pmorici

They have a couple people to manage test drives and they will ask if you have any questions and make sure your aware of the current interest rate or other sales incentives but they aren’t sales people in the sense that you would typically be used to.

If receiving stock based compensation is grounds for not being independent then wouldn't most companies have an independence issue with their boards? It just seems like a crazy claim on it's face.

The Tesla knows when it's cameras and blinded by sun and act accordingly or tells the human to take over.

Half the so called dock workers don’t actually work. They sit at home and collect, “container royalties”.

https://nypost.com/2024/10/04/business/how-did-50k-dockworke...

I wouldn’t say they have caught up. The self driving features alone are in a league of their own. Supercharger network is also unmatched for reach and reliability.

Making purchase decisions based on a company executive’s personal political opinions is dumb. It’s a self own to buy an inferior product for political reasons.

Does anyone have any tips for debugging EFI_STUB kernels when they fail to boot? I've run into BIOS before that I can't get EFI_STUB to work on but grub works fine and I'm not sure why or even how to go about getting any debug info since the bios/firmware is a block box. Is the only option to get in touch for the motherboard vendor and how they care to look into it? It's rare but happens.

Is this similar to the Extropic approach but a different mechanism?

The notion that rich people aren’t concerned with long term outcomes seems like one of those things that isn’t true. In fact the reverse is often said the poor have, “nothing to lose”. Many wealthy people have gotten where they are by focusing on the longer term. The promise of your comment just doesn’t seem true.

Nicely written. I’m a bit confused about the part that seems to conflate individualism with fame or notoriety.

TPM and checking your physical security boundary hasn't been breached.

I would guess the highest leverage thing you could do is open source some of your work on Github as samples to show potential employers. If you are just getting by your top priority should probably be to find better employment ASAP. Making money off little utilities like this is almost certainly going to be tough going.

Have you gotten any feedback from people on these projects? If you get feedback from people that might give you a hit as to whether they might be willing to pay money for such things.

When you put a lot of time into something and are understandably pleased with the result it can be hard to look at it objectively and you are likely to overvalue your work relative to someone who isn't invested in it. Maybe just look at them as a stepping stone learning experiences to bigger and better things.

In truly rural or remote areas relative to any available alternative it is as close to a miracle product as one could imagine. If you haven’t had to use other satellite Internet services like BGAN, Iridium, viasat, etc… it’s hard to explain what a revolution Starlink is in every aspect.

It seems they did repeatedly say they could do it but fcc just ignored them.

Because the obligation was to meet the requirements in 2025 and FCC basically just subjectivity said 2 years before the deadline they don’t think they will.

The reasoning that is there is all subjective.

That's not how it works, they just need to offer a service tier that provides a service with the required minimums by a particular date, it is obviously possible unless you are blinded by revenge politics.

Seeing as they offer service basically everywhere in the US right now and the only quibble is that the average speed is only 75 Mbps instead of 100 Mbps I'd say they are well ahead of 40%.

Today your speed tier is based on what you pay. If you pay for the priority or business tier service you absolutely get over 100Mbps consistently, a lot more. If you pay for the basic service tier then yeah you might only get 3-4x DSL speeds which is still phenomenal for the purpose being discussed here.

It doesn't. This was originally legislated as a hand out to legacy telecom companies that lobbied for it. Seeing as it exists though I would rather the money be spent with the best option instead of it being used as a political retribution fund.

Yes, but that is a function of satellite density or so the argument seems to suggest. SpaceX is launching rockets multiple times a week and has put more satellites into orbit that any entity in the history of human kind by an order of magnitude or more. Betting they won't be able to meet these speed goals is not a rational conclusion.

"Musk still managed to slide in and loot a few billion dollars before they realized that Starlink can't meet their definition of "broadband.""

That's false. SpaceX doesn't appear to have actually received any money from the FCC for this program yet, and now won't assuming this decision holds.

Because if you use the service you know it is capable of that and more today. SpaceX is also capable of providing differentiated service speeds so looking at what an average user is getting today is not indicative of what could be provided if they were under some minimum speed obligation. The FCC's rational is clearly them twisting themselves into knots to try and get to the decision they want to satisfy their preferred politics.

When a government agency that is supposed to be impartial and fact based is clearly making decisions like this on a political basis that undermines it in the long term due to public mistrust.

If the terms of the deal were that they didn't need to hit the performance benchmarks until 2025 and they have demonstrated that the technology was capable of those speeds it makes little sense to do this now except as a thinly vailed political punishment.

He doesn't, he has publicly said the company didn't lobby for this program. If it exists though would you rather have the most efficient player be award the contract or some legacy telco who lobbied for the largesse and is woefully slow and inefficient?

Starlink service is so obviously phenomenal to anyone who's used it, this isn't going to change that or effect SpaceX's success one bit. The FCC's actions here are just embarrassing their agency by exposing their petty ineptitude and harming whomever this program was supposed to help.

Looks like a bunch of people who don’t have any information speculating about something which they have no prior experience with (new body construction style) and reporter’s reporting it as some how news worthy to get a sensational article.

Every Tesla made to date has been safer than the last and they are all rated as safer than any other car you can buy. There is no reason to believe they would abandon that world class safety goal with this product. I would be surprised if at minimum this didn’t turn out to be the highest rated vehicle in its class for safety when the official crash tests are published.

I don’t think that is true. It has a front crumple zone there are some photos and videos of the crash tested vehicle showing that and discussing it.

I wonder if they could wire the jamming system into the fire alarm. Pulling the alarm turns off the jamming.

If you get a Tesla it is solved now. The charging is seamless and reliable pretty much everywhere except the very most out of the way places. All the rest though that can't yet use Tesla's charging network I would agree total trash if you want to do a long trip and need charging. This should change in ~2 years when manufactures start making more EVs that are compatible with NACS (aka Tesla's super charger network)