的关注。所以你的选择很大程度上取决于时间安排。正如我所说，我个人还有很多工作要做，以便像了解特斯拉一样深入了解SpaceX和XAI。
So just don't feel bad if you don't want this merger to happen, even though it is the minority view. Personally, I really am torn. I go back and forth with what I think I want to happen, and I have changed my mind a few times already. The more I think about the long term, the more I want the merger. The more I think about the next three to five years, I lean toward preferring them to stay separate. When the rumor mail first started, I didn't want it to happen. That was my knee jerk reaction. Tesla is just now ready to scale and to ramp profitably, and I would hate to see that get diluted and overlooked as Wall Street tries to remodel everything with hesitation. And for me, selfishly, having two separate positions that I can add to and trim too as I see fit, and as I consider my exit strategies would be a lot easier keeping those companies separate.
所以，即使你不希望合并发生，也别感到不好意思，尽管这是少数人的观点。就我个人而言，我真的很纠结。我不断在想到底希望发生什么，并且已经改变了几次想法。如果从长期来看，我越发希望合并能实现。但如果考虑到未来三到五年，我倾向于希望它们保持独立。当这个传闻刚开始时，我并不希望它发生，那是我本能的反应。特斯拉现在正准备大规模扩张并实现盈利，我不希望看到这一切被稀释或忽视，因为华尔街在犹豫着重新规划一切。对我来说，自私地讲，拥有两个独立的持股让我能够根据需要增减持仓，考虑我的退出策略时也更加轻松。因此我比较希望这两家公司保持独立。
So one way or another, I'm going to own both Tesla and SpaceX. And not to cop out here, but I do just trust Elon and his team to do what's best, no matter what, I'm planning to be along for the ride. But again, my guess is a SpaceX IPO with some preferential treatment for Tesla owners, and then maybe a year or two down the line once valuations settle in after the hype. The financials become public, perhaps the Tesla SpaceX merger talks pick up again at that point. And even if no merger happens, Tesla and SpaceX will obviously continue to cross pollinate and share resources and collaborate to race toward intelligence at scale on Earth and in space.
无论如何，我打算同时拥有特斯拉和SpaceX的股份。我不是在敷衍，只是非常信任埃隆及其团队，他们会做出最好的决定。不管怎么样，我计划一直跟随。不管怎样，我猜测SpaceX可能会进行IPO（首次公开募股），特斯拉的股东可能会有一些优待。可能在一两年后，当股价稳定下来，财务状况公开时，特斯拉和SpaceX的合并谈判可能会再次启动。即使最终没有合并，特斯拉和SpaceX显然也会继续互相借鉴、共享资源，并合作推进地球与太空的大规模智能化。
And just a few quick ones touching on the hearing the other day, so what you need to know is that clearly some of these senators were just taking orders from their teamster constituents, who are clearly strongly opposed to fully driverless AVs, especially in commercial trucking and delivery. They quite literally advocate for requiring human safety operators in autonomous vehicles for goods delivery, all to protect union jobs, framing autonomy as job killing automation pushed by big tech. All you have to do is look at the teamster website. It says, keep our streets safe, protect good jobs, require human safety operators. And you scroll down, big tech and corporations that invest in AVs keep telling us their vehicles are safe, but if we turn on the news, we know there are crashes occurring in that death, injuries, and the destruction of property have been caused by failures in autonomous tech.
几天前的听证会提到的一些重要信息，需要我们注意的是，一些参议员显然只是听从工会成员的指示，他们强烈反对完全无人驾驶的自动驾驶汽车（AVs），尤其是在商用卡车运输和送货方面。他们明确倡导在货物运输的自动驾驶车辆中必须配备人工安全操作员，目的是保护工会工作，将自动化视为一种由大型科技公司推动的削减就业的技术。你只需查看工会网站就能发现，它说要保持街道安全、保护优质工作、要求配备人工安全操作员。再往下看，投资自动驾驶汽车的大型科技公司和企业总是告诉我们他们的车辆是安全的，但如果我们打开新闻，就知道还是有因自动驾驶技术失败导致的事故、伤亡和财产损失的事件发生。
There were some very frustrating clips and attacks on Tesla and senators calling for LIDAR and giving Tesla a hard time for allowing customers to engage FSD on all streets and so on. But the silver lining was that most of the senators very clearly understand that autonomy is the future. They just have different opinions on the best path to get there. And I will say, I think Lars could have done a better job. He was a bit too passive in my opinion. I know he needed to be respectful, but he just didn't do a great job at explaining why Tesla has made certain decisions like cameras only and allowing customers to use FSD on all streets.
有一些很令人沮丧的片段和对特斯拉的攻击，比如一些参议员要求使用激光雷达，并批评特斯拉允许客户在所有道路上启用全自动驾驶功能。然而，好的一面是，大多数参议员非常清楚地认识到自动驾驶是未来的发展方向。他们只是对实现这一目标的最佳路径有不同的看法。我觉得Lars本可以做得更好一些。在我看来，他有点太被动。我知道他需要尊重他人，但他在解释为什么特斯拉做出一些决策（如仅使用摄像头，允许客户在所有道路上使用全自动驾驶）时，表现得不够出色。
And just one example, he missed a layup when Senator Lemis was talking. I'm quickly entering the era when I might be a little old lady who wants the freedom to still be able to drive when maybe she should not. And I just want a button in a car that if I don't know where I am or I'm not as sharp as I was behind the wheel, that I can push a button in the car that says grocery store and another button that says home. Take me home. And sure, maybe he would have needed to add some clarifiers, but he could have just said Senator that currently exists in every Tesla you buy from the factory. So more of the same, these senators who have clearly never used FSD talking like it's something of the future when we know in reality it's here.
只举一个例子，当参议员Lemis发言时，他错过了一个上篮。我很快就进入了一个时代，也许我会成为一个想要自由驾驶的小老太太，即使可能不应该开车。我希望车上有一个按钮，当我不知道自己在哪里或者不太清醒时，我可以按一下“超市”按钮，还有一个“回家”按钮，让我安全回家。当然，也许他需要再做些说明，但他本可以直接告诉参议员说这种功能已经存在于所有出厂的特斯拉车型中。因此，这类参议员对全自动驾驶FSD的谈论像是在描述未来的事情，而实际上它已经成为现实。
It also came to light that some of Waymo's remote operators are actually based in the Philippines. Let's turn to Tesla. Mr. Moravie, yes and no, does Tesla restrict its partially autonomous driving system such as full self drive and autopilot to save pre-mapped operational design domains? Senator Markey, our driver's assistant system that you mentioned full self driving supervised in our vehicles can be operated on a generalized solution in public roads. On the other hand, our fully autonomous solution that is an operation in Austin is geofence than map to a limited area.
了解到，Waymo 的一些远程操作员实际上是设在菲律宾的。让我们来看一下 Tesla。Moravie 先生，特斯拉是否将其部分自动驾驶系统（如完全自动驾驶和自动驾驶功能）限制在预先绘制好的操作区域内？Markey 参议员，您提到的我们的驾驶辅助系统——完全自动驾驶是在我们车辆中由驾驶员监督的，可以在公共道路上进行广泛的操作。另一方面，我们在奥斯汀的全自动驾驶系统是有地理围栏并限制在特定区域内的。
So what Tesla is doing unlike Waymo, unlike Waymo, Tesla's do not have technology that prevents drivers from triggering the full self drive and autopilot in unsafe conditions. So from my perspective, that's outrageous because autopilot and full self drive have already been involved in dozens of deaths because in part Tesla drivers can enable these driving systems on any road under any conditions. And by failing to follow the best practices of every other AV company, Tesla is pointing American lives at risk and that is unconscionable.
特斯拉与Waymo不同，特斯拉的车辆并没有具备能够在不安全情况下阻止司机启动全自动驾驶和自动驾驶的技术。在我看来，这非常令人愤怒，因为自动驾驶和全自动驾驶系统已经在数十起死亡事故中有所涉及，其中部分原因是特斯拉司机可以在任何道路和任何条件下启动这些驾驶系统。通过不遵循其他所有自动驾驶公司的一系列最佳实践，特斯拉正在拿美国人的生命冒险，这种做法是不可接受的。
Tesla's vehicles say full self drive, but really they are only partial full self drive for the driver. That's very misleading to call something full self drive when you cannot in fact, meaningfully, use that technology without increasing the danger. We need to ensure that they are supervised by human drivers when they are using full self drive. So that's my message to Tesla. You got to do that. Other companies do it. You have to do it as well. We're going to continue to see recurrence of these accidents on the streets of our country.
特斯拉的车辆声称是完全自动驾驶，但实际上它们只提供部分自动驾驶功能。这种把不具备真实意义上的完全自动驾驶技术称为“完全自动驾驶”的做法非常具有误导性，因为如果不谨慎的话，使用这种技术实际上会增加危险。我们需要确保在使用完全自动驾驶时，必须由人类驾驶员进行监督。这是我要传达给特斯拉的信息。其他公司都这样做，你们也必须这样做。否则，我们将在全国各地的街道上继续看到重复发生的事故。
Thank you Mr. Trima. So again, he just sat there, took the message respectfully, but personally, I think after that tirade, you have to put your foot down and respond to this guy and share some truth and some data about why Tesla is doing it this way. This is your chance to explain to all of these senators why Tesla made those decisions and why it's actually the best way forward for Tesla. Of course, Waymo shouldn't allow its vehicles to go operate anywhere, but there's a reason why Tesla should not be restricted to these air quote best operating practices that the competition is following.
谢谢，Trima先生。他只是坐在那里，尊重地接受了信息。但是，我个人认为，在这一长篇大论之后，你必须坚定立场，回应这个人，并分享一些真相和数据，解释为什么特斯拉要这样做。这是你向所有参议员解释特斯拉做出这些决策原因的机会，以及为什么这实际上是特斯拉发展的最佳途径。当然，Waymo不应该允许其车辆随处运行，但特斯拉也有理由不被限制在竞争对手声称的所谓最佳操作实践中。
And listen, not to sound callous here, but at the end of the day, it is still the human's fault for any of those accidents on autopilot or FSD. How about a simple comment like clearly knowing that people are texting and driving, eating and driving, putting on makeup? Customers are going to do that anyway, so why not have FSD enabled to make it safer? So yeah, I was a bit disappointed in Lars, but zooming out, seeing the bigger picture again, most of the senators know this is where things are headed.
听我说，我不是想显得无情，但归根结底，那些在自动驾驶或全自动驾驶中发生的事故还是人类的过错。比如，有人发布简单评论指出大家都知道，人们在开车时会发短信、吃东西、化妆。既然顾客无论如何都会这样做，为什么不启用全自动驾驶功能来提高安全性呢？所以，是的，我对拉尔斯有点失望，但从更广泛的角度看，大多数参议员都知道这是发展的方向。
And hopefully, reason will prevail in the end and the senators attacking Tesla and they were also attacking Waymo too that are trying to score points with their donors and the teamsters will be overruled in the end. In case you missed it, the Model Y standard is no longer a thing, it's just going to be the Model Y. So in the US, we now have five variants, rear wheel drive, all wheel drive, and then two premium trims, RWD and AWD, and then the performance.
希望最终理智能够占上风，那些攻击特斯拉的参议员，以及同样攻击Waymo，希望通过这样做来为自己的捐赠者和司机工会谋取好处的人，最终会被否决。如果你错过了消息，Model Y标准版已经不再存在，现在只有Model Y这个名称。在美国，我们现在有五种车型：后驱版（RWD）、全驱版（AWD），然后是两个高级版（后驱和全驱）以及一个高性能版。
The new all wheel drive is now available in the US in Puerto Rico for $41,990, with a range of 294 miles, 0-64.6 seconds. It's like, how do you get here today with the demo? But many people drove here with their own eyes. And then obviously you can walk around building with your own eyes. It's so obvious that you can solve this with cameras for me at least. Why wouldn't you solve this camera? It should be solved with cameras, just like how every other human and animal lives around this world.
全新全轮驱动车型现已在美国和波多黎各上市，售价为 $41,990，续航里程为 294 英里，加速度为 0 到 100 公里/小时仅需 6.4 秒。就像有人会问，今天你是怎么来到这里的？不过许多人亲眼看到了驾驶的过程。显然，你也可以用自己的眼睛环顾这栋建筑。对我来说，很明显这个问题应该可以用摄像头来解决。为什么不用摄像头呢？它理应可以被摄像头解决，就像世界上其他所有人和动物是用眼睛观察周围环境一样。
It's just like very simple sensors. The cell-driving problem is, you know, thought of as a sensor problem, it's actually not a sensor problem, it's an AA problem. Like you need to understand the world, you need to understand what other people are going to do. And the cameras have enough information, already it's just the problem of extracting information, which is an AA problem. The sensor solution was developed back in 2008 or whatever, doing the ARPA days when there wasn't enough intelligence around back then to extract this information.
这就像非常简单的传感器。 自主驾驶的问题通常被认为是一个传感器问题，但实际上它不是，这其实是一个人工智能（AA）问题。 你需要理解这个世界，需要预测其他人的行动。 摄像头已经拥有足够的信息，只是需要从中提取信息，而这正是人工智能的问题。 传感器解决方案早在2008年或更早的ARPA时代就已经开发出来了，那时候并没有足够的智能来提取这些信息。
It was, and that's why you need to depend on all these other sensors back in the day. But nowadays, the intelligence has grown tremendously. You can obviously extract this information. And once you have the AI, you don't need the other sensors. You just need the information, which is the cameras to provide. That was from a presentation that a show gave earlier this week. I'll have it linked below, but it was very similar to the one he gave a few months ago.
过去确实是这样，所以当时你需要依赖所有这些其他传感器。 但是现在，智能技术已经有了巨大的发展。你显然可以获取这些信息。一旦有了人工智能，你就不需要其他传感器了。你只需要摄像头提供的信息。这是一个节目本周早些时候的一次演讲中提到的内容。我会在下面附上链接，但这次和他几个月前的演讲非常相似。
Sendio Polani from Tesla just said that licensing FSD has not proven to be easy, despite our best efforts to share the technology. So, not really news, but just confirmation that nothing has changed. Starting in China, Tesla is now adding a, hey, Tesla, wake word with spatial awareness. So when this feature is enabled, you can just say, hey, Tesla, to activate the voice assistant. For users in China, this new feature will wake their region's specific voice assistant, which is similar to Grog.
特斯拉的Sendio Polani刚刚表示，尽管我们尽了最大的努力去分享这项技术，但FSD的授权并不容易实现。因此，这不算是什么新消息，只是确认了情况没有改变。目前，在中国，特斯拉正在加入一个新的唤醒词功能，具有空间感知能力。所以，当这个功能启用时，你只需说“嘿，特斯拉”，就可以激活语音助手。对于中国的用户，这一新功能将唤醒该地区特定的语音助手，类似于Grog。
And as we said earlier, many times these features start in China and then roll out globally after the fact. Tesla has filed two trademarked applications both for the upcoming Roadster. One is wording in a stylized font, and the other appears to be a sketch of the top of the vehicle. And hopefully, we're about two months away from the reveal.
正如我们之前所说，许多功能往往先在中国推出，然后才在全球范围内推广。特斯拉已经为即将推出的 Roadster 提交了两个商标申请。一个是以特殊字体书写的文字，另一个似乎是车辆顶部的草图。希望大约两个月后会揭晓。
Reuters said that SpaceX is planning new Starlink products, including a mobile device connected to Starlink that could rival smartphones, to which Elon replied Reuters lies relentlessly. But the other day, he just said that something like a smartphone might tap in down the road. So again, this could be a semantics game in Elon rejecting parts of this reporting. Because very clearly, Elon said it would not be a rival to a smartphone.
路透社报道称，SpaceX计划推出新的Starlink产品，包括一款可以连接Starlink的移动设备，这款设备可能会与智能手机竞争。对此，埃隆·马斯克回应称“路透社不实报道一贯如此”。但是就在前几天，他刚刚表示将来可能会有类似智能手机的产品推出。所以，这可能只是埃隆在字眼上对这一报道进行否定。很明显的是，埃隆表示这不会成为智能手机的竞争对手。
Tesla stock closed the day at $397.21 down 2.17% while the NDX was down 1.51%. The volume was 11% above the average. Don't forget, check out AG1 links below for those interested. Hope you all have a wonderful day and a huge thank you to all of my Patreon supporters.
特斯拉股票当天收盘价为397.21美元，下跌了2.17%，而纳斯达克100指数下跌了1.51%。当天的交易量比平均水平高出11%。别忘了，感兴趣的朋友可以查看下面的AG1链接。希望大家都有美好的一天，同时非常感谢我所有的Patreon支持者。