But let me ask you a question: why DO YOU CARE that the "entrenched, fossilized launch services" exist? Does it affect you in any way that the military or communication companies save a bit on money on a launch? Also, Tesla isn't even the biggest producer of EVs, and isn't producing an affordable EV. But other companies are. So why aren't you interested in them? It is like suddenly the Musk fanboys became space accountants and interested in EVs. But not really EVs: just Tesla's, the most unaffordable EV created.
BS. Shorts don't care about the "environmental movement". You guys are nuts: Tesla isn't "green". They are producing $60,000+ EVs! Are you out of your mind? There are other manufacturers who are actually producing affordable EVs. Why not invest in them? It is like you guys are brainwashed. The only thing shorts care about is making money. Tesla is priced way too high. It isn't personal. He isn't attacking your god.
I never understood why people are so entranced by Musk. Do we not remember how scummy PayPal was when he was there? Now he is producing electric vehicles for the 1% and shooting military and communication satellites to LEO and he is a hero. I don't get it. He isn't an engineer, just a guy who got rich during the dotcom bubble, just like Mark Cuban. He isn't even producing affordable EVs or solar panels. Other companies are doing that. So he is hardly "saving the planet" by producing $60,000 cars.
How is this "change"? How is this even "AI"? There have been game playing bots for decades. I never understand why people think this is somehow remarkable. Computers are very good at games with strict rules.
Why would there only be a single corporation that offered these bundles? Many corporations could and compete on selection and price. Only Amazon seems to have the vision to do that though. That is why they bought whole foods for example.
I must have missed where Amazon is the only music streaming company on the planet. I would have thought $1 trillion Apple would be a music streamer. I guess not.
Sure. But that is a different answer. You can also say "stop buying books" or "stop buying anything" because Amazon sells everything. My point is what is the difference if you were going to stream music (I dont), to pay Apple or Spotify? I would rather pay Amazon because they are cheaper.
As opposed to what? Giving your money to other music streaming mega-corporations like Spotify or Apple? Amazon has built the infrastructure to stream content. I would expect them to use it. Amazon music streaming is cheaper than the other monthly alternatives. Maybe this will force the others to lower their prices.
California forest fires are mostly caused by idiots going into forested areas and setting fires (arson) or other idiots moving further out into what used to be wilderness and inadvertently setting them. Management only helps with the spread of the fires.
No, it really IS that simple. Local environmental destruction is causing forest fires and flooding. But you can't write a paper about that, and no one is going to address it, so it is ignored. What do you think happens to water if you have no buffer lands to keep it contained?
Rising sea levels is a fact, but it isn't causing massive flooding. That doesn't make any sense. The seas are not "rising" 30 meters above flood barriers because of climate change. The flooding is caused by runoff from hardscapes and no where for the water to go. It is ridiculous to think that rising sea levels measured in millimeters can cause massive flooding. But if you get rid of all the swampland and marshes where do you think the water is going to go???
That is total BS. If you look at where forest fires start it is in areas populated by humans. There isn't an increase in forest fires in non human populated areas. More humans = more fires.
The increase of forest fires is due to humans moving into forested areas and starting fires (inadvertently or on purpose). Yes, it really is THAT simple. If you start building in forested areas and bring more humans into forested areas then the number of forest fires will increase. This is another example how LOCAL environmental destruction has a huge impact. The same goes with flooding: the reason flooding seems to be getting worse is due to the destruction of marshlands and buffer areas and building hardscape surfaces on coastal areas. It has nothing to do with "rising sea levels" or anything else. You can't destroy the local environment and expect things to remain the same.
Neither would America Google. They sell the data to anyone who asks. I don't get why people are so upset about it. What do you think they do with all that data?
Why? It seems logical to me. Everyone is walking around with a tracking devices that sends their current location to mega corporations. Why wouldn't the FBI ask for that information?
Slashdot Mirror
But let me ask you a question: why DO YOU CARE that the "entrenched, fossilized launch services" exist? Does it affect you in any way that the military or communication companies save a bit on money on a launch? Also, Tesla isn't even the biggest producer of EVs, and isn't producing an affordable EV. But other companies are. So why aren't you interested in them? It is like suddenly the Musk fanboys became space accountants and interested in EVs. But not really EVs: just Tesla's, the most unaffordable EV created.
The shorts are the only ones keeping this scam to only a $300 stock and not a $600 stock. Tesla isn't solving the "world's pressing problems" either.
Exactly. rich guys driving around in $60,000 EVs is NOT environmental movement.
BS. Shorts don't care about the "environmental movement". You guys are nuts: Tesla isn't "green". They are producing $60,000+ EVs! Are you out of your mind? There are other manufacturers who are actually producing affordable EVs. Why not invest in them? It is like you guys are brainwashed. The only thing shorts care about is making money. Tesla is priced way too high. It isn't personal. He isn't attacking your god.
I never understood why people are so entranced by Musk. Do we not remember how scummy PayPal was when he was there? Now he is producing electric vehicles for the 1% and shooting military and communication satellites to LEO and he is a hero. I don't get it. He isn't an engineer, just a guy who got rich during the dotcom bubble, just like Mark Cuban. He isn't even producing affordable EVs or solar panels. Other companies are doing that. So he is hardly "saving the planet" by producing $60,000 cars.
I've never understood why people think graphics cards "wear out" due to use.
How is this "change"? How is this even "AI"? There have been game playing bots for decades. I never understand why people think this is somehow remarkable. Computers are very good at games with strict rules.
Why would there only be a single corporation that offered these bundles? Many corporations could and compete on selection and price. Only Amazon seems to have the vision to do that though. That is why they bought whole foods for example.
I must have missed where Amazon is the only music streaming company on the planet. I would have thought $1 trillion Apple would be a music streamer. I guess not.
Sure. But that is a different answer. You can also say "stop buying books" or "stop buying anything" because Amazon sells everything. My point is what is the difference if you were going to stream music (I dont), to pay Apple or Spotify? I would rather pay Amazon because they are cheaper.
As opposed to what? Giving your money to other music streaming mega-corporations like Spotify or Apple? Amazon has built the infrastructure to stream content. I would expect them to use it. Amazon music streaming is cheaper than the other monthly alternatives. Maybe this will force the others to lower their prices.
That isn't true. 90% of all forest fires are by humans. You can look it up yourself.
Yes. Humans are now "all over the place".
The major difference is that it costs $300 instead of $999. That gets people upset.
California forest fires are mostly caused by idiots going into forested areas and setting fires (arson) or other idiots moving further out into what used to be wilderness and inadvertently setting them. Management only helps with the spread of the fires.
No, it really IS that simple. Local environmental destruction is causing forest fires and flooding. But you can't write a paper about that, and no one is going to address it, so it is ignored. What do you think happens to water if you have no buffer lands to keep it contained?
Rising sea levels is a fact, but it isn't causing massive flooding. That doesn't make any sense. The seas are not "rising" 30 meters above flood barriers because of climate change. The flooding is caused by runoff from hardscapes and no where for the water to go. It is ridiculous to think that rising sea levels measured in millimeters can cause massive flooding. But if you get rid of all the swampland and marshes where do you think the water is going to go???
That is total BS. If you look at where forest fires start it is in areas populated by humans. There isn't an increase in forest fires in non human populated areas. More humans = more fires.
The increase of forest fires is due to humans moving into forested areas and starting fires (inadvertently or on purpose). Yes, it really is THAT simple. If you start building in forested areas and bring more humans into forested areas then the number of forest fires will increase. This is another example how LOCAL environmental destruction has a huge impact. The same goes with flooding: the reason flooding seems to be getting worse is due to the destruction of marshlands and buffer areas and building hardscape surfaces on coastal areas. It has nothing to do with "rising sea levels" or anything else. You can't destroy the local environment and expect things to remain the same.
...the solution is more money to study the effects of AI. It beats having to get a real job I guess.
Neither would America Google. They sell the data to anyone who asks. I don't get why people are so upset about it. What do you think they do with all that data?
Why? It seems logical to me. Everyone is walking around with a tracking devices that sends their current location to mega corporations. Why wouldn't the FBI ask for that information?
I know. I am such a SHORT. I guess the SEC must be a short too. That can be the only explanation!
What? No stories about Tesla getting subpoenaed and officially investigated by the SEC? Where is WindBourne and Rei with the latest Tesla news?
It definitely does, but rich people like to play with rockets instead of solving real problems.