I'm not going to chime in on the semi one way or the other, but I have always disliked this way of thinking of EV charging.

Great news, this EV only takes 1 minute to full change! But it only has a range of 10 miles...

This EV has a 10,000 mile range!! Oh that's worthless because it takes 2 hours to charge from empty to full..

The right metric is miles per hour of charge, not percentage of capacity replenished.

Mindless homework foisted on the students doesn't necessarily make them smarter.

The summary did a solid job of presenting some perspectives toward that end.

I will particularly agree that *maybe* practicing math has value beyond the classroom setting, but will counter that in my experience that is only valuable if a parent has the availability and skill to check their work and help them identify missteps.

To be fair, you had to be *really* paying attention. Even then, the people describing him for what he was were personal contacts and folks could write them off as jealous people left behind on Musk's success.

His public image was more carefully curated, and the media broadly was all too happy to roll with the Phony Stark scenario, because "genius billionaire" is such a valued trope in the industry.

The point is the hypocrisy.

He was content to throw money at a "cool AI project that is open" when it was a vague hypothetical, but when it's actually real business opportunity, he's all about being for-profit.

Ok, not great, but fine, he changed his mind and thinks for-profit is the way to go. Except he insists his *competitor* should be penalized for not using the model he himself doesn't think viable. That's some self-serving hypocrisy there.

That said, your point about rug-pulling broadly is on point. It's just that Elon Musk's position carries baggage that may hand OpenAI a victory.

It's weird to credit him with Paypal and Tesla (that formed without his involvement, and in the case of Paypal he founded a *competitor* that lagged Paypal before being folded into Paypal) and also OpenAI, where he was indeed a part of founding it but walked away from it well before anything vaguely interesting happened with it.

Either the *actual* founding counts to give him credit for OpenAI and the actual founders of Paypal and Tesla get credit, or being there when it makes it big counts, and OpenAI does not count.

At least for Zip2 and Paypal, it's painfully obvious that he had luck/confidence rather than competence to explain his situations there. Zip2 money had nothing to do with product and just a lot of money for the vague concept that Compaq did nothing with, and Paypal's trajectory was positive before Elon, Elon about tanked it, and him getting ousted was how it flourished again. He had 11% of the shares because he made some idiots think he should have that much, not because he's actually valuable for the business.

Tesla roadster was implemented verbatim from pre-Elon design, but hard to say for certain about the more enduring success of Model 3/Y. However I've heard claims that Cybertruck was really the first pass at just letting Elon get what he wanted, and that is... well... something...

It *might* have been sustainable if built out more modestly. But instead they said we need to make new datacenters everywhere all of a sudden no matter how much they have to borrow and whatever purchasing commitments they need to do to seemingly secure supply.

Probably a large amount of waste written off in bankruptcy then the more sustainable market persists beyond, including the light AI augmentation you reference and some of the software development offerings persist (though those folks have historically been the quickest to pivot from paid tools to convenient free tools, so local models may eat that lunch)

A lot of "big software teams" have already made offerings from these companies foundational to their process. The one I'm familiar with is having just a nasty mess come out of it, but that team has a history of churning out human slop anyway, so the switch to AI slop quality wise hasn't really changed but it is faster and cheaper than the human slop.

The providers will erase the 'cheaper' part, but it will remain faster.

At this point even if a company has a human using VSCode as a boring old editor, they'll require a copilot account connected just because the non-technical leadership thinks it's just a mandatory thing to deal with 'git' projects.

Hey, it has worked pretty well for IBM and their mainframe... Well except for the "starting cheap bit", but the landscape is much more competitive than IBM had starting out.

Sam Altman's leadership style is tuned for maximum grift over short term with long-term problems.

No matter how bullish one may be on LLM in general, I think folks *have* to at least concede that OpenAI itself is in it deep.

Maybe if they had kept Altman ousted, they could have proceeded in a more viable way, but I suspect OpenAI lwon't fare well in the coming months.

They aren't the best nor the cheapest at what they do. They don't have "hooks" into the user experience (e.g. Google can force Gemini by control of phone and browsers, Microsoft can force whatever solution they like via the OS and VSCode, OpenAI is). It is *widely* reported that Altman doesn't actually understand this stuff but acts like he does anyway. This could even be forgiven mostly except they made crazy financial commitments way beyond even the most bullish scenario...

A full rebound is unlikely, but I think it's a fair notice that book stores made a resurgence.

It's happened in a few industries, something is somewhat popular, businesses oversaturate the market, the business results cause them to conclude that the business is 'done', and the last remaining few get overwhelmed by demand.

So there's a bit of a back and forth to find the right equilibrium, particularly after a disruption.

Got lucky a few times.

First launched into the vague area because Compaq had dot-com FOMO and gave Musk a ton of money for Zip2, and did nothing with it. Musk got millions for not much because Compaq had no idea how to evaluate things but was in a frenzied hurry.

Then he made a failing online payment service and effectively conned his way to be in charge of PayPal after a merger, and totally boffed it. Despite being ousted as CEO, he still ended up getting hundreds of millions for just generally screwing up.

Then bullied his way into being a 'founder' of Tesla, nevermind that Tesla already existed before he came along..

He cofounded x.com, which was losing to Cofinity's PayPal, and got replaced by Bill Harris within months. Then when Cofinity merged with X.com, for whatever stupid reason they allowed Musk to be in charge again, and then within months replaced him as he about destroyed the merged entity.

Advisors should be *advising*, not just being yes men to a megalomaniac.

The whole point is for the president to surround himself with experts and take their expertise into account, not to just have people to echo whatever he says.

Your stated experience and guess has to be weighed against Trump's usual motives.

Occam's razor would suggest it's like everything else he has done his entire life: it's about self enrichment and ego.

The ship has sailed though. So many work vehicles don't have rear windows anyway.