Is that where Musk's $44bn from Twitter go? Spun out of SpaceX, who bought it from xAI, who bought it from X using money funnelled from Tesla who in turn are subsidised by sales to SpaceX?

This is not a chicken and egg problem. It's an analysis problem. SpaceX built rockets for reasons started by government incentives and prizes to get new rockets designed. Once their rockets were designed customers also came flooding in. They'd be doing perfectly fine without Starlink. Starlink came almost a decade after SpaceX's first launch and the first Starlink constellation went up 2 years after SpaceX was already handling commercial and government contracts using second hand (reused) boosters.

Starlink on the other hand needed a very cheap launch vehicle to be viable and it wasn't even a conceptual idea before that happened. We very much know which came first.

EA has no money to invest. Thanks to a leveraged buyout all they have is a huge debt to serve. They will keep doing this by milking what they have while rapidly selling off or cost cutting their way to bankruptcy.

Normally you just post about how you don't understand what statistics mean. It's refreshing to see you have no idea about history either. I mean there are actually "movies" you could cite which would relate to what you are talking about, but the two you chose are not them. Try again. At least you're on the right continent though.

The cops had nothing to do with that. For the general populace that change was pushed a lot by Facebook which at the time pushed its service as a way of connecting to real people at your college. But even then you have rose coloured glasses on. Remember the advice? I think the advice came *after* the internet of old. These days very few people use their real name online unless you have a public facing personality and that "blue check" is a source of income for you. On the other hand if you look to Slashdot UIDs in the sub 10000 you'll find a significant number of them actually do use their actual real name.

I remember the early days of the internet. Everyone (including me) was very naïeve about the concept of privacy and security.

Sorry but no. Phishing and fraud existed before the "normies" did, and there are a significant number of very stupid and naïve tech gurus out in the world as well whose idea of privacy and security amount to "Who? Never met them." I mean the early internet by design considered no aspect of anonymity, privacy, or security.

Take the rose coloured glasses off.

Quit? Oh man you should have lived in Europe. You'd probably have been able to retire on the payout the courts would have given you.

Oh they very much are anonymous. At least they are where I live. If they weren't (I really hope they aren't and would love to prove it) my employer would find themselves financially arse-fucked by the courts and I will be able to retire early and rich.

In the olden days the chip in your CPU was made from different materials assembled in a different way than today. Not all silicon is the same, not all transistors are the same. There's a reason why some devices burn out at 75C junction temperature, and others can stand easily over 150C.

Also we don't measure temperature the same as we always did. That 80C in your "olden days" CPU... it probably is the same 100C as your current one. Multi-point precision on die temperature sensing is something from the past decade (and change).

That for sure. Tesla's marketing team seems to be Musk's twitter feed and that's too busy being a far right asshat than actually promote his cars. Whoope de do his car can jump. That's irrelevant, what is irrelevant is cars in my price category, and the reality is I legit wouldn't have known about the model Y refresh if I didn't see one driving down the road, and the Model 3 if my friend didn't recently buy one.

Tesla barely has any marketing of their vehicles compared to other cars.

Please don't, the last time they redirected resources it resulted in them stalking a customer on the other side of the country resulting in them being placed in the annals of stupid corporate espionage history.

They cite their sources and separate their opinion, that's the definition of reliable. I didn't say they weren't biased, I said you're stupid for engaging in an ad hominem attack rather than addressing the materials (ignore Electrek, go to their cited sources and address those if you want) of the discussion.

Look maybe I will hate you. Maybe that hate will result in me systematically looking through everything you say and calling out each individual stupid thing you say. That may be my future mission, and my bias. But as long as I cite stupid things you say that doesn't make it lies or unreliable, and the *only* critique anyone having an intelligent discussion has that is valid is to address your comments I cite.

You don't need to like Electrek, they don't need to like Musk, but as long as they provide cited references and all you do is complain about them being biased, their opinion is both more reliable and valuable than yours.

Come join us in intelligent discourse you "Electrek hater"

20% of companies which are acquired under a leveraged buyout go bankrupt within 10 years compared to companies which don't. Goodbye EA.

The Volkswagen engineers (specifically James Liang) were the first to fly because they admitted that they were the ones that came up with the obviously illegal idea. But critically within any jurisdiction it wasn't the engineers handed the highest punishment, it was the accountable department heads. The only reason James Liang got more prison time than Jens Hadler is because the latter was under the jurisdiction of a different country's court, one which handed engineers only suspended sentences. James Liang got fucked because he was under the jurisdiction of a court with more severe sentencing guidelines. Had Jens Hadler been in the USA or James Liang in Germany it would look different.

Causality Fault - Facebook knew it was illegal because they got the lawyers involved. These people are literally paid to review this sort of shit.