The Elio Engine

[John Painter]

I think that is very convoluted logic. EM has not been very honest to date. What really matters is what they DO, not what they say.

Based on what they have DONE versus published commitments to self-imposed timelines, Occam's razor says the engine was not ready for prime time viewing. Having said it, I agree to disagree with you. IMO, the root cause of EM's slippage is too many admin/executive/PR/Marketing types and not enough do-ers or car guys. There's a hollow middle to their organization.

So far, I have been more right than wrong. I don't think I'll be eating any shoes or hats as promised.

And here's where Gödels incompleteness theorem comes in, in any formal system that is interested enough to formulate its own consistency can prove that consistency if it is inconsistent. The engine exists because it has not been shown, and has not been shown because it runs and can only not be shown not to run if it its shown to not exist.

Well that's how circular logic works in the absence of many facts other than Elio saying they'll reschedule as soon as possible.

 

[RUCRAYZE]

Well said, clear and to point-thanks

 

[goofyone]

I think that is very convoluted logic. EM has not been very honest to date. What really matters is what they DO, not what they say.

Based on what they have DONE versus published commitments to self-imposed timelines, Occam's razor says the engine was not ready for prime time viewing. Having said it, I agree to disagree with you. IMO, the root cause of EM's slippage is too many admin/executive/PR/Marketing types and not enough do-ers or car guys. There's a hollow middle to their organization.

So far, I have been more right than wrong. I don't think I'll be eating any shoes or hats as promised.

How does the fact that they have missed some timeline goals in any way prove that their explanations for these have been dishonest?

I have seen plenty of conjecture claiming that EM has lied however I have yet to see anything conclusive showing that EM has lied in their communications. If you have evidence beyond speculation to back up the claim that EM has lied in their official communications we would love to see it.

As your entire argument is predicated on the assumption that EM has not been honest in their communications, and that is not based on anything more than conjecture, we find ourselves back at square one which is that in the absence of evidence to the contrary the most likely reason for the delay is the reason we were given by EM.

 

[Mike W]

Ok, I think we should include the concept of Shrodingers Cat at this point. Right now the Elio is alive, we hope, but if we open the box it will definitely be dead. Ok, it works with a cat but not so much with a car company, eh? There's a lot more variables involved so, I think it that even though it's fun to run with these theoretical exercises they are just another lens through which we can view the whole experience of what's evolving and not something to peg the final outcome on.

 

[John Painter]

How does the fact that they have missed some timeline goals in any way prove that their explanations for these have been dishonest?

I have seen plenty of conjecture claiming that EM has lied however I have yet to see anything conclusive showing that EM has lied in their communications. If you have evidence beyond speculation to back up the claim that EM has lied in their official communications we would love to see it.

As your entire argument is predicated on the assumption that EM has not been honest in their communications, and that is not based on anything more than conjecture, we find ourselves back at square one which is that in the absence of evidence to the contrary the most likely reason for the delay is the reason we were given by EM.

Damn....logic just isn't as fun as speculation.

 

[JEBar]

folks tend to view others based on their own point of view .... if they are honest, until proven otherwise they tend to believe others are honest .... if they are truthful, until proven otherwise they tend to believe others are truthful .... if they want to believe something, until proven otherwise they tend to believe it .... the converse is also true .... folks who rely on emotion or their own personal point of view don't need or want facts and discussions with them are usually pointless ..... bottom line, charges/accusations that aren't based on facts are just that and carry no weight in a discussion where others are relying on factual information

 

[BlioKart]

Damn....logic just isn't as fun as speculation.

Wrong its

 

[RUCRAYZE]

folks tend to view others based on their own point of view .... if they are honest, until proven otherwise they tend to believe others are honest .... if they are truthful, until proven otherwise they tend to believe others are truthful .... if they want to believe something, until proven otherwise they tend to believe it .... the converse is also true .... folks who rely on emotion or their own personal point of view don't need or want facts and discussions with them are usually pointless ..... bottom line, charges/accusations that aren't based on facts are just that and carry no weight in a discussion where others are relying on factual information

Had to read it a few times to get your message, but it finally made sense!- thanks

 

[Ian442]

I won't requote the post above becuase its just too big . But it makes absolute sense to the T.

 

[JEBar]

Had to read it a few times to get your message, but it finally made sense!- thanks

understood .... I usually have to do the same with much of what I write ..