China subsidies Byd. It would be bad for american car industry. So if US wants to create a fair competition, they would need to use tariffs or subsidies the US car industry players that could compete fairly with BYD.
And the Tesla factory in Shanghai also gets Chinese subsidies.
The subsidies to Chinese EV companies isn't direct anymore. Most of it is in the form of tax refunds. The biggest "subsidy", though, is the incredible pipeline China has built to feed the industry. Their industrial policy has created an huge ecosystem capable of feeding batteries and components into their EV industry at a price point and scale that no other country can compete with. It's been an incredibly effective industrial policy.
I get what the OP means about the destruction of our auto industry but we can only hide behind that for so long. An ineffective and noncompetitive auto industry won't be able to scale up during a war either. I hope our industrial leaders and politicians are using tariffs and other trade barriers to the US car industry only as a temporary reprieve while we scale up our ecosystem too. Otherwise we run the risk of becoming one of those countries that keeps outdated domestic companies alive just to say we have those companies. Without export discipline and the ability to compete effectively on the global stage, domestic companies are just zombies kept alive by domestic subsidies. They won't be able to help us in the event of a war with a peer adversary.
Tesla's US subsidies mainly came from a ATVM loan from the DOE back in 2008/2009, repaid back in 2013 -- Ford ($6B) was the largest recipient. The DOE had/have other auto/EV/battery subsidies, equally available to foreign domestic producers/recipients, which is what the global subsidies standard requires. No special, or "specific" subsidy favoring Tesla over others (or local companies over foreign competitors). America's consumer purchase EV subsidies prior to the IRA were also neutral without preference to any "specific" company, industry or country of origin.
China's NEV subsidies were/are illegal and Chinese EVs are countervailed in many developed countries (eg, the EU, Turkiye, Canada, US) because they are misapplied in three key ways.
i. forced tech transfer: no subsidies or market access unless hybrid/BEV/batteries tech transfer to China since 2011; violates China's 2001 Accession Protocal (see Section 7, Non-Tariff Measures); litigated before the WTO by the EU (WT/DS549)
ii, local content requirement: no subsidies or license/permit to operate in China unless automakers' EVs used Chinese batteries made by Chinese local "champions" only, namely CATL, since 2015; all foreign battery producers effectively banned and all EV producers forced to switch to local battery suppliers; violates Article 3(a) Prohibition of the Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) Agreement
iii, export subsidies: subsidies given to MIC exporters to under price/under cut foreign competitors in markets abroad; EU Commission's counter measures: 2024/1866 and 2024/2754.
Tesla China benefited significantly from China's NEV subsidies and is likewise also countervailed in the EU, at the import tariff rate of 7+%. Tesla no longer imports EV from China in the US/Canada.
Is that really correct? I have no idea how to compare one to the other but if I search for "how much money did China give BYD" the AI claims 3.7 billion. If I ask "how much money did the US government give Tesla" it has 3 different numbers. $4.9 billion, $11 billion, and $38 billion. Not sure how it's counting
Asking for other companies: Ford $9 billion, Chevy $11 billion
No idea if this is made up and no idea how to compare them but without knowing better it seems like both sides are subsidized
That's a good question. I think I might classify that as solving a novel problem. I have no idea if LLMs can do that consistently currently. Maybe they can.
The idea that "understanding" may be able to be modeled with general purpose transformers and the connections between words doesn't sound absolutely insane to me.
We do believe in a hybrid approach where a fast/deterministic representation is saved - but think there is a more seamless way were the framework itself is high level and manages these details by caching the underlying actions that can run
Lots of founders go through this. You should have an honest conversation with your co-founder. Probably couples therapy. One option is to do it with another founder who has been there (me).
You both are going through a challenging time. Of-course you are going to find some things that are more interesting to you than your founder, and vice versa. Especially if you are pivoting every month (which is a whole different problem).
Going through tough times can build resentment, the way to get on the same page is to talk.
Mediation is what you do when there's something to lose from dissolving the enterprise. But that's not the case here! Why preserve the relationship at all?
Maybe, maybe not. Once something stops being free the human brain starts setting expectations (at least mine does.) Sure that last conversation “only” cost $0.08 but since I’m now paying it better damn well work and not fuck up my code. And even though it was only $0.08 I’ll be cranky that I have to undo its changes because it went down a rabbit hole and now need to reprompt it or ask it what the hell it thinks it’s doing… costing yet another $0.08.
Sure it’s a few pennies but it does add up. I’m sure there is some research or term / explanation for this phenomenon.
I was thinking cursor pricing. It becomes a whole different ballgame when you plug these tools into the providers API and pay by the token. Suddenly you really start evaluating how much value you are actually getting out of the tool!
Looks like US is using tariffs to compete.