Elon Musk: Officially a fraud and piece of shit. Official or unofficial war criminal?

[Chopper 15889]

18 minutes ago, texasdago said:

The whole video is very nice... Mehdi had receipts.  

and taibbi is a bumbling moronic tool who can't even form a coherent sentence. I'm so old I remember when an elmo jock-sniffer appeared in this thread to claim taibbi is a good journalist.

[Firemans4Horn 16852]

2 hours ago, NoName said:

MSNBC Host Makes Matt Taibbi Squirm Over His ‘Twitter Files’ Errors

https://www.thedailybeast.com/msnbc-host-mehdi-hasan-makes-matt-taibbi-squirm-over-his-twitter-files-errors

this is one of the sickest burns ever

Taibbi: "“You’ve said a lot of things, um, I stand by my story" (for a couple of hours before correcting 3 different tweets called out in the interview)

 

-

afterwards he then posted an article titled "Eat me, MSNBC" lol https://www.racket.news/p/msnbc-sucks which basically is shitting on MSNBC as a company but doesn't really say anything about the interview other than

somehow Matt Tabibbi came out of it looking worse than he did going into it, which was hard to believe.

-

 

 

Mehdi is so much better at this than his American peers. 

[HenryJames 64901]

 

[G650 13063]

 

[Chopper 15889]

Is the 3rd time a charm?

 

https://spoutible.com/thread/4370168

Tesla cuts prices on all models, 3rd cut this year

Tesla cut prices on its entire U.S. electric vehicle model lineup for the third time this year in an apparent effort to lure more buyers amid rising interest rates
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/tesla-cuts-prices-models-time-year-98428538

By The Associated Press
April 7, 2023, 7:32 AM

Quote

 

DETROIT -- Tesla cut prices on its entire U.S. electric vehicle model lineup for the third time this year in an apparent effort to lure more buyers amid rising interest rates.

The cuts that appeared Friday on Tesla's website ranged from $5,000 per vehicle for Tesla's slower-selling more expensive models, the S large sedan and the X big SUV.

The company lopped $2,000 off the price of the Y small SUV, its most popular model, and added a lower-cost dual-motor version priced at $49,990. The 3 small sedan saw a $1,000 price cut.

The moves come as Tesla's first-quarter sales grew 36% but fell short of analysts' expectations. The company said Sunday that it delivered a quarterly record of 422,875 vehicles worldwide from January to March, up from just over 310,000 a year ago. But the increase fell short of analyst estimates of 432,000 for the quarter, according to FactSet.

A message was left Friday seeking comment from the Austin, Texas-based Tesla on why the prices were cut.

Guidehouse Research e-Mobility Analyst Sam Abuelsamid said the company needs to sell more vehicles to keep its factories running at full capacity. “Overhead of underutilized plant eats up (profit) margin extremely quickly,” he said.

Tesla has added a huge plant near Austin to its U.S. factory footprint, in addition to its original plant in Fremont, California. The company also has built new plants in Shanghai and near Berlin.

 

 

[Captain Ron 12691]

5 hours ago, NoName said:

MSNBC Host Makes Matt Taibbi Squirm Over His ‘Twitter Files’ Errors

https://www.thedailybeast.com/msnbc-host-mehdi-hasan-makes-matt-taibbi-squirm-over-his-twitter-files-errors

this is one of the sickest burns ever

Taibbi: "“You’ve said a lot of things, um, I stand by my story" (for a couple of hours before correcting 3 different tweets called out in the interview)

 

-

afterwards he then posted an article titled "Eat me, MSNBC" lol https://www.racket.news/p/msnbc-sucks which basically is shitting on MSNBC as a company but doesn't really say anything about the interview other than

somehow Matt Tabibbi came out of it looking worse than he did going into it, which was hard to believe.

-

 

1:49 - is that guy ready to cry? Or does he just talk like a little bitch?

[atomheartbevo 88750]

5 hours ago, NoName said:

somehow Matt Tabibbi came out of it looking worse than he did going into it, which was hard to believe.

3 hours ago, Chopper said:

and taibbi is a bumbling moronic tool who can't even form a coherent sentence. I'm so old I remember when an elmo jock-sniffer appeared in this thread to claim taibbi is a good journalist.

17 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

1:49 - is that guy ready to cry? 

That was the voice of a man who was out over his skies and not sure just how bad it was going to hurt when he collided with the earth.

[Chopper 15889]

26 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

1:49 - is that guy ready to cry? Or does he just talk like a little bitch?

OMG. All of the above. To be clear I have no personal bias against former heroin addicts who've lived in Moscow. Only some of 'em.

It takes a special kind of "journalist" to publish the wrong name of the main organization whose group you're citing as evidence for some grand, government-led conspiracy, and have it turn out to be one that's not even a governmental organization, let alone one that didn't do the things you've accused it of.

Edited April 7, 2023 by Chopper

[NoName 16196]

red flag the size of Elon's ego here...

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/04/twitter-lawyer-quits-as-musks-legal-woes-expand-report-says/
 

Quote

 

After the Federal Trade Commission launched a probe into Twitter over privacy concerns, Twitter’s negotiations with the FTC do not seem to be going very well. Last week, it was revealed that Twitter CEO Elon Musk’s request last year for a meeting with FTC Chair Lina Khan was rebuffed. Now, a senior Twitter lawyer, Christian Dowell—who was closely involved in those FTC talks—has resigned, several people familiar with the matter told The New York Times.

Dowell joined Twitter in 2020 and rose in the ranks after several of Twitter’s top lawyers exited or were fired once Musk took over the platform in the fall of 2022, Bloomberg reported. Most recently, Dowell—who has not yet confirmed his resignation—oversaw Twitter’s product legal counsel. In that role, he was “intimately involved” in the FTC negotiations, sources told the Times, including coordinating Twitter’s responses to FTC inquiries.

 

also while i saw the elon reply to the t(w)itter daily news account, i missed their response:

 

[Chopper 15889]

Mike Masnick of TechDirt weighs in on matt the idiot dunce taibbi

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/04/07/mehdi-hasan-dismantles-the-entire-foundation-of-the-twitter-files-as-matt-taibbi-stumbles-to-defend-it/

 Mehdi Hasan Dismantles The Entire Foundation Of The Twitter Files As Matt Taibbi Stumbles To Defend It

from the i'd-like-to-report-a-murder dept
Fri, Apr 7th 2023 09:22am - Mike Masnick

So here’s the deal. If you think the Twitter Files are still something legit or telling or powerful, watch this 30 minute interview that Mehdi Hasan did with Matt Taibbi (at Taibbi’s own demand): (see link above)

Hasan came prepared with facts. Lots of them. Many of which debunked the core foundation on which Taibbi and his many fans have built the narrative regarding the Twitter Files.

Quote

 

We’ve debunked many of Matt’s errors over the past few months, and a few of the errors we’ve called out (though not nearly all, as there are so, so many) show up in Hasan’s interview, while Taibbi shrugs, sighs, and makes it clear he’s totally out of his depth when confronted with facts.

Since the interview, Taibbi has been scrambling to claim that the errors Hasan called out are small side issues, but they’re not. They’re literally the core pieces on which he’s built the nonsense framing that Stanford, the University of Washington, some non-profits, the government, and social media have formed an “industrial censorship complex” to stifle the speech of Americans.

As we keep showing, Matt makes very sloppy errors at every turn, doesn’t understand the stuff he has found, and is confused about some fairly basic concepts.

The errors that Hasan highlights matter a lot. A key one is Taibbi’s claim that the Election Integrity Partnership flagged 22 million tweets for Twitter to take down in partnership with the government. This is flat out wrong. The EIP, which was focused on studying election interference, flagged less than 3,000 tweets for Twitter to review (2,890 to be exact).

And they were quite clear in their report on how all this worked. EIP was an academic project to track election interference information and how it flowed across social media. The 22 million figure shows up in the report, but it was just a count of how many tweets they tracked in trying to follow how this information spread, not seeking to remove it. And the vast majority of those tweets weren’t even related to the ones they did explicitly create tickets on.

    In total, our incident-related tweet data included 5,888,771 tweets and retweets from ticket status IDs directly, 1,094,115 tweets and retweets collected first from ticket URLs, and 14,914,478 from keyword searches, for a total of 21,897,364 tweets.

Tracking how information spreads is… um… not a problem now is it? Is Taibbi really claiming that academics shouldn’t track the flow of information?

Either way, Taibbi overstated the number of tweets that EIP reported by 21,894,474 tweets. In percentage terms, the actual number of reported tweets was 0.013% of the number Taibbi claimed.

Okay, you say, but STILL, if the government is flagging even 2,890 tweets, that’s still a problem! And it would be if it was the government flagging those tweets. But it’s not. As the report details, basically all of the tickets in the system were created by non-government entities, mainly from the EIP members themselves (Stanford, University of Washington, Graphika, and Digital Forensics Lab).

This is where the second big error that Taibbi makes knocks down a key pillar of his argument. Hasan notes that Taibbi falsely turned the non-profit Center for Internet Security (CIS) into the government agency the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). Taibbi did this by assuming that when someone at Twitter noted information came from CIS, they must have meant CISA, and therefore he appended the A in brackets as if he was correcting a typo:

Taibbi admits that this was a mistake and has now tweeted a correction (though this point was identified weeks ago, and he claims he only just learned about it). I’ve seen Taibbi and his defenders claim that this is no big deal, that he just “messed up an acronym.” But, uh, no. Having CISA report tweets to Twitter was a key linchpin in the argument that the government was sending tweets for Twitter to remove. But it wasn’t the government, it was an independent non-profit.

The thing is, this mistake also suggests that Taibbi never even bothered to read the EIP report on all of this, which lays out extremely clearly where the flagged tweets came from, noting that CIS (which was not an actual part of the EIP) sent in 16% of the total flagged tweets. It even pretty clearly describes what those tweets were:

    Compared to the dataset as a whole, the CIS tickets were (1) more likely to raise reports about fake official election accounts (CIS raised half of the tickets on this topic), (2) more likely to create tickets about Washington, Connecticut, and Ohio, and (3) more likely to raise reports that were about how to vote and the ballot counting process—CIS raised 42% of the tickets that claimed there were issues about ballots being rejected. CIS also raised four of our nine tickets about phishing. The attacks CIS reported used a combination of mass texts, emails, and spoofed websites to try to obtain personal information about voters, including addresses and Social Security numbers. Three of the four impersonated election official accounts, including one fake Kentucky election website that promoted a narrative that votes had been lost by asking voters to share personal information and anecdotes about why their vote was not counted. Another ticket CIS reported included a phishing email impersonating the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) that was sent to Arizona voters with a link to a spoofed Arizona voting website. There, it asked voters for personal information including their name, birthdate, address, Social Security number, and driver’s license number.

In other words, CIS was raising pretty legitimate issues: people impersonating election officials, and phishing pages. This wasn’t about “misinformation.” These were seriously problematic tweets.

There is one part that perhaps deserves some more scrutiny regarding government organizations, as the report does say that a tiny percentage of reports came from the GEC, which is a part of the State Department, but the report suggests that this was probably less than 1% of the flags. 79% of the flags came from the four organizations in the partnership (not government). Another 16% came from CIS (contrary to Taibbi’s original claim, not government). That leaves 5%, which came from six different organizations, mostly non-profits. Though it does list the GEC as one of the six organizations. But the GEC is literally focused entirely on countering (not deleting) foreign state propaganda aimed at destabilizing the US. So, it’s not surprising that they might call out a few tweets to the EIP researchers.

Okay, okay, you say, but even so this is still problematic. It was still, as a Taibbi retweet suggests, these organizations who are somehow close to the government trying to silence narratives. And, again, that would be bad if true. But, that’s not what the information actually shows. First off, we already discussed how some of what they targeted was just out and out fraud.

But, more importantly, regarding the small number of tweets that EIP did report to Twitter… it never suggested what Twitter should do about them, and Twitter left the vast majority of them up. The entire purpose of the EIP program, as laid out in everything that the EIP team has made clear from before, during, and after the election, was just to be another set of eyes looking out for emerging trends and documenting how information flows. In the rare cases (again less than 1%) where things looked especially problematic (phishing attempts, impersonation) they might alert the company, but made no effort to tell Twitter how to handle them. And, as the report itself makes clear, Twitter left up the vast majority of them:

    We find, overall, that platforms took action on 35% of URLs that we reported to them. 21% of URLs were labeled, 13% were removed, and 1% were soft blocked. No action was taken on 65%. TikTok had the highest action rate: actioning (in their case, their only action was removing) 64% of URLs that the EIP reported to their team.)

They don’t break it out by platform, but across all platforms no action was taken on 65% of the reported content. And considering that TikTok seemed quite aggressive in removing 64% of flagged content, that means that all of the other platforms, including Twitter, took action on way less than 35% of the flagged content. And then, even within the “took action” category, the main action taken was labeling.

In other words, the top two main results of EIP flagging this content were:

    Nothing
    Adding more speech

The report also notes that the category of content that was most likely to get removed was the out and out fraud stuff: “phishing content and fake official accounts.” And given that TikTok appears to have accounted for a huge percentage of the “removals” this means that Twitter removed significantly less than 13% of the tweets that EIP flagged for them. So not only is it not 22 million tweets, it’s that EIP flagged less than 3,000 tweets, and Twitter ignored most of them and removed probably less than 10% of them.

When looked at in this context, basically the entire narrative that Taibbi is pushing melts away.

The EIP is not part of the “industrial censorship complex.” It’s a mostly academic group that was tracking how information flows across social media, which is a legitimate area of study. During the election they did exactly that. In the tiny percentage of cases where they saw stuff they thought was pretty worrisome, they’d simply alert the platforms with no push for the platforms to take any action, and (indeed) in most cases the platforms took no action whatsoever. In a few cases, they added more speech.

In a tiny, tiny percentage of the already tiny percentage, when the situation was most extreme (phishing, fake official accounts) then the platforms (entirely on their own) decided to pull down that content. For good reason.

That’s not “censorship.” There’s no “complex.” Taibbi’s entire narrative turns to dust.

There’s a lot more that Taibbi gets wrong in all of this, but the points that Hasan got him to admit he was wrong about are literally core pieces in the underlying foundation of his entire argument.

At one point in the interview, Hasan also does a nice job pointing out that the posts that the Biden campaign (note: not the government) flagged to Twitter were of Hunter Biden’s dick pics, not anything political (we’ve discussed this point before) and Taibbi stammers some more and claims that “the ordinary person can’t just call up Twitter and have something taken off Twitter. If you put something nasty about me on Twitter, I can’t just call up Twitter…”

Except… that’s wrong. In multiple ways. First off, it’s not just “something nasty.” It’s literally non-consensual nude photos. Second, actually, given Taibbi’s close relationship with Twitter these days, uh, yeah, he almost certainly could just call them up. But, most importantly, the claim about “the ordinary” person not being able to have non-consensual nude images taken off the site? That’s wrong.

You can. There’s a form for it right here. And I’ll admit that I’m not sure how well staffed Twitter’s trust & safety team is to handle those reports today, but it definitely used to have a team of people who would review those reports and take down non-consensual nude photos, just as they did with the Hunter Biden images.

As Hasan notes, Taibbi left out this crucial context to make his claims seem way more damning than they were. Taibbi’s response is… bizarre. Hasan asks him if he knew that the URLs were nudes of Hunter Biden and Taibbi admits that “of course” he did, but when Hasan asks him why he didn’t tell people that, Taibbi says “because I didn’t need to!”

Except, yeah, you kinda do. It’s vital context. Without it, the original Twitter Files thread implied that the Biden campaign (again, not the government) was trying to suppress political content or embarrassing content that would harm the campaign. The context that it’s Hunter’s dick pics is totally relevant and essential to understanding the story.

And this is exactly what the rest of Hasan’s interview (and what I’ve described above) lays out in great detail: Taibbi isn’t just sloppy with facts, which is problematic enough. He leaves out the very important context that highlights how the big conspiracy he’s reporting is… not big, not a conspiracy, and not even remotely problematic.

He presents it as a massive censorship operation, targeting 22 million tweets, with takedown demands from government players, seeking to silence the American public. When you look through the details, correcting Taibbi’s many errors, and putting it in context, you see that it was an academic operation to study information flows, who sent the more blatant issues they came across to Twitter with no suggestion that they do anything about them, and the vast majority of which Twitter ignored. In some minority of cases, Twitter applied its own speech to add more context to some of the tweets, and in a very small number of cases, where it found phishing attempts or people impersonating election officials (clear terms of service violations, and potentially actual crimes), it removed them.

There remains no there there. It’s less than a Potemkin village. There isn’t even a façade. This is the Emperor’s New Clothes for a modern era. Taibbi is pointing to a naked emperor and insisting that he’s clothed in all sorts of royal finery, whereas anyone who actually looks at the emperor sees he’s naked.

 

 

[Chopper 15889]

13 minutes ago, NoName said:

red flag the size of Elon's ego here...

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/04/twitter-lawyer-quits-as-musks-legal-woes-expand-report-says/
 

also while i saw the elon reply to the t(w)itter daily news account, i missed their response:

 

Is the "CEO" of twitter asking some titter rando for info about what the DE government has officially requested from Twitter a good thing?

[Pig Bellmont 8637]

Ummm have we covered this?

Quote

Tesla Inc assures its millions of electric car owners that their privacy “is and will always be enormously important to us.” The cameras it builds into vehicles to assist driving, it notes on its website, are “designed from the ground up to protect your privacy.”

But between 2019 and 2022, groups of Tesla employees privately shared via an internal messaging system sometimes highly invasive videos and images recorded by customers’ car cameras, according to interviews by Reuters with nine former employees.
 

Some of the recordings caught Tesla customers in embarrassing situations. One ex-employee described a video of a man approaching a vehicle completely naked.
 

Also shared: crashes and road-rage incidents. One crash video in 2021 showed a Tesla driving at high speed in a residential area hitting a child riding a bike, according to another ex-employee. The child flew in one direction, the bike in another. The video spread around a Tesla office in San Mateo, California, via private one-on-one chats, “like wildfire,” the ex-employee said.

More at the link. This seems like a massive privacy violation. Essentially if your vehicle is on or charging, employees can watch from the car cameras - and then they share pictures and videos to laugh about 

[Post Oak 20068]

There's no way I would buy a Tesla.

[Brisketexan 103143]

24 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Is the "CEO" of twitter asking some titter rando for info about what the DE government has officially requested from Twitter a good thing?

Fellow attorneys: Imagine that you represent client X.  Client X gets an enforcement letter from the government.  Here is the following flow of actions:

1 -- you would presume/hope that correspondence is immediately routed to the legal department.  If it is not, all kinds of bad shit can follow -- blown deadlines, etc.

2 -- from there (the legal department), you would presume that protocol is to notify the CEO.  If it is routine, small-potatoes stuff (large enterprises can get enforcement notices that really are no big deal -- a penalty for failure to register two of your delivery vans, that sort of stuff), then it would be listed in some sort of summary briefing provided to the CEO on a regular basis (weekly, bi-weekly, what have you).  If it is at all material, it would go to him as a separate communication, noting "action required" or "read receipt required."  If it is a big f'n deal....you communicate it to him directly, either over the phone or in-person, usually accompanied by an email of the actual document (with words like "I am also calling you to discuss").

2a -- if you live in fuckedupland, and these things are NOT routed directly to legal....you would think/hope that they are routed directly to the CEO.

3 -- and then what happens is....your CEO responds to some rando tweet about the enforcement action, stating that this is the first time he's heard of it?  WTF?  What the hell is wrong with this guy?  Hell, let's say this IS the first he's heard of it.  Perhaps, just maybe, instead of making a public post viewable by everyone on the planet saying "man, I don't know anything about this allegation....let's totally have a public conversation about it," you CALL YOUR LEGAL COUNSEL and ask them "so...what is this?  I need you to be able to brief me on this in 30 minutes."

But nope, not Elmo.  There may not be a functioning legal department.  The protocol at Twitter for the CEO getting notice of enforcement actions ACTUALLY MAY BE "he reads about them on Twitter, if someone posts about them."

In any case, fellow attorneys....I presume you would be resigning your position/firing this client rather soon, correct?

10 minutes ago, Post Oak said:

There's no way I would buy a Tesla.

It's actually reached the point that I wouldn't fucking accept one if you gave it to me for free.

[Neonmoon 38126]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Fellow attorneys: Imagine that you represent client X.  Client X gets an enforcement letter from the government.  Here is the following flow of actions:

1 -- you would presume/hope that correspondence is immediately routed to the legal department.  If it is not, all kinds of bad shit can follow -- blown deadlines, etc.

2 -- from there (the legal department), you would presume that protocol is to notify the CEO.  If it is routine, small-potatoes stuff (large enterprises can get enforcement notices that really are no big deal -- a penalty for failure to register two of your delivery vans, that sort of stuff), then it would be listed in some sort of summary briefing provided to the CEO on a regular basis (weekly, bi-weekly, what have you).  If it is at all material, it would go to him as a separate communication, noting "action required" or "read receipt required."  If it is a big f'n deal....you communicate it to him directly, either over the phone or in-person, usually accompanied by an email of the actual document (with words like "I am also calling you to discuss").

2a -- if you live in fuckedupland, and these things are NOT routed directly to legal....you would think/hope that they are routed directly to the CEO.

3 -- and then what happens is....your CEO responds to some rando tweet about the enforcement action, stating that this is the first time he's heard of it?  WTF?  What the hell is wrong with this guy?  Hell, let's say this IS the first he's heard of it.  Perhaps, just maybe, instead of making a public post viewable by everyone on the planet saying "man, I don't know anything about this allegation....let's totally have a public conversation about it," you CALL YOUR LEGAL COUNSEL and ask them "so...what is this?  I need you to be able to brief me on this in 30 minutes."

But nope, not Elmo.  There may not be a functioning legal department.  The protocol at Twitter for the CEO getting notice of enforcement actions ACTUALLY MAY BE "he reads about them on Twitter, if someone posts about them."

In any case, fellow attorneys....I presume you would be resigning your position/firing this client rather soon, correct?

It's actually reached the point that I wouldn't fucking accept one if you gave it to me for free.

I used to work in a big corporation. Our department was nowhere close to sniffing the C-Suite, but we had a lawyer attached to us because we dealt with legal contracts in our work and needed legal advice every day. Often times we would be copied on legal stuff or we would copy legal on things. I don’t remember how many times I would see the lawyer run down the hall to yell at an idiot that typed something in an email they shouldn’t have. I can’t imagine what Twitters lawyers go through every day. 

[Brisketexan 103143]

4 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

I can’t imagine what Twitters lawyers go through every day. 

Probably 2-3 bottles of bourbon.

[atomheartbevo 88750]

46 minutes ago, Post Oak said:

There's no way I would buy a Tesla.

And that was even before all of the other EVs that mainstream carmakers are coming out in the next 18 months.

Edited April 7, 2023 by atomheartbevo

[HenryJames 64901]

 

[Ted Lange 15821]

[Captain Ron 12691]

 

[Captain Ron 12691]

 

[Bozo_Casanova 25500]

36 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

 

Welp 

 

[Ted Lange 15821]

 

 

[Captain Ron 12691]

 

[HenryJames 64901]

 

[Captain Ron 12691]

Spot on

 

 

[Chooky 13277]

Next timeline:

Badges now on sale for $12. 

Then $9.

Then $4.

Then terminating the entire badge concept. 

Then suing ex employees for giggling about the badge fiasco. 

Then business. 

[Captain Ron 12691]

Guess how I know that Elon Musk doesn’t employ system engineers?

[Brian Fantana 6589]

On 4/7/2023 at 9:41 AM, Chopper said:

and taibbi is a bumbling moronic tool who can't even form a coherent sentence. I'm so old I remember when an elmo jock-sniffer appeared in this thread to claim taibbi is a good journalist.

The sad thing is, he legitimately used to be. He wasn't perfect, but was admirable nonetheless. He has purposefully thrown all of his journalistic integrity out the window in hopes he'll get the bag from nuthanging Elon. What capitalism does to a mf'er.

[Captainant 26861]

2 hours ago, Captain Ron said:

Guess how I know that Elon Musk doesn’t employ system engineers?

I didn't know that imma started with star link

[BrickHorn 17983]

5 hours ago, Chooky said:

Next timeline:

Badges now on sale for $12. 

[Chopper 15889]

9 hours ago, Captain Ron said:

Guess how I know that Elon Musk doesn’t employ system engineers?

Also elmo, speaking to a hooker after a long night of ingesting cocaine: "Look babe my firmware wasn't up to date, it caused a malfunction in the 'erection module.' My CPU was working just fine, but the peripherals failed to initiate. I'll need to run a diagnostic and perform some system updates before we can achieve optimal functionality. We can try again next week. In the meantime if I give you a coupon for a free Arby's sandwich, will that take care of your needs for tonight?"

Edited April 8, 2023 by Chopper

[Francisco 2.0 31567]

 

 

 

[atomheartbevo 88750]

1 hour ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

Wait, people will pay for snail mail newsletters? 

[NoName 16196]

 

[Captain Ron 12691]

[Captain Ron 12691]

This whole episode reminds me of an ex-GF of mine that stopped talking to a friend of hers for a year over the flavor of a birthday cake. 

[atomheartbevo 88750]

Okay, Elon is taking 1990s angst-ridden teenage BBS SysOp to a whole other level. 

There is insecurity and then there’s Insecurity.  

Spending $44 billion to read her DMs and put your insecurity on public display is hilarious.  

[Chopper 15889]

Good news! Taibbi has escaped the clutches of a law-breaking, racist, narcissist.

Bad news! Taibbi apparently remains in the clutches of a law-breaking, racist, narcissist.

I guess he knows where to find his audience.

 

[Chopper 15889]

Apartheid Clyde is about to make a movie for OWN

[Hank Kingsley 19822]

Elon bootlickers and Trumpers are very similar. 

Musk and Trump? These. People. Are. Not. Your. Friends. 

They don't give a shit about you. 

They don't think about you. 

They will run you over. 

If you want some inspiration look to one of your friends or a family member. 

 

[Captain Ron 12691]

21 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Elon bootlickers and Trumpers are very similar. 

Musk and Trump? These. People. Are. Not. Your. Friends. 

They don't give a shit about you. 

They don't think about you. 

They will run you over. 

If you want some inspiration look to one of your friends or a family member. 

 

Well that was the last guys that sucked up to Elon and The Donald  

 

 

[Blotto 23226]

On 4/7/2023 at 3:11 PM, atomheartbevo said:

And that was even before all of the other EVs that mainstream carmakers are coming out in the next 18 months.

Yeah, but will those manufacturers allow you to pay $15K for software that doesnt even work at the level they claimed it did 4 years ago?

[cactusflinthead 26791]

 

[Captain Ron 12691]

 

[atomheartbevo 88750]

25 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

He really is an angst-ridden 1990s dial-up BBS SysOp.

[NoName 16196]

i am shocked that Elon doesn't understand basic concepts, like the concept of what Substack is and isn't.

him saying that substack links were not blocked is dumb. especially when they re-routed searches for "substack" to "newsletter" - which they are still doing right now:

[Celery Man 20535]

On 4/7/2023 at 3:17 PM, Pig Bellmont said:

Ummm have we covered this?

More at the link. This seems like a massive privacy violation. Essentially if your vehicle is on or charging, employees can watch from the car cameras - and then they share pictures and videos to laugh about 

atom also posted this and quoting his post just contained his comment of "interesting". This seems like it should be a big story? For all the hand wringing about "apple is scanning your iphotos for files that are duplicates of known kiddie porn" or "company has scraped public images off of facebook and used them for purposes" invasion of privacy stories... I don't think I've seen anything that approaches this level of "humans at Tesla are reviewing footage of you in your vehicle and home for fun and then posting them in slack to laugh at your accidents and road rage and comment on the personal belongings you keep in your garage" like HOLY SHIT. There should be extremely limited human review of footage and audio captured by your car, and there should be very strict rules/policies/guardrails/etc around that media escaping and a culture that is vigilant about the importance of protecting customer privacy. That's not a description of some wonderful top of their game "we handle sensitive personal information" company, that's absolute minimum. The idea of videos being shared around and commented on internally is insane and Tesla owners should be highly alarmed.

I spent much of my career working in industrial data analytics where the domain was vehicle safety. If someone posted something like that in an internal channel they would be fired for cause immediately, best case scenario.

[atomheartbevo 88750]

30 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

But tech bros, by all means, try your hand at oil & gas, mining, steel, heavy manufacturing - maybe take on Procter & Gamble and J&J.    I need some more entertaining threads like this one for schadenfreude.

Well see, all they have to do is crowd-source everything.  Just do everything by public polls.

"Hey, we're going to drill some oil wells, so here's an online poll asking where you think we should drill some oil wells."

What could go wrong?

[HamsterHookah 112]

50 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Putting aside his missing that the joke was about him, I love that he thinks “talented entrepreneur” tech bros can just automatically be epically successful in heavy industry.  Granted, the fact that he’s a trust fund baby idiot who has been epically successful in the auto industry does lend credence to the idea, but we’ve discussed how that happened plenty as well as how out of whack Tesla’s valuation is.  

But tech bros, by all means, try your hand at oil & gas, mining, steel, heavy manufacturing - maybe take on Procter & Gamble and J&J.    I need some more entertaining threads like this one for schadenfreude.

Elon going all in with China for mfg?

Quote

Tesla is expanding in China. The company already has a Gigafactory in Shanghai that produces cars. Now, it’s planning to build a Megafactory in the same city that will make Megapack batteries—its large-scale energy storage units that serve a growing market as the world shifts to renewable energy. CEO Elon Musk, who was reportedly in China over the weekend, has promised to make Tesla’s battery division just as big as its car business. Tesla’s Shanghai auto plant churned out almost 711,000 vehicles last year, accounting for the majority of its global production.