Dave Fladd

Light bender at work. Inshore fisherman at play. Former Pole vaulter & Coach

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@BLKMDL3 We recently got .4 and it's a big step backward. Tons of interventions due mostly to poor mapping choices. Hope .5 is better

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@TesCalendar1 330 mi range *while towing a boat* is what is keeping EV trucks from being successful. Why does no one get this? Trucks are energy hogs

[Tesla @Tesla]

Slowly, then all at once

[Andrej Karpathy @karpathy]

I took delivery of a beautiful new shiny HW4 Tesla Model X today, so I immediately took it out for an FSD test drive, a bit like I used to do almost daily for 5 years. Basically... I'm amazed - it drives really, really well, smooth, confident, noticeably better than what I'm used to on HW3 (my previous car) and eons ahead of the version I remember driving up highway 280 on my first day at Tesla ~9 years ago, where I had to intervene every time the road mildly curved or sloped. (note this is v13, my car hasn't been offered the latest v14 yet)

On the highway, I felt like a passenger in some super high tech Maglev train pod - the car is locked in the center of the lane while I'm looking out from Model X's higher vantage point and its panoramic front window, listening to the (incredible) sound system, or chatting with Grok. On city streets, the car casually handled a number of tricky scenarios that I remember losing sleep over just a few years ago. It negotiated incoming cars in tight lanes, it gracefully went around construction and temporarily in-lane stationary cars, it correctly timed tricky left turns with incoming traffic from both sides, it gracefully gave way to the car that went out of order in the 4-way stop sign, it found a way to squeeze into a bumper to bumper traffic to make its turn, it overtook the bus that was loading passengers but still stopped for the stop sign that was blocked by the bus, and at the end of the route it circled around a parking lot, found a spot and... parked. Basically a flawless drive.

For context, I'm used to going out for a brief test drive around the neighborhood to return with 20 clips of things that could be improved. It's new for me to do just that and exactly like I used to, but come back with nothing. Perfect drive, no notes. I expect there's still more work for the team in the long march of 9s, but it's just so cool to see that we're beyond finding issues on any individual ~1 hour drive around the neighborhood, you actually have to go to the fleet and mine them. Back then, I processed the incredible promise of vehicle autonomy at scale (in the fully scaleable, vision only, end-to-end Tesla way) only intellectually, but now it is possible to feel it intuitively too if you just go out for a drive. Wait, of course surround video stream at 60Hz processed by a fully dedicated "driving brain" neural net will work, and it will be so much better and safer than a human driver. Did anyone else think otherwise?

I also watched @aelluswamy 's new ICCV25 talk last week (https://t.co/RdaM23kvez) that hints at some of the recent under the hood technical components driving this progress. Sensor streams (videos, maps, kinematics, audio, ...) over long contexts (e.g. ~30 seconds) go into a big neural net, steering/acceleration comes out, optionally with visualization auxiliary data. This is the dream of the complete Software 1.0 -> Software 2.0 re-write that scales fully with data streaming from millions of cars in the fleet and the compute capacity of your chip, not some engineer's clever new DoubleParkedCarHandler C++ abstraction with undefined test-time characteristics of memory and runtime. There's a lot more hints in the video on where things are going with the emerging "robotics+AI at scale stack". World reconstructors, world simulators "dreaming" dynamics, RL, all of these components general, foundational, neural net based, how the car is really just one kind of robot... are people getting this yet?

Huge congrats to the team - you're building magic objects of the future, you rock! And I love my car <3.

[Jared Isaacman @rookisaacman]

It is unfortunate that NASA’s team and the broader space community have to endured distractions like this. There are extraordinary opportunities and some risks ahead and so the focus should be on the mission. With many reporters and other interested parties reaching out, I want to help bring some clarity to the discussion... unfortunately, that means another long post:

I have met Secretary Duffy many times and even flew him in a fighter jet at EAA Oshkosh--probably one of the coolest things a cabinet secretary can do. I have also told many people I think he has great instincts and is an excellent communicator, which is so important in leadership. If there is any friction, I suspect it is more political operators causing the controversy.

This isn't an election or campaign for the NASA Administrator job, the Secretary is the leader and I will root for his success across his many responsibilities. We both believe deeply in American leadership in the high ground of space--though we may differ on how to achieve that goal and whether NASA should remain an independent agency.

It is true that Athena was a draft plan I worked on with a very small group from the time of my initial nomination through its withdrawal in May. Parts of it are now dated, and it was always intended to be a living document refined through data gathering post-confirmation. I would think it is better to have a plan going into a responsibility as great as the leadership of NASA than no plan at all.

It is also true that only one 62-page version of the plan (with unique header/footer markings) was delivered in hard copy back in mid-August to a single party. I learned it was leaked to reporters and across industry last week. It seems some people are letting politics get in the way of the mission and the President’s goals for space. Personally, I think the “why” behind the timing of this document circulating--and the spin being given to reporters--is the real story.

While the full plan exceeded 100 pages, it centered around five main priorities that I will summarize below, including some specifics on the topics attracting the most interest. There is the question--why not release the entire document? Well, one party is clearly circulating it, so I am sure it is only a matter of time before it becomes public--in which case, I will stand behind it. I think there are many elements of the plan that the space community and NASA would find exciting, and it would be disappointing if they never came to fruition. Mostly, I just don’t think the space community needs to debate line-by-line while NASA and the rest of the government are going through a shutdown. I will say everything in the report is consistent with my Senate testimony, my written responses to the Senate for the record, and all the podcasts and papers I have ever spoken to on the subject.

- Reorganize and Empower
Pivot from the drawn-out, multi-phase RIF “death by a thousand cuts” to a single, data-driven reorganization aimed at reducing layers of bureaucracy between leadership and the engineers, researchers, and technicians--basically all the “doers”. Align departments tightly to the mission so that information flows for quick decision-making. One example, which was mischaracterized by a reporter, was exploring relocating all aircraft to Armstrong so there could be a single hierarchy for aviation operations, maintenance, and safety. From there, aircraft like T-38s would operate on detachment at JSC. Other goals of the reorganization, would be to liberate the NASA budget from dated infrastructure that is in disrepair to free up resources to invest in what is needed for the mission of the day. And maybe most importantly, reenergize a culture of empowerment, ownership, and urgency--and recalibrate a framework that acknowledges some risks are worth taking.

– American Leadership in the High Ground of Space
Put more astronauts in space with greater frequency, including rebooting the Payload Specialist programs to give opportunities for the NASA workforce--especially on opportunities that could unlock the orbital economy--the chance to go to space. Fulfill the 35-year promise and President Trump’s Artemis plan to return American astronauts to the Moon and determine the scientific, economic, and national security reasons to support an enduring lunar presence. Eventually, transition to an affordable, repeatable lunar architecture that supports frequent missions. When that foundation is built, shift resources toward the near-impossible that no one else will work on like nuclear electric propulsion for efficient transport of mass, active cooling of cryogenic propellants, surface power, and even potential DoD applications. To be clear, the plan does not issue a directive to cancel Gateway or SLS, in fact, the word “Gateway” is used only three times in the entire document. It does explore the possibility of pivoting hardware and resources to a nuclear electric propulsion program after the objectives of the President’s budget are complete. On the same note, it also seeks to research the possibility that Orion could be launched on multiple platforms to support a variety of future mission applications. As an example of the report being dated, Sen. Cruz’s has subsequently incorporated additional funding in the OBBB for further Artemis missions--which brings clarity to the topic.

- Solving the Orbital Economy
Maximize the remaining life of the ISS. Streamline the process for high-potential science and research to reach orbit. Partner with industry (pharmaceuticals, mining, biotech, etc) to figure out how to extract more value from space than we put in--and critically attempt to solve the orbital economy. That is the only way commercial space station companies will have a fighting chance to succeed. I don’t think there is anything controversial here--we need to figure out how to pay for the exciting future we all want to see in space.

– NASA as a Force Multiplier for Science
Leverage NASA’s resources--financial (bulk buying launch and bus from numerous providers), technical, and operational expertise to increase the frequency of missions, reduce costs, and empower academic institutions to contribute to real discovery missions. The idea is to get some of that $1 trillion in university endowments into the fight, alongside NASA, to further science and discovery. Expand the CLPS-style approach across planetary science to accelerate discovery and reduce time-to-science... better to have 10 x $100 million missions and a few fail than a single overdue and costly $1B+ mission. I know the “science-as-a-service” concept got people fired up, but that was specifically called out in the plan for Earth observation, from companies that already have constellations like Planet, BlackSky, etc. Why build bespoke satellites at greater cost and delay when you could pay for the data as needed from existing providers and repurpose the funds for more planetary science missions (as an example)? With respect to JPL, it was a research request to look at overlaps between the work of the laboratory and what prime contractors were also doing on their behalf. The report never even remotely suggested that America could ever do without the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Personally, I have publicly defended programs like the Chandra X-ray Observatory, offered to fund a Hubble reboost mission, and anything suggesting that I am anti-science or want to outsource that responsibility is simply untrue.

– Investing in the Future
The congressionally mandated “learning period” will eventually expire, and the government will inevitably play a greater role in certifying commercial missions (crewed and uncrewed) just like they do with aircraft, ships, trains, etc. NASA eventually should build a Starfleet Academy to train and prepare the commercial industry to operate safely and successfully in this future space economy, and consolidate and upgrade mission control into a single “NORAD of peaceful space,” allowing JSC to become the spaceflight center of excellence and oversee multiple government and commercial missions simultaneously. Other investments for the future included AI, replacing dated IT systems, and ways to alleviate the demand on the Deep Space Network.

- Closing
This plan never favored any one vendor, never recommended closing centers, or directed the cancellation of programs before objectives were achieved. The plan valued human exploration as much as scientific discovery. It was written as a starting place to give NASA, international partners, and the commercial sector the best chance for long-term success. The more I see the imperfections of politics and the lengths people will go, the more I want to serve and be part of the solution... because I love NASA and I love my country 🇺🇸🚀

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

💯

[Jeff_GoingPlaid @Jeff_GoingPlaid]

@chuckcook "I can't tell you how many people compare FSD to their own car's lane assist."---This is SOO true!! Whenever I discuss FSD with others they say "My car does that too." ---umm, no it doesn't.

[Mark Cuban @mcuban]

I said I wanted to fix healthcare in the USA. That’s where I’m spending my money.

Some people think helping Americans get out of this healthcare mess we are in is important. In fact I think it’s the most important issue Americans face.

Some don’t. They want to talk about things I can’t impact, I want to talk about things I can change.

Healthcare will cost the typical American Family of 5 , 5x what they pay in federal income taxes. BEFORE deductibles and max out of pocket

It will cost your employer 30k for that same family. Leaving a lot Less money to pay to you.

And if you have a high deductible and high out of pocket plan, you are just fucked unless you are rich. Really tough when most people who don’t qualify for medicaid barely have $500 in the bank and avoid going to the doctor and just get sicker. Costing businesses and taxpayers even more.

All while there will be a debate about whether to extend ACA subsidies for 12.5m people. Which is simultaneously the most important and most worthless conversation our politicians will have.

It’s important that the money be there for healthcare. It’s ridiculously worthless because that money goes right into the pockets of big insurance companies for plans that have ~5k deductibles and 18k OOP max, which few can afford when something bad happens.

But hey. Let’s play gotcha about global politics instead of dealing with something that impacts all Americans and the economy more than any 1 percent interest rate cut ever will.

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@chamath It's simple. They can't afford it! My sons are 28 and 25 and are both employed engineers at good companies and are struggling to save money. And this with meal prepping and living frugally. We need to distribute the nations wealth in a more balanced way.

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@CodeComa @TeslaKing420 Our MY is also named Rosie. For Rosie the Robot

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@Teslarati Keep it simple, make it tough and we need *towing* range of 350 mi

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

👏👏👏

[Tesla @Tesla]

World's first autonomous delivery of a car!

This Tesla drove itself from Gigafactory Texas to its new owner's home ~30min away — crossing parking lots, highways &amp; the city to reach its new owner

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@Rainmaker1973 0

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

Let's go @rgarris18 ⚾

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@chuckcook Yes 100% (from Charleston SC)

[SpaceX @SpaceX]

Watch Starship's ninth flight test → https://t.co/Gufroc2kUz https://t.co/NYF0ZMyeGp

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@greggertruck EV trucks won't really take off until they get 300+ miles of range *while pulling a trailer*. I'm a fisherman and own a truck to pull my boat. Trucks hog energy. It's a fact. Realistically a truck needs 500-600 mi range. Ppl don't buy trucks to drive them like a car.

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@HiiGHOFFJAVi @Tesla This is happened to us twice on our 2024 MY. In both cases it fixed itself overnight. Pretty annoying when it happens. Can't use FSD

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@floodtide13 @rgarris18 Love this. The stoke is real!

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

@MrTeslaTom Cut out the noise and focus on the products. That's what I do. Long Tesla retail inventor here.

[Dave Fladd @Fladdski]

This is an incredible deal for imo the worlds best car

[Sawyer Merritt @SawyerMerritt]

NEWS: Tesla has increased inventory discounts in the U.S. for the old Model Y to as much as $7,000 off.

Discounts:
• Model Y Performance: Up to $7,000
• Model Y LR AWD: Up to $5,250
• Model Y LR RWD: Up to $3,840

Combined with the $7,500 Fed EV credit and you can now get a new previous generation Model Y Performance for $37,000 (excluding gas savings).