zlacker

>>g-mork+(OP)
From the Big Short (movie)

Jared Vennett (narration): "In the years that followed, hundreds of bankers and rating agency's executives went to jail. The SEC was completely overhauled, and Congress had no choice but to break up the big banks and regulate the mortgage and derivatives industries."

"Just kidding. Banks took the money the American people gave them, and they used it to pay themselves huge bonuses, and lobby the Congress to kill big reform. And then they blamed immigrants and poor people, and this time even teachers."

>>eduard+tq
I feel like without adding some commentary with these quotes this comment lacks enough info to see how it relates to the linked article.

>>Fogest+Ku
Legitimately, did you not immediately conclude it was for financial shenanigans? What did you think? I'm not trying to be shitty, but what else could there be?

>>Loughl+lx
Well if they plan to put a crap ton of new satellites in the air specifically for running xAI on it, I think there is a decent chance that it isn't purely financial shenanigans. Obviously the finances are probably a big part of such a decision, but companies also do these kinds of things all the time. I don't see why this is considered "shenanigans" or how the quote would relate to what is happening.

>>Fogest+EM
see https://taranis.ie/datacenters-in-space-are-a-terrible-horri...

>>bdangu+vN
I'm gonna be honest, I really don't see how these opinion pieces are relevant. There are a lot of smart people working at these companies and I'm sure they have done a lot of research and work into determining that this is a viable thing to try. I am going to put more faith into that than somebodies opinion online.

It seems like a lot of people are very biased on this topic and want to see this fail because of who the company is. This author of this piece you linked appears to be both anti-AI and anti-Elon for example.

We also are unaware if there is some bigger strategy at play here and a bigger vision then what is currently being shared. I like to see companies try to innovate and take risks. I would like to try and be optimistic about things.

>>Fogest+RO
> I'm gonna be honest, I really don't see how these opinion pieces are relevant. There are a lot of smart people working at these companies and I'm sure they have done a lot of research and work into determining that this is a viable thing to try.

Like "robo"taxi, right? A lot of smart people have been working on this at same company for decade+

> I am going to put more faith into that than somebodies opinion online.

There are opinions and then there are things you can review that are factual and based on laws.

>>bdangu+IQ
> Like "robo"taxi, right? A lot of smart people have been working on this at same company for decade+

I'm a bit confused what you're trying to imply here. They have launched RoboTaxi's and recently have been removing the human safety monitors in them. Are you trying to imply this didn't take a lot of work from a lot of intelligent people?

>>Fogest+cR
No, I am trying to not imply but say that it doesn't work which is why the company is now pivoting away to "humanoid robots" and is slowly starting to stop making cars.

>>bdangu+ET
You're talking about two different things. Robotaxi's are different from the self-driving style features of a personal Tesla vehicle. You specifically said RoboTaxi but now are referring to a pivot related to their Tesla vehicles.

>>Fogest+GY
I am just talking about (non-existent and will never materialize or exist) robotaxi. not about “full” “self driving” features of regular teslas (I own one)

>>bdangu+ya1
They exist and are operational. I am confused by what you are talking about. How can you say "non-existent" and "never materialize" when they are quite literally in operation as a service right now.