One exists and is wildly useful. The other is self indulgent bullshit to distract from the fact that Tesla is a terrible company that would be bankrupt without the circus act.
How much fucking money was deposited to make a piece of shit car fly for a couple of seconds that could have changed many many lives makes me sick. Fuck this timeline and fuck that musk gooch
How much fucking money was deposited to make a piece of shit car fly for a couple of seconds
They basically used the stabilization from SpaceX mixed with the old compress air gimmick that was used in the 1984 Olympics, which only work for very short flights because you quickly run out of compressed Nitrogen after a couple of seconds, which is a technology from the cutting edge 1960s. It's great to make a visual stunt but you need to constantly recharge the nitrogen canisters each time the feature is used to impress your friends for a couple of seconds.
It's all nonsense.
That vehicle was built on a lightweight composite frame—essentially just a big, light shell with no battery or other systems. But the Musk fanboys think they'll be flying next year, lol.
It would be funny if they pushed it onto US consumers in a couple of years, only for us to end up with endless videos of random explosions and falling debris. I’m sure pedestrians would appreciate the excitement.
Yeah it's practically the same, one of them has a man controlling left and right on a jetpack, the other is a freaking car that drives upside downby itself, flips through the air, and automatically stabilises itself.
I mean it's practically the same isn't it. Although the tesla used compressed air, rather than pure nitrogen, which it can theoretically charge.
But pretending it's a gimmick is rather disingenuous, it was a spectacular tech demo.
The model with only rear jet boosters will actually be available to purchase, but the rocket car one that can fly is limited to "invite only" with no one knowing who gets invited yet.
The rocket car one also only has one seat, the other has two.
I wrote something similar. I agree. He could be doing so many good things, like all the other top billionaires. They would still make money, just not as much. This is a disease. In this kind of world, to be able to sleep at night while children die of starvation daily, while at the same time growing your own wealth by a degree of billions, is lunacy.
The thing is they just don't care. They lack empathy and genuinely don't care about those children. How else do you become that successful if you had a shred of morality?
He could rebuild so much of America's rail infrastructure, build proper California high speed rail. Not Hyperloop. But nah. Vapourware is the way to go.
Elon Musk's destruction of USAID just because he feared legal action is expected to cause 15 or so million deaths by 2030. Those are Hitler levels of death.
This was David Copperfield making Statue of Liberty disappear business. Just keep people staring at the shiny object and move them around on a turntable.
Can you imagine how much fun those people that engineered and design that car had doing that project. It was life changing do something they could only dream of them one day the said sure go for it.
You're the one who started the gotcha game. Where does it end? Do we discuss bank robberies? Is a grocery store robbery okay? Or stealing candy from a child? Where should we draw the line???
Will any of you actually not dodge the question completely? Do you all even have an answer to it?
His analogy doesn’t hold because no amount of crime is okay. But obviously having some amount of money is okay. His logic will lead us to concluding that we should have no amount of wealth to our name.
You are talking about logic while totally jettisoning any attempt to steel-man the thing you're arguing against; hardly the act of someone who actually cares about logic.
We can deduce that this other person who isn't me (stop acting like its you against a cabal), thinks that becoming a billionaire marks you out as apsychopath. You have taken the insane leap to suggest that they would have no gradient to their hatred of wealth accumulation when you live in a world absolutly jam packed with philosophies, economic theory and policy by governments that all have functions for limiting the accumulation of wealth and power in the hands of the few while allowing for all sorts of competition and reasonable wealth accumulation, But you just jump to something mad and have the audacity to call to logic of all things?
Your position is the most childlike non-engagement with reality huffy puffy trying to win an argument with facts and logic, but sadly with the facts and logic of an omeba in a petri dish with zero external information. You deserve no explanations; you have done nothing but invent the most stupid possible aveserial position so that your tiny intellect could tackle it.
who cares if someone came back with an imperfect analogy? You didn't deserve the effort of logic you hadn't used any to start the exchange.
I've left all the typos, spelling mistakes and shit in this because it will give your cognitive dissonance something to hide behind so you don't get too hurt by the realisation you're an idiot.
I draw the line at $200m. If you are hoarding wealth so much that you own more than $200m in assets, you are a psycho.
It's an arbitrary amount well beyond enough to money to live a dream life without worries outside of the inevitable.
Wherever you want to argue the line is, it is far far far away from a billion. A billion dollars is actually obscene as I said. A sickening amount of resource hoarding to the extent that it is undeniably genuine violent misanthropy.
I draw the line at $200m. If you are hoarding wealth so much that you own more than $200m in assets, you are a psycho.
So if I take one penny out and get just below that line, I'm safe?
If not, do you see the sippery-slope your emotional argument is making since you do not have a logically sound one? Notice how your point is weak and just about subctive stances on morality instead of any objective metrics?
You didn't even say USD or if that was inflation-adjusted or not.
We deserve shitty leaders until regular people like us bring more nuance into our average conversations.
So if I take one penny out and get just below that line, I'm safe?
Yeah, sure.
our point is weak and just about subctive stances on morality instead of any objective metrics.
This is not unique to resource-hoarding... We make moral values into objective metrics for loads of things (quick obvious examples: age of consent, gestation limits for abortions).
You didn't even say USD or if that was inflation-adjusted or not.
I figured it literally would go without saying in the discussion. People aren't talking about people with a billion zimbabwean dollars or whathaveyou when they criticise the evilness of billionaires.
We deserve shitty leaders until regular people like us bring more nuance into our average conversations.
Lol, wut? Speak for yourself. We are capable of having nuanced conversations and also reaching obvious, correct conclusions. As I said wherever any reasonable person is drawing the line about how much is too much to hoard... it is a loooong way before $1billion.
Having wealth doesn't make one inherently evil and terrible. However objectively evil people tend to excel at gaining obscene amounts of wealth because they don't care how much damage they do to get it...like Elon for example.
I agree we need more nuance in our lives but its really not hard to understand why people say things like "people don't need more than $200 million" when the only billionaires we have thrust into our lives are power hungry pieces of shit like Musk, Bezos, the human reptile, and Trump...none of them are good people and keep collecting unfathomable amounts of wealth beyond what they need while pushing for shit thats going to hurt the common man financially.
Sure there are good rich people who are very philanthropic with their wealth but we don't hear about them hardly ever and it doesn't seem like the majority so why should people change their mind on the rich until they see more from them?
You know what has really changed my life? Self driving cars. Like the automobile, it was something that almost nobody had, and now regular people have it.
Making rocket on cars could save lifes, Imagine an ambulance or a rescue vehicle. Also, investing on a research doesnt hinder you to research something else
At that point you should also be losing sleep over the metals in your phone which are mined by enslaved children in the Congo with very low life expectancies. You should be crying your eyes out to the East Asian children who work in inhuman conditions to make pretty much everything you consume. You definitely shouldn't own a car. You shouldn't be ordering off of Amazon. You shouldn't be eating any meat. All of these things directly cause suffering to billions worldwide. Unless you're self conscious to the point where you avoid doing all of those, I think it's safe to say that you don’t actually care about "changing lives" and are just virtue signalling.
What you clearly don't understand is that the spectacle is what leads to further innovation. Going to the moon had fuck all purpose other than just being able to say that we did it and the Russians didn't. But our space program gave us GPS, cordless powertools, chemical-free water sanitization, digital signal processing, and the CMOS sensors sitting in your phone right now, among many other things.
Similarly, if we can pack things into a car that can keep it upright midair or even slow it's descent, we save lives in some otherwise very nasty crashes. Is this exact mechanism that Elon demonstrated what's going to do it? No, but we've now seen that it's possible and further work can be done to make it more practical.
Is this exact mechanism that Elon demonstrated what's going to do it? No, but we've now seen that it's possible and further work can be done to make it more practical.
How many crashes actually launch a car in the air?
How many of those crashes launch the car in a normal trajectory that can be controlled?
How many of those crashes where the car is launched in the air in a well-behaving trajectory have the luggage perfectly balanced and tied so that the application of thrusters is actually viable?
How much damage will the thrusters do to everything around them while trying (and utterly failing) to stabilize it?
How many of those crashes where...well you know by now...have a perfect empty landing strip (or really, any suitable space at all) behind it where they can "land" the car?
Go find a tissue and wipe that Elon spunk from your face, it's disgusting. And think a little before opening the mouth again.
Well it turns out I hit it here right in the beginning.
So now it's not about stabilizing a car launched, but rolling, where the floor is the major force affecting the trajectory. So your solution to avoid rolling on the floor is LAUNCHING THE CAR IN THE AIR and stabilizing it there (I hope you can see why firing thrusters on a car rolling on or near the floor does not work). Totally sane and safe idea.
I value my neurons too much to let them self destruct by continuing such an idiotic Elon-fan discussion
Call me once this is a viable product. Actually, call me once FSD is, it's still 12 years late from announcing.
You invoked the moon landings to justify this garbage. This is a stunt to make people talk about Tesla and pump their stocks, that is all it is and all it will ever do.
You compared the lack of knowledge or uncertainty of what this will lead to. These two acts are not even in the same ballpark of the potential real world applications that the Apollo missions gave us, and to suggest they could be is asinine.
Is this exact mechanism that Elon demonstrated what's going to do it? No, but we've now seen that it's possible and further work can be done to make it more practical.
Yeah, people should do NOTHING with their money but help the poor, I agree!!
How many people spend money and time on thins like birthday gifts for loved ones or going to see a movie, or getting a pizza with friends instead of spending that money to help poor people more?
Allegedly, yes. I read the Telegraph article. Its claim that Musk proposed the restrictions to Trump relies entirely on four unnamed sources. No documents, recordings, named witnesses, or official confirmation are provided to substantiate that allegation. In other words, the Telegraph is saying "trust me bro"
We know Starshield service was restricted. We also know Starshield is controlled by the US government, with usage restrictions falling under military and presidential authority, not Starlink, and not Musk.
Also America profits from European investors money ...
If all of a sudden all this money only goes to Europe .. It will profit EU R&D in all useful domains... and pseudo flying car is not in this list atm.
As someone who lives in and loves the EU: That shi is not “wildly useful” 💔 just a nuisance and pointless since 99% of people already didn’t lose their caps. Definitely one of the worst things they ever implemented
And that's assuming their percentage is even remotely accurate. I suspect far more caps are lost post-consumer, and this measure cuts back of that dramatically.
Because they cant turn it away from their face and get pissy when the cap splashes liquid on their noses, when they chug. It's like watching children get irate lol
German here.
The problem is that it generated significant costs for companies to implement this shit. It also creates tradebarriers with foreign entities. For example, swiss companies still have the normal caps, and they cant participate in the EU market if they dont change. Less competition is unhealthy.
Moreover, this whole story smells like corruption. I would not be surprised if some buddy of an EU parlamentarian earned alot with this utter bs.
I wouldn't be surprised if the eastern guy did actually influence that vote. I didn't do my research on the matter, but that's something I can absolutely believe.
significant costs for companies to implement this shit.
Which they had over 5 years to implement and amortize
Less competition is unhealthy.
As is a race to the bottom, which is why we have regulations, and this is one of them.
this whole story smells like corruption. I would not be surprised
Everything can be a conspiracy when you don't even bother to do a cursory search on a phenomenon's background and just let your fantasies run wild. von der Leyen can be a lizard person that came down from Jupiter to suck the blood of virgin horseshoe crabs. I would not be surprised
The guy is right in that "doing one's own research" is more important than ever. Before you know it, the Suiss are flooding the EU with illegal bottle caps.
It wouldn't be the first time that there's a bad actor infecting bottle caps with a virus grown in a secret lab in Wuhan, China, subsidized by the the Yankee dumocrats, Joe and Hunter Biden, Barak Hussein Obama and Anthony Fauci in particular lol.
The company BERICAP is one of the main beneficiaries of this regulation, and they are lobbying in the deutsche bundestag. They hold patents in process engineering for the bottle caps. I know lobbying is not called corruption in the EU, but srsly, give me a break.
Huh???!!! It might as well have been a conspirancy of the WEF and Soros to weaken EU-unity in favour of a Russian take-over of Middle and Western Europe!!!
Sadly when it's a way for the elite to try and garner more followers (i.e. convert them into yes-men techbros who will keep sucking off Elmo despite multiple of his projects not only bombing but setting back public infrastructure for more than a decade (thank you HyperLoop)) which in turn will lead them to try and do continuously more outrageous cons.
5 seconds multiplied by the amount of bottles consumed per year is a fuckton of time wasted per year across the EU for zero actual benefit. That's time stolen by politicians.
You don't need to adjust every time you need to drink a bottle. Do you need to look up how to start your dishwasher every time? Realise just once, that all you have to do, is not drink with the cap facing directly up or down, and you're golden. That is a onetime loss of 5 seconds, maybe 10. In other words, 1/8640th of your day gone. Just imagine to how many things you could get used to when not criticising the EU for their actually somewhat good decisions. Fuck them over for the digital surveillance which "protects the kids" instead
That was a shitty way to defend your point (or attack theirs) when you were already logically in the right and they made the first logical leap by calling your observation something that you struggle with.
A'ight I'll bite - You wanna mention the big numbers fallacy or more commonly known as denomineering being used to present this as a remotely correct indicator?
It's not an observation, it's a technique, a poorly constructed one at best.
You might wanna ask the marine wildlife like sea birds, turtles and fish which die miserably en masse from swallowing these thrown away plastic caps. I‘m pretty sure they‘ll find the attached caps quite useful.
That sure is a big problem. But so are the plastic caps, look it up. And loose caps are much more easy to fix, there is literally no disadvantage to that.
Good point, it's important as a society that we don't spend time fixing any issue unless it's the biggest issue possible (and then do nothing still) \s
It's important we don't waste resources pretending we're doing something when the real problem goes ignored. Eg. someone posts a video of a turtle with a straw in its nose and suddenly the entire world switches to paper straws, but keeps the plastic lids and plastic coated cardboard they slot into.
the caps are trash, this reduces them being scattered in the environment. It's not a pretend issue, and we didn't "waste resources" doing it. It's made a real, measurable change and took a minimum of effort - it's the exact same manufacturing process, they just needed new injection molds. Personally, i find it more convenient anyway - i don't have to hold on to the cap while drinking. But i guess you find it slightly weird or something, so go ahead and crash out about a good thing as if it's the most important thing in your life ... glad to know your life is going so well that caps attached to a bottle (that you can still remove with a slight tug if you really care) is worth your stress and anger.
All the European turtles?
Are we going back millions of years?
Seriously. This cap idea is one of the weirdest and most useless garbage protection deals and so many more actually useful things could have been implemented instead of this joke.
Yes, the ones in the south from France and Portugal through the Mediterranean into the Aegean and up into the Balkans. There are several species native to Europe but pretty much all of them are endangered at this point.
EU makes a very small part of the overall Ocean pollution. Countries in a nearby region push tons of plastic garbage per hour into their rivers, but what has the "civilized humanity" done to stop it? These shitty strapped caps... only in the small EU! Success?? Bullshit!
Such a great point! We shouldn't try to fix anything unless other countries try to fix it first, why should we have clean water and reduce trash and improve our environment if those other people in other countries aren't doing it?
I say the money and effort should be spent on a real reason. I don't like such hypocrisy when people are proud of achieving 1-2% of something while the huge piece (80%) is "untouchable".
Ah just because others are polluting the oceans more, means we shouldn‘t take measures to minimize our impact on marine wildlife. Great logic. And by the way, even monkeys have been proven to be able to handle the new attached caps. I‘m sure you can do it, too!
you every been so groggy in the morning you loose the milk cap and put it back inn the fridge without the cap rather than use up the last few brain cells trying to find it?
Also they are being adopted in Asia too, although I suspect it's to cut on the manufacturing costs, so there's only one version produced, the one mandated on one of the world's biggest market. Either way, I'd say that makes the cup pretty successful and influential industrial design.
Was that a problem before? I've never seen anyone in my life unscrew the cap and throw it on the ground before throwing the bottle in the recycling bin.
People didn't unscrew the bottles and then just throw away the cap - most likely you would have a person just litter with the entire bottle.
Then, with an unscrewed cap, it is much easier to miss it when the actual bottle gets picked up.
Additionally birds would often try to eat the caps and either succeed and kill themselves or discard them somewhere, leading to more littering (and possibly another animal trying to eat it). This is much harder now when there's an entire bottle attached to one.
All in all, was this a huge problem? Probably no, but this is also an extremely mild inconvenience to help fixing some issues.
Even though that it's not its purpose, you don't have to hold the cap, which is really useful to me. I have never had an issue with drinking with the cap attached.
Functionally, it's shit, worse than normal cap, but people are even shittier, throwing caps away on beaches. It's for seagulls and sea animals. That's the sole purpose of attached caps, according to official EU documents.
Hey, I'm slightly hand-disabled & when visiting the EU was pleasantly surprised that I did not once have to ask for help opening a water bottle because of these things. Now I'm back in the US and having to find a drink cap helper is extra infuriating
I'm ngl, "wildly useful" maybe not, but I do think it's a plus, even not considering the environmental reason. I don't have to hold the cap or smth and the only downside is... turning the bottle 45°, at most 60°. Wow.
Eh, some were pretty bad earlier, but most designs nowadays are actually pretty good, easy to turn to side in a way that doesn't get into way when drinking. Actually prefer having them now, as it makes it hard to misplace the cap and easier to remember to screw it back on.
Hey, just because you don't know how to use it doesn't mean it's "one of the worst things" implemented. I think it's a massive improvement over detachable caps. No risk of losing a cap into the bowels of a moving vehicle on long car journeys. No need to use an extra hand while drinking something out of a bottle. And there's the obvious environmental benefits, of course.
What is odd is that it doesn't work as a distraction. It basically brings eye balls onto a company that is persevered to be led by an out of touch billionaire. The trick doesn't fix that perception.
Ok I'm sorry but this is really silly. A regulation was put in place which then required the minor innovation of finding a convenient design for attached bottle caps, some engineer probably did indeed get paid for that and the best designs got patented, and production lines got slightly altered. But this is ultimately a miniscule change.
ASML is a European company which is the sole manufacturer of EUV lithography machines in the entire world, which are essential to the production of the most advanced semiconductors. Zeiss is a company making some of the most precise optics in the world for industrial measurements, medical devices, cameras and more. Everything from laser eye surgery to the aforementioned lithography uses Zeiss optics. Ericsson and Nokia are the two top 5G network providers (with all major competitors from Asia, most notably Huawei). There's also Revolut for financial technology if that interests you, a good number of defence companies from Thales to Rheinmetall and of course Aerospace ones as well. Europe is technically behind the US in space rockets now, but Ariane rockets are still widely used and for good reason, and at least until recently everyone including America was using Soviet Soyuz rockets to get people to space. The US has only regained domestic capability to launch people into space in 2020, with the Falcon 9.
I'm certainly concerned with where Europe is headed especially so long as nation-state bickering predominates European politics, but the idea that Europe would he predicting nothing top of the line is an absolutely ridiculous assertion.
You know the thing that made LLMs usable, 'attention'? That was proposed in a paper by a German and a Candian researcher. Yes it was made into an Architecture by Google, but the foundation was partly European (and as always with sciences from all over the world). You cannot discount the base scientific research that led to the advancements and just look at the actualizations made with the investor money available in the US.
I’m not saying Europeans don’t produce great talent. In fact, the US benefits enormously from European talent.
My point is that the US business environment and venture capital system are far more favorable to innovation and building big technological advancements than Europe’s.
Source: I’m European and moved to the US for PhD and run a startup. I deal with VCs all the time.
You are completely wrong on EVs and rockets, and partially wrong on AVs and AI. You probably don't even know what all of this technology is, not to mention where it's being developed.
I would suggest this comment is perfect propaganda:
TESLA solved a very important problem: batteries are very complicated and you can't have electric cars without good batteries
TESLA, like any business, abused regulations: Climate change is real, and ESG investment made desperate politicians willing to fund anything that sounds reasonable
As with all laws, they get gamed and politicians refuse to admit their laws are dogshit
1.9k
u/True_Protection6842 7h ago
One exists and is wildly useful. The other is self indulgent bullshit to distract from the fact that Tesla is a terrible company that would be bankrupt without the circus act.