They will quickly learn that it's easier to rip off a mailbox than a delivery robot. Robot is not always in the same spot, so you can't just sneak up to it at 4am when nobody is looking. Mailbox doesn't have cameras which record evidence and with someone monitoring which will immediately dispatch help if needed. Survival is not about outrunning the bear, it's about running faster than the other guy. Delivery robots will be harder targets than ripping off mailboxes, stealing from porches, or even mugging the delivery guy.
Now consider the fact that the facebook content comes from a fairly wide cross section of the voting public. Is it time to update the Churchill's famous quite : "The best argument against democracy is a 10 minute conversation with an average voter"? Substitute "10 minute conversation with an average voter with "spend 10 minutes as a facebook moderator"?
If that was true, the paleontologists in question here would just pay pennies a day and get all the fossils their hearts desire, rather than complain about high prices on the market.
I worked in a video rental store when I was in high school (part time, but 20+ hrs per week). The manager had an obsession with the movie "Grease", so it was played over and over on TV screens in the store. While I do remember getting some of the tunes stuck in my head and finding it annoying, my brain developed a noise filter pretty quickly. To this day I still don't know, nor care to know, the plot of that movie, even though I probably have been exposed to hundreds of hours, if not over 1000 hrs of it playing over and over.Or maybe it's my brain just blocking it out now;-)
At 10% failure rate it seems there should be a small niche business suing for wrongful stops. At $500K a pop, there is money to be made for victims, laywers, and plenty of motivation to make the system more accurate (another business?). The system would fix itself - capitalism at work, unless of course legislators start interfering by putting laws in place preventing the victims from suing, rather than fix the accuracy of the system (which is much harder than signing a new law).
Ha, ha. One of Elon's PR lines was "everyone gets a P100D loaner while in service, with an option to buy it when you return". In 6 years I never once got a P100D (or top level configuration at the time). Also, in the last year or two, loaners are very hard to come by, and you can't even book an appointment with guaranteed loaner because the loaners are on first come, first serve basis, and once they run out for the day, they offer complementary Lyft ride if you live or work nearby, but no, they don't cover unlimited Lyft rides anywhere you need to go for however long the car is int he shop. The cars stuck for 2 weeks waiting for anyone to even look at them seems to be a new thing, caused by the flood of Model 3's no doubt - https://teslamotorsclub.com/tm...
Tesla's go-to "diagnosis" whenever you take it in for most issues is "it will be fixed in the next firmware". When it doesn't come few weeks down the road, the excuse is "oh, the fix must have not made it, it will be coming next update". It's not that the service people are trying to make excuses, they are awesome, but they get that BS from Tesla corporate. Elon thinks he can fix everything in software. One of the cars I bought had a problem unfolding one of the mirrors, and even when unfolded it would go limp. I noticed that on delivery day, the answer "new firmware is coming", after 2 ota updates which fixed nothing I demanded a new mirror. Service was happy to do it, but the new mirror developed the same problem a week or two later. 3 mirrors and 4 months later finally got a mirror which worked. Turned there was a out the new mirror assembly which went into production in Dec 2016, and in agile development tradition it was wasn't exhaustively tested - let the customers find the problem. Turned out that it wasn't fixable via firmware as Elon would like, so finally the techs got a bulletin to replace it with a mirror produced after 4/2017 (my car was 12/2016) which finally fixed the problem.
Things like music not playing, browser not working, weird sounds instead of blinker sound, the service even touch that because they know it's just a software issue, so you'll get a "reboot it and see it it fixes it" or "known issue, wait for next update". If you insist, they will wipe all your settings and perform a factory reset, which may make it work for a day or two. Having owned Teslas over the last 6 years, I got to know some of the techs, they are an awesome bunch, but they can only do what corporate Tesla will let them. Since the Model 3 more than doubled the number of Teslas on the roads, service centers are so swamped now that appointments are over a month away in a lot of places, and in MA apparently even when you get an appointment, cars have been reported sitting in a queue for over 2 weeks! If your car needs parts, the wait can be many weeks if not months. Given that, making an appointment for stuff you know they can't fix will just leave you without a car for possibly over 2 weeks - pointless.
Oh, as for Model 3 experience on Model S, UI squished into portrait orientation (Model 3 is landscape) and the media player is forced on the screen at every occasion - when you get in the car (even if you hid it before you left the car), almost every time you go to any menu, like to turn on headlights or seat heaters or heated steering wheel, or change suspension level to clear a snow buildup on the road (and yes, it can be dangerous to have to navigate through so many menus with tiny buttons on a not very responsive touch screen while driving). Why the media player forcing is annoying, because there already is a media player display on the instrument cluster and it can be operated from the steering wheel (only on Model S or X), so the one on the main screen is only needed when doing some advanced controlling. The "unified" version which unifies the Model 3 and Model S/X experience sucks big time, most S/X owners who had older versions hate it. Oh, and on older MCU (any car build pre-March-2018) the screen response time sucks too, but again, Model 3 has the new computer and new S/X do too, so not a priority for Tesla.
No other manufacturer changes things every 2 weeks. No other manufacturer ships unfinished product planning to OTA the features when ready, or even things like shipping a car without ever driving it outside of sunny California. Oops, bumpers fall off or Model 3 in heavy rain, let's fix it for new cars. Oops, turns out Model 3 freezes up in the winter - dang, we don't get that white stuff here in the valley, let's see what we can do. All the other guys do way more testing before shipping, yes they will miss some things, but not to that degree. You don't have to wake up every day thinking what broke now with the latest ota update. Once Tesla moves on to new hardware, old hardware us orphaned too. For example, they started shipping new main computer in March 2018. One of my cars has the old MCU. It's been getting slower and some features like the browser haven't worked in months! Not a priority for Tesla because new cars have a new MCU now. And they don't allow people to downgrade to last version where most things work, the update to latest is mandatory. Not to mention that they reworked the UI to suit the Model 3 and unified the software, so the Model S has to run UI for Model 3 which doesn't account for a second screen (instrument cluster) because Model 3 doesn't have an instrument cluster.
Or they won'r survive and get bought out. Once the other guys catch up with EV drivetrains, Tesla will have a hard time competing. Selling untested cars (what the heck, we never drove this thing in snow, let's just sell a hundred thousands and see what customers complain about the first winter, then we fix it for new cars) is not going to play well with most customers. I personally bought 4 Model S cars, but am totally ready for competition, with features delivered on day one as opposed some "some day in the future", things not breaking from one mandatory update to the next, some physical buttons for things like turning on headlights or changing suspension level while driving, instead of pecking ever smaller buttons (they get smaller every major release) while navigating through ever growing number of levels of menus on a touch screen. I swear, if the government didn't force Tesla to have a physical stalk, in order to turn on the blinker you'd have to navigate 4 levels of menus: "Controls->Lighting->Directional Signals->Left->ON".:-(
Nope, it's a permanent beta problem. Elon is very proud how they "improve" their cars every 2 weeks. They are using agile software development model but applied to the hardware+software product, i.e. ship minimum viable product asap, fix and add new features as you go. They've been making the Model S 7 years now, still has problems whenever they decide to upgrade hardware, and with over the air updates you always have to check what broke this time, though some things get fixed or added. They've had the only viable EV on the market, plus I consider myself an early adopter, so I am a customer, but mature product Teslas are not. I got my wife into one 2 years ago, she is not an early adopter, so for example she didn't read the release notes one morning which stated somewhere in there that in their wisdom Tesla decided to auto-unfold mirrors as soon as the car starts moving. So when my wife folded the mirrors manually, as she did many times in the past, and started backing up, crack, the mirror unfolded and broke off on a wall. Yes, they fixed it on next release, but too late for my wife's mirror - there goes $600, just another cost of driving a beta car Then there are features which Tesla sells but delivers to future cars only. One good example was the highly touted P85D which was supposed to produce 691hp. It didn't at first, but Tesla assured owners a software update is coming. Eventually they delivered a car which can produce that power, but it took 3 redesigns of the battery so only available for new cars. The original owners got an excuse "your motors can produce that power, and the car can handle it, but with your battery the most you will see is 463hp, which is about 50hp more than the non performance car you could have bought for $25K less". They offered a retrofit to 500hp for an additional $5K, but to get the advertised power it would require an upgrade to a brand new P100D, which would cost roughly $80K. They sold cars in 2014/2015 with "blind spot warning" which was supposed to come via software upgrade, turns out Elon was smoking something when he decided it can be done using nothing but parking sensors (who knew when going down the highway parking sensors don't work, eh?), so they quietly removed the feature from the website. Current cars, 4 years later have better blind spot monitoring, but that requires 8 cameras and a powerful computer (simple, reliable radar based solution is too boring for Elon), so again, they delivered but only to new cars. Anyone heard of Full Self Driving sold in 2016 through 2018? It does absolutely nothing today, and chances are it never will for those who bought the cars back then. Oh, but the car can play fart noises through the speakers on demand - a breakthrough feature on one of the recent over the air updates. Welcome to agile development for cars.
Do they claim they have multiple cameras now to support IR and 3D face based payment system? Or is it "like a cheap knock-off of Apple" which can be fooled with a smartphone photo?
Zoning laws apply just the same to one large business as to 25 small ones. Just because Amazon gets a permit to build an office building for 2,000 people, doesn't give it the right to build a warehouse. Large businesses apply for many permits, it's not "one business permit per company" as you might think. Your only argument here is that a large business like Amazon hires faster, but first, that can be also be controlled via building permits if the city wants, and second, not sure that is what cities even want to do - a planned large expansion is likely to be cheaper to the city than a trickle over 10 years, for example think electric grid capacity - plunking down a new power plant and running one set of properly sized transmission lines would likely be cheaper, rather than adding small diesel generators and adding small lines every year for 10 years. Similar on expanding public transit - cheaper per capita cost to provide reliable transit for 25,000 people than 1,000.
Amazon doesn't want to build HQ somewhere where they are going to be picketed, attacked and vilified. Even if those attacks come from a vocal minority, in the age of social outrage that is not good for business. So they'll go somewhere where they are going to be welcome, or just spread their employees across different places to diversify their locations and reduce the risk being targeted by outraged people. How does this surprise anyone? I'm neither defending or attacking anyone here, just stating this was the obvious logical outcome.
I was with you until the last paragraph about how the same amount of employees requires more public resources purely because they work for the same company. How exactly is one company with 25,000 workers put more strain on public resources than 25 companies with 1,000 employees each? Are you saying that breaking up companies (and government agencies) to limit them to say 100 employees each would save NYC a ton of money?
Or, maybe it's just "don't try to scam someone who spent their life tracking scammers". Kind of like "don't try to mug a black belt", or "if you're going to steal a hat, don't steal from a police officer on duty". Really unlucky (for the criminal) choice of a mark/victim.
I don't think you know what libertarians belive. Libertarian view point would be "you invested all your money in an unproven fiat currency backed by nothing and noone and and you lost you shirt - a predictable and most likely outcome of going all-in in most lotteries". High risk, high reward investments are nothing new. While regulation has its place, it has a dark side - it actually killed off common sense in a lot of investing by telling people "trust the government, we know what we're doing". That's how Bernie Madoff or Enron got an aura of legitimacy - SEC and government audited and in perfect financial health. A libertarian would tell you if something seems too good to be true, it usually is, but of course the counterargument for Bernie and other scams like him was "but the government says it's a financially sound investment". Before SEC and such, people only trusted companies which had a long good track record - anybody new was always considered high risk. Crypto is very new in that sense.
Imagine that every video or product would get a rating from everyone on Earth. Each person gets one thumbs up or thumbs down option. How many games, books, videos or other products would get a majority positive reviews?
Then there is the vocal minority problem, where there is a minority which has very strong opinions and lots of time to voice them as loud as they can. We can see that in the USA politics today, anyone expressing any views near the center will get attacked by global minorities from the left and from the right. In the age of social outrage, the only survivable positions are extreme left or extreme right, at least you got one set of vocals on your side an only get attacked from one side.
One solution is to create multiple virtual review buckets, akin to Netflix rating system - "majority of people who tend to rate content like you liked this product". The vocal minorities will have their own buckets to voice their approvals or displeasures.
How many of those 83% refuse to use any app which provides them such personalized ads and/or collects their data in exchange for a "free" app? People say a lot of things on the surveys, but do otherwise in life. I seriously doubt that 83% of people purchase apps when given the "free" option with targeted advertisements.
I'd love to agree with you, but I can't. At today's state of technology, first, the guy might not have fallen asleep if it wasn't for auto-pilot. Second, if the drive did fall asleep in traffic, they'd have a rude awakening in a fender bender, but with auto-pilot, they get to sleep until the traffic lets up and they never wake up after their car hits something at 70mph like Walter Huang in his Model X. At least Walter's accident didn't claim any additional lives. Had he plowed into a stationary ambulance of fire truck (which sadly, Tesla's on auto-pilot have been known to do), it could have ended up with more casualties.
So no, I will have to disagree with you 100% that dozing off on auto-pilot is better than without. Oh, in case it matters, I do have first hand experience with Tesla auto-pilot.
I'm more afraid some smart kid gets his or her life ruined by playing a stupid joke on Siri, then decides that the society fucked him or her, therefore feels justified to take it out on the society and decide to take revenge on said society (they won't be able to get a good job with the record anyways, so they put their skills to use for revenge). Of course, then all the paranoid will say how their joke was predictive of the tragedy that ensued, so the next kid that joked will just be put to death - better safe than sorry.
Vaccination manufacturers don't make data available available, or at least actuarial data that any insurance company would trust. Insurance companies will insure almost anything - a jewelry store in Vancouver, BC, pays insurance against more than some number of centimeters of snow falling in January, and if that happens, the insurance company refunds all their customers purchases from December (actually happened once). However, after our first-born had a major reaction as a child to a vaccination and needed an inhaler for a couple of years (luckily it cleared up, or so we think) for our second child I asked what the odds of such reaction. The doc was quick to tell me "one in a million or less". I asked whether the pharma company or any insurance company will insure me with those odds - I'd give them 2:1 on their money, $100 for $50M payoff, heck, I'd settle for lifetime healthcare paid by the pharma in case my kid has a reaction (lifetime value likely much less than $50M). Guess what, no takers. So I call bullshit on the number, and sorry, will not be using product pushed by doctors which will not provide me with real risk data. If the data was real, the pharma could make tons of money insuring against such reactions, and parents would be comforted that they are covered in case their kid ends up the "one in a million".
For those ready to mod this down, care to provide a source where parents can insure against vaccination side effects at the claimed 1:1,000,000 ratio of premium to claim benefit?
Slashdot Mirror
Netflix sells a service, not content. Using someone else's Netflix subscription would be like using someone else's gym membership.
They will quickly learn that it's easier to rip off a mailbox than a delivery robot. Robot is not always in the same spot, so you can't just sneak up to it at 4am when nobody is looking. Mailbox doesn't have cameras which record evidence and with someone monitoring which will immediately dispatch help if needed. Survival is not about outrunning the bear, it's about running faster than the other guy. Delivery robots will be harder targets than ripping off mailboxes, stealing from porches, or even mugging the delivery guy.
Now consider the fact that the facebook content comes from a fairly wide cross section of the voting public. Is it time to update the Churchill's famous quite : "The best argument against democracy is a 10 minute conversation with an average voter"? Substitute "10 minute conversation with an average voter with "spend 10 minutes as a facebook moderator"?
If that was true, the paleontologists in question here would just pay pennies a day and get all the fossils their hearts desire, rather than complain about high prices on the market.
I worked in a video rental store when I was in high school (part time, but 20+ hrs per week). The manager had an obsession with the movie "Grease", so it was played over and over on TV screens in the store. While I do remember getting some of the tunes stuck in my head and finding it annoying, my brain developed a noise filter pretty quickly. To this day I still don't know, nor care to know, the plot of that movie, even though I probably have been exposed to hundreds of hours, if not over 1000 hrs of it playing over and over.Or maybe it's my brain just blocking it out now ;-)
At 10% failure rate it seems there should be a small niche business suing for wrongful stops. At $500K a pop, there is money to be made for victims, laywers, and plenty of motivation to make the system more accurate (another business?). The system would fix itself - capitalism at work, unless of course legislators start interfering by putting laws in place preventing the victims from suing, rather than fix the accuracy of the system (which is much harder than signing a new law).
Ha, ha. One of Elon's PR lines was "everyone gets a P100D loaner while in service, with an option to buy it when you return". In 6 years I never once got a P100D (or top level configuration at the time). Also, in the last year or two, loaners are very hard to come by, and you can't even book an appointment with guaranteed loaner because the loaners are on first come, first serve basis, and once they run out for the day, they offer complementary Lyft ride if you live or work nearby, but no, they don't cover unlimited Lyft rides anywhere you need to go for however long the car is int he shop. The cars stuck for 2 weeks waiting for anyone to even look at them seems to be a new thing, caused by the flood of Model 3's no doubt - https://teslamotorsclub.com/tm...
Tesla's go-to "diagnosis" whenever you take it in for most issues is "it will be fixed in the next firmware". When it doesn't come few weeks down the road, the excuse is "oh, the fix must have not made it, it will be coming next update". It's not that the service people are trying to make excuses, they are awesome, but they get that BS from Tesla corporate. Elon thinks he can fix everything in software. One of the cars I bought had a problem unfolding one of the mirrors, and even when unfolded it would go limp. I noticed that on delivery day, the answer "new firmware is coming", after 2 ota updates which fixed nothing I demanded a new mirror. Service was happy to do it, but the new mirror developed the same problem a week or two later. 3 mirrors and 4 months later finally got a mirror which worked. Turned there was a out the new mirror assembly which went into production in Dec 2016, and in agile development tradition it was wasn't exhaustively tested - let the customers find the problem. Turned out that it wasn't fixable via firmware as Elon would like, so finally the techs got a bulletin to replace it with a mirror produced after 4/2017 (my car was 12/2016) which finally fixed the problem.
Things like music not playing, browser not working, weird sounds instead of blinker sound, the service even touch that because they know it's just a software issue, so you'll get a "reboot it and see it it fixes it" or "known issue, wait for next update". If you insist, they will wipe all your settings and perform a factory reset, which may make it work for a day or two. Having owned Teslas over the last 6 years, I got to know some of the techs, they are an awesome bunch, but they can only do what corporate Tesla will let them. Since the Model 3 more than doubled the number of Teslas on the roads, service centers are so swamped now that appointments are over a month away in a lot of places, and in MA apparently even when you get an appointment, cars have been reported sitting in a queue for over 2 weeks! If your car needs parts, the wait can be many weeks if not months. Given that, making an appointment for stuff you know they can't fix will just leave you without a car for possibly over 2 weeks - pointless.
Oh, as for Model 3 experience on Model S, UI squished into portrait orientation (Model 3 is landscape) and the media player is forced on the screen at every occasion - when you get in the car (even if you hid it before you left the car), almost every time you go to any menu, like to turn on headlights or seat heaters or heated steering wheel, or change suspension level to clear a snow buildup on the road (and yes, it can be dangerous to have to navigate through so many menus with tiny buttons on a not very responsive touch screen while driving). Why the media player forcing is annoying, because there already is a media player display on the instrument cluster and it can be operated from the steering wheel (only on Model S or X), so the one on the main screen is only needed when doing some advanced controlling. The "unified" version which unifies the Model 3 and Model S/X experience sucks big time, most S/X owners who had older versions hate it. Oh, and on older MCU (any car build pre-March-2018) the screen response time sucks too, but again, Model 3 has the new computer and new S/X do too, so not a priority for Tesla.
No other manufacturer changes things every 2 weeks. No other manufacturer ships unfinished product planning to OTA the features when ready, or even things like shipping a car without ever driving it outside of sunny California. Oops, bumpers fall off or Model 3 in heavy rain, let's fix it for new cars. Oops, turns out Model 3 freezes up in the winter - dang, we don't get that white stuff here in the valley, let's see what we can do. All the other guys do way more testing before shipping, yes they will miss some things, but not to that degree. You don't have to wake up every day thinking what broke now with the latest ota update. Once Tesla moves on to new hardware, old hardware us orphaned too. For example, they started shipping new main computer in March 2018. One of my cars has the old MCU. It's been getting slower and some features like the browser haven't worked in months! Not a priority for Tesla because new cars have a new MCU now. And they don't allow people to downgrade to last version where most things work, the update to latest is mandatory. Not to mention that they reworked the UI to suit the Model 3 and unified the software, so the Model S has to run UI for Model 3 which doesn't account for a second screen (instrument cluster) because Model 3 doesn't have an instrument cluster.
Or they won'r survive and get bought out. Once the other guys catch up with EV drivetrains, Tesla will have a hard time competing. Selling untested cars (what the heck, we never drove this thing in snow, let's just sell a hundred thousands and see what customers complain about the first winter, then we fix it for new cars) is not going to play well with most customers. I personally bought 4 Model S cars, but am totally ready for competition, with features delivered on day one as opposed some "some day in the future", things not breaking from one mandatory update to the next, some physical buttons for things like turning on headlights or changing suspension level while driving, instead of pecking ever smaller buttons (they get smaller every major release) while navigating through ever growing number of levels of menus on a touch screen. I swear, if the government didn't force Tesla to have a physical stalk, in order to turn on the blinker you'd have to navigate 4 levels of menus: "Controls->Lighting->Directional Signals->Left->ON". :-(
Nope, it's a permanent beta problem. Elon is very proud how they "improve" their cars every 2 weeks. They are using agile software development model but applied to the hardware+software product, i.e. ship minimum viable product asap, fix and add new features as you go. They've been making the Model S 7 years now, still has problems whenever they decide to upgrade hardware, and with over the air updates you always have to check what broke this time, though some things get fixed or added. They've had the only viable EV on the market, plus I consider myself an early adopter, so I am a customer, but mature product Teslas are not. I got my wife into one 2 years ago, she is not an early adopter, so for example she didn't read the release notes one morning which stated somewhere in there that in their wisdom Tesla decided to auto-unfold mirrors as soon as the car starts moving. So when my wife folded the mirrors manually, as she did many times in the past, and started backing up, crack, the mirror unfolded and broke off on a wall. Yes, they fixed it on next release, but too late for my wife's mirror - there goes $600, just another cost of driving a beta car Then there are features which Tesla sells but delivers to future cars only. One good example was the highly touted P85D which was supposed to produce 691hp. It didn't at first, but Tesla assured owners a software update is coming. Eventually they delivered a car which can produce that power, but it took 3 redesigns of the battery so only available for new cars. The original owners got an excuse "your motors can produce that power, and the car can handle it, but with your battery the most you will see is 463hp, which is about 50hp more than the non performance car you could have bought for $25K less". They offered a retrofit to 500hp for an additional $5K, but to get the advertised power it would require an upgrade to a brand new P100D, which would cost roughly $80K. They sold cars in 2014/2015 with "blind spot warning" which was supposed to come via software upgrade, turns out Elon was smoking something when he decided it can be done using nothing but parking sensors (who knew when going down the highway parking sensors don't work, eh?), so they quietly removed the feature from the website. Current cars, 4 years later have better blind spot monitoring, but that requires 8 cameras and a powerful computer (simple, reliable radar based solution is too boring for Elon), so again, they delivered but only to new cars. Anyone heard of Full Self Driving sold in 2016 through 2018? It does absolutely nothing today, and chances are it never will for those who bought the cars back then. Oh, but the car can play fart noises through the speakers on demand - a breakthrough feature on one of the recent over the air updates. Welcome to agile development for cars.
Do they claim they have multiple cameras now to support IR and 3D face based payment system? Or is it "like a cheap knock-off of Apple" which can be fooled with a smartphone photo?
Zoning laws apply just the same to one large business as to 25 small ones. Just because Amazon gets a permit to build an office building for 2,000 people, doesn't give it the right to build a warehouse. Large businesses apply for many permits, it's not "one business permit per company" as you might think. Your only argument here is that a large business like Amazon hires faster, but first, that can be also be controlled via building permits if the city wants, and second, not sure that is what cities even want to do - a planned large expansion is likely to be cheaper to the city than a trickle over 10 years, for example think electric grid capacity - plunking down a new power plant and running one set of properly sized transmission lines would likely be cheaper, rather than adding small diesel generators and adding small lines every year for 10 years. Similar on expanding public transit - cheaper per capita cost to provide reliable transit for 25,000 people than 1,000.
Amazon doesn't want to build HQ somewhere where they are going to be picketed, attacked and vilified. Even if those attacks come from a vocal minority, in the age of social outrage that is not good for business. So they'll go somewhere where they are going to be welcome, or just spread their employees across different places to diversify their locations and reduce the risk being targeted by outraged people. How does this surprise anyone? I'm neither defending or attacking anyone here, just stating this was the obvious logical outcome.
I was with you until the last paragraph about how the same amount of employees requires more public resources purely because they work for the same company. How exactly is one company with 25,000 workers put more strain on public resources than 25 companies with 1,000 employees each? Are you saying that breaking up companies (and government agencies) to limit them to say 100 employees each would save NYC a ton of money?
All those against a simple, flat tax; how is the complex, loophole ridden tax system working out for you?
Elon could save some time, not having to come up with his own future fictions. Heck, he could die and the AI would keep the vision alive!
Or, maybe it's just "don't try to scam someone who spent their life tracking scammers". Kind of like "don't try to mug a black belt", or "if you're going to steal a hat, don't steal from a police officer on duty". Really unlucky (for the criminal) choice of a mark/victim.
Maybe someone needed an email to disappear to avoid public embarrassment or legal trouble.
I don't think you know what libertarians belive. Libertarian view point would be "you invested all your money in an unproven fiat currency backed by nothing and noone and and you lost you shirt - a predictable and most likely outcome of going all-in in most lotteries". High risk, high reward investments are nothing new. While regulation has its place, it has a dark side - it actually killed off common sense in a lot of investing by telling people "trust the government, we know what we're doing". That's how Bernie Madoff or Enron got an aura of legitimacy - SEC and government audited and in perfect financial health. A libertarian would tell you if something seems too good to be true, it usually is, but of course the counterargument for Bernie and other scams like him was "but the government says it's a financially sound investment". Before SEC and such, people only trusted companies which had a long good track record - anybody new was always considered high risk. Crypto is very new in that sense.
Imagine that every video or product would get a rating from everyone on Earth. Each person gets one thumbs up or thumbs down option. How many games, books, videos or other products would get a majority positive reviews?
Then there is the vocal minority problem, where there is a minority which has very strong opinions and lots of time to voice them as loud as they can. We can see that in the USA politics today, anyone expressing any views near the center will get attacked by global minorities from the left and from the right. In the age of social outrage, the only survivable positions are extreme left or extreme right, at least you got one set of vocals on your side an only get attacked from one side.
One solution is to create multiple virtual review buckets, akin to Netflix rating system - "majority of people who tend to rate content like you liked this product". The vocal minorities will have their own buckets to voice their approvals or displeasures.
How many of those 83% refuse to use any app which provides them such personalized ads and/or collects their data in exchange for a "free" app? People say a lot of things on the surveys, but do otherwise in life. I seriously doubt that 83% of people purchase apps when given the "free" option with targeted advertisements.
I'd love to agree with you, but I can't. At today's state of technology, first, the guy might not have fallen asleep if it wasn't for auto-pilot. Second, if the drive did fall asleep in traffic, they'd have a rude awakening in a fender bender, but with auto-pilot, they get to sleep until the traffic lets up and they never wake up after their car hits something at 70mph like Walter Huang in his Model X. At least Walter's accident didn't claim any additional lives. Had he plowed into a stationary ambulance of fire truck (which sadly, Tesla's on auto-pilot have been known to do), it could have ended up with more casualties.
So no, I will have to disagree with you 100% that dozing off on auto-pilot is better than without. Oh, in case it matters, I do have first hand experience with Tesla auto-pilot.
I'm more afraid some smart kid gets his or her life ruined by playing a stupid joke on Siri, then decides that the society fucked him or her, therefore feels justified to take it out on the society and decide to take revenge on said society (they won't be able to get a good job with the record anyways, so they put their skills to use for revenge). Of course, then all the paranoid will say how their joke was predictive of the tragedy that ensued, so the next kid that joked will just be put to death - better safe than sorry.
Vaccination manufacturers don't make data available available, or at least actuarial data that any insurance company would trust. Insurance companies will insure almost anything - a jewelry store in Vancouver, BC, pays insurance against more than some number of centimeters of snow falling in January, and if that happens, the insurance company refunds all their customers purchases from December (actually happened once). However, after our first-born had a major reaction as a child to a vaccination and needed an inhaler for a couple of years (luckily it cleared up, or so we think) for our second child I asked what the odds of such reaction. The doc was quick to tell me "one in a million or less". I asked whether the pharma company or any insurance company will insure me with those odds - I'd give them 2:1 on their money, $100 for $50M payoff, heck, I'd settle for lifetime healthcare paid by the pharma in case my kid has a reaction (lifetime value likely much less than $50M). Guess what, no takers. So I call bullshit on the number, and sorry, will not be using product pushed by doctors which will not provide me with real risk data. If the data was real, the pharma could make tons of money insuring against such reactions, and parents would be comforted that they are covered in case their kid ends up the "one in a million".
For those ready to mod this down, care to provide a source where parents can insure against vaccination side effects at the claimed 1:1,000,000 ratio of premium to claim benefit?