Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Got it! I've been meaning to check out Dithering anyway so I'll give that a listen.

> they effectively own and control a large percentage of all charging infrastructure in the world. Every other car company adopting their standard means they have a lot of customers that will pay them to charge at their stations (even independent of the licensing).

This is the argument I find interesting... IMO if everything does centralize on NACS, nothing (AFAICT) is stopping the really big players like bp, Shell, Exxon, etc from just outfitting their already-existing real estate, already-existing infrastructure with NACS. The petro-companies are ludicrously well capitalized, very sophisticated, and have tons of baked-in advantages. Memes aside, they're also already the biggest players in the energy transition anyway. Basically if I were investing in Tesla, I'd be curious why this doesn't just create a great opening for the huge huge players to mop the floor.

Again, consumers (and the environment, probably) win here, so I'm happy about it!

P.S. Also thank you for entertaining a thoughtful convo. Usually this question just attracts zealots and it doesn't get me closer to an answer. You did -- so thank you!



No worries - trying to engage in thoughtful conversation despite the internet incentivizing craziness is my goal!

Fair point about existing players, I just tend to discount old large companies being able to execute for the same reasons startups tend to eat their lunch. Why haven’t they done it already? Why haven’t they started even now?

Why did it require Tesla to build EVs? Why did existing car companies ignore Tesla for 20 years until they were way behind?

Probably the innovators dilemma - it’s rare existing providers are much of a threat.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: