Delivering "late" is not delivering at all.
For example -- "The Roadster 2 is going into manufacture *this year*" he said, several years ago.
For example -- "We will have humans on Mars by 2024" he said. Even if he eventually does deliver humans to Mars, he still broke that promise.
Saying you're going to do something by a certain date and then not doing so constitutes a broken promise -- even if you do it a decade later.
Of course Musk is a genius... those who say otherwise are idiots.
After all, how else would I be enjoying my FSD Roadster 2 that charges from my solar roof-tiles before the drive through a Boring Company tunnel to the Hyperloop terminal where I'm whisked off to the SpaceX launch-pad in anticipation of a Starship flight to join some of the others who set up that initial Mars base back in 2024.
Those who say that Musk is a snake-oil merchant who doesn't deliver on his promises are just deniers who simply choose not to see the reality of the world as it is today.
Or I could be wrong
I think xAI is falling behind (does anyone using Cursor use xAI as a coding agent?).
Perhaps this is Musk's way of buying market-share for a product that's really failing to perform right now (xAI).
That's $60 billion today (with SpaceX stock near $170) but how much/little will it be in 2 year's time? If I was Cursor, I'd be wanting a fair amount of cold, hard cash in that deal
> Meta doesn't really know how to do anything else with any skill.
They don't know how to do Facebook very well either: it's been pretty much stagnant and enshittified to death for the past 22 years, and it feels like a forum for greying people whose greying friends haven't bothered to move on either, or to get the date of the next annual meeting of the bridge club.
one of those companies whose sole purpose seems to be annoying you by slapping their name as a watermark on a generic image you'd like to use in a meme, and force to spend 10 seconds finding somewhere else because you were never going to pay a stupid company to remove their mark on a bad picture you can find everywhere.
I wonder how those companies still exist, let alone make any money.
Anyway, the modern way to use copyrighted photos for free is to ask stable diffusion to regenerate it, because the AI companies have done all the data stealing for you and repackaged the stolen data into "models" you can use for free.
Why aren't they putting this information alongside the thumbnail so we can totally skip AI content if we want to. Only finding out once you've clicked on the video and the player has loaded is stupid -- being both a waste of the viewer's time and bandwidth.
I download all my books DRM-free from bittorrent.
My ebook reader is an ancient Sony PRS-650, it still works fine and it has no trouble reading files that haven't been messed up by Amazon. What a concept eh?
"What about the book's authors who aren't getting paid when you download their stuff for free?" I hear you say:
Yes, I wish I could pay for what I downloaded. But I can't. The best option I could find was to buy the paperback as well, so some of my money would trickle back to them. But that's mighty stupid and totally not environmentally-friendly.
I did try to pay an author directly once (the late Ian M. Banks) but he send me an angry email back saying even if he got money from me, I was robbing his editor and distributor, and I should just buy his book normally - which I would, if that didn't entail leaving an undeserved cut to effing Amazon.
So there we are: there's no mechanism to legally buy books that aren't hamstrung by DRM. So honest people who value their consumer rights can't be honest.
"The use of wood as an energy source is a relic of the past, one that should not be relived if given a choice.
Wood burning is very much alive - both old-stylee polluting open-fires and stoves, and ultra-efficient pellet, wood-chip and wood dust burning in power stations. And it's renewable. Try visiting any nordic country some day...
Also, just because burning wood has downsides doesn't mean it has to be ditcheds it entirely. Solve the downsides instead...
CloudFlare was an aggressive global internet surveillance and privacy invasion operation. Now it's an AI-powered aggressive global internet surveillance and privacy invasion operation.
Why don't I feel excited about it?
Crypto grift, AI bubble and psychopathic billionaire CEO.
Yes, that's because there have been a lot more stupid humans doing stupid things to databases for a lot longer than AI agents.
So tell me: if AI is no safer than people, what's the point of replacing humans with AI?
and animate it eating your face when the AI agent wastes your entire database.
The difference between reality and unreality is that reality has so little to recommend it. -- Allan Sherman
