It is somewhat correct. For one like Linux, Darwin is open-source. Many of the commands in Mac OS are also linux commands (grep, cat, etc..). It is a POSIX like OS (both take inspiration from UNIX). Also, both use the same file driven layout. (same slashes, same . notation for hidden files, etc etc etc). It is certainly more like Linux than say, Windows.

This is FUBAR, and something I can speak to with plenty of experience. FSD is good enough that insurance companies are offering discounts to use it. It has a lower crash statistic than a human driver, thats not fucked up reporting, that data submitted to the DMVs which involves mandatory collection. Personally, I have used FSD for over 90k miles on two Model X vehicles. It works, and it works. well.

But to imagine that Elon Musk doesnt deliver:
1. His rockets land.
2. His space internet has 10,000,000 subscribers and climbing.
3. His brain implant has give multiple paraplegics abilities.
4. His home battery created an industry of solar batteries at scale, and they contribute to keeping peaker plants offline.
5. He has the worlds largest EV charging network.
6. Tesla is profitable and out-producing big-auto on EVs. A "Tesla Killer" is now the same thing as an "iPhone Killer".
7. FSD works, and you can have multiple end-to-end autonomous drives yourself, if you rent or buy a Tesla.
8. Elon made SpaceX profitable to the point it no longer needs NASA / US Government.
9. His companies have paid back all the loans and grants the government afforded it.

To your point:

Citation needed. But let's give you the benefit of the doubt. Even if that were true, this is like saying stop pursuing the automobile because it will never be faster than a horse. With all things tech related, the incremental ratcheting improvement will make alternatives (human drivers in this case) eventually seem silly for how incapable we are at driving. 50K road deaths in America will be a thing of the past, sooner or later, and it will be Tesla that delivers that, because they're the ones pushing the envelope.


The guy is off on timelines, but the proof is in the pudding. Maybe you just dont like that a guy who has different politics than you is vastly more capable?

Neither of his two major companies receive their entire income from the US Government. This is an old lie. 60% of SpaceX revenue today comes from Starlink, about 35% comes from Rocket Launches not related to NASA, and about 5% comes from NASA.

Tesla... well they sell cars and battery packs and solar panels, and charging sessions. So.. no.

Maybe they are just looking at the Model Y and thinking Tesla can do it again, and hit a sweet spot of price / value like they have there.

Let's look at the Chinese market in particular. The Model Y is the best selling new-energy vehicle (Chinese auto-industry breakdown) SUV and the #3 best selling overall. It dominates its price point, and has the absolute highest customer satisfaction in china (2.2 complaints per 10,000 vehicles vs an industry average of 19/10000).

There are cheaper products, there always will be. But buying the cheapest isn't always the best value, and Tesla hit the mark on that sweet spot.

To put it another way: You need internet and you are remote. You can buy Hughes Net for $70 or Starlink for $120. Starlink has 10,000,000 subscribers, while Hughesnet has under a million. The same thing in space access is true. Falcon 9 is more expensive than an Electron rocket launch, but not quite big enough for the Artemis launches. But for most consumers of space launches with most payload sizes, the value proposition is again, best to be had. Even Amazon is using it for project Kuiper.

Optimus aims to be the Starlink / Falcon 9 / Model Y of humanoid robotic assistants. Good enough for most people and useful to everyone, while maybe not the best for industry specific applications, the best general purpose. Can you buy a mannequin with actuators for less? Sure. But why would you? Unless you want a Roomba that only vacuums, you'll want an Optimus. That is where the optimism comes from.

Boston Dynamics is not angling for the same market as Tesla Optimus. Whether you believe the hype or not (as it has yet to be released as a product), the attack angle of each of these products if very different. Optimus has the aspirational price of $25k which makes it close to a middle-upper income household appliance and something companies can procure to do tasks with that are basic. Boston Dynamics sells Spot, the robotic dog for 3x that price. The Atlas will be well into 6 figures. It will be a highly capable platform but without much of the AI that will enable it to be a prosumer product. It will be used in heavy industry or dangerous places where extreme capability and agility matter more than dynamic every day tasks. Tesla approached Optimus from the software angle at the same time. They have their Tesla Vision system from the vehicles that they plan to make recognize all sorts of every day objects. Atlas and Optimus are as different as that drill kit you can buy at Home Depot for $499 vs a tunnel boring machine. You wont buy an Atlas. It will be too expensive and limited for what you need and highly capable in ways you dont need. Optimus will fold your laundry, make you coffee, and retrieve a delivered package from your front door for you. More mundane, but more useful in general purpose assistance roles. Whether Tesla delivers on capability, or price is another topic of conversation entirely, Iâ(TM)m just merely saying their approaches are very different.

In America we almost no one is happy with the government. Governments increase in power until the people restrain them, and that is always via violent revolution. It is inevitable as government swells and becomes more coercive and oppressive.

Actually this doesnt matter. The first cars were not as fast as the first horses. Nor were the first trains. They also broke down more, cost far more, and needed more expensive "feed". Time will fix those concerns. You do not set out to create a car and come out with a McLaren P1, or a Honda Civic, or a city bus. The real problem is WHERE it is designed to operate, and that is: not on parking lots or industrial rooftops where solar should be.

Desert is beige, and fosters quite a bit of life, much of it bugs etc. Solar panels are black. They will heat up more than the sand. That was my point. Plus even if this were untrue, the shade they provide would be better served in parking lots, near the consumption of electricity. rather than transporting it a hundred miles to San Diego or Phoenix. In the video, it looks like there is quite a bit of green, vs the Dunes of the empty quarter in Arabia or the sands of the Sahara

Pretty sure he means the rails the solar panels are fixed to. That part does not seem automated. Also, this is really stupid in that we are covering farm fields with solar? Why not industrial and distribution rooftops and parking lots? Fuck I would even settle for partial cover of roads and freeways. There is no need to ruin nature like this. We are taking fields which have high productivity with photosynthesis and converting them into low albedo solar arrays, when we could be turning roads and rooftops and parking lots which already have low albedo and making them cooler and nicer with some shade. This is absolutely stupid.

The Lenovo ThinkStation PX (a high-end dual-socket Intel Xeon Scalable workstation) supports up to 9 PCIe slots. The exact speeds and lane configurations depend on whether you have one or two CPUs installed, as slots are split between the two CPUs (and some require the second CPU).

This is the full configuration with both Intel Xeon processors installed:
4 × PCIe 5.0 x16 (full height, full length, up to 75W, double-width capable in some positions)
4 × PCIe 4.0 x16 (full height, full length, up to 75W)
1 × PCIe 4.0 x8 (full height, full length, 25W, open-ended)

Total: 9 slots (all full-height).

Single PSU1850WFull output at 200–240V AC input.
At 115–127V: still 1850W.
At 100–110V: limited to 1400–1500W.Dual PSUs – Redundant mode1850W (system total)One PSU acts as backup. The system is limited to the capacity of a single PSU for full redundancy. Hot-swap supported.Dual PSUs – Team mode2350WBoth PSUs actively share the load (no redundancy).
Highest power mode, ideal for heavy GPU/CPU configurations.
At lower voltages (100–110V) output is still capped accordingly.

An actual Pro machine. Just because the 2023 Pro was not a pro machine (It was a MacBook Pro in a cheese grater case), doesnt mean Apple hasn't ever had Pro machines. A Pro machine is a machine like a Lenovo PX or P8. They have dual Xeon, can go to 4TB of ram, and have 3 PCIE-16 slots. Now, some people are going to say "Who needs 4TB of RAM?" and I will reply with: If you have to ask, you aren't the target market for those, and that is kind of the point. Apple has abandoned that target market. It would rather sell iPads to 8 and 80 year olds.

local AI Models

Yes. We should all be our own FDA, EPA, and OSHA. That worked *really well* in the past.

This. Isn't the point of an Aircraft Carrier to establish dominance? It isnt a surprise attack vessel. When a carrier strike group moves into your neighborhood, you know. They want you to know.

This is modded down and sarcastic, but it's true. Why should the government be allowed to tell Americans who they can and can not bet with and on what? If there is foul play like fixing a fight or causing damage to the thing being wagered on, then fine, you have a fraud case on your hands. But the simple act of betting (which I think is stupid most of the time) should be a freedom we keep. Our constitution didn't strip us of the right to wager. Where does the government get the power to do so?