> Freeze frame photos show what appears to be a lightweight hollowed out car shell prop, likely using magnets, suction, and compressed gas to help the country's richest nazi once again lie to the gullible American public and boost the valuation of a car company that stopped being innovative more than a decade ago.
It's obviously a stunt. But IMO it's a real stunt probably developed by the controls engineers at SpaceX to show off some pretty crazy control capabilities.
Musk has earned the vitriol, largely due to his political stunts. When the world's richest person starts dumping his money into elections and interfering in politics across the globe, why are we surprised people are angry and critical? When he takes a golden chainsaw to USAID, how many preventable deaths are directly attributable to these changes? How is it fair that an unelected, private citizen can contribute so much money to one person's political campaign, and then receive carte blanche to change our public services as a reward? How is it that this same person can unilaterally change how our military assets are used by an ally?
Something is deeply wrong with this. This is the heart of people's anger.
The 'CEO Said a Thing' in journalism is pervasive and detrimental when the critical analysis is missing (most cases). This part of the article is very on point, as is the basic analysis of the de jour technical stunt. That being said, I agree with you that this author puts too much click bait and feeding the fans language into this, doing a disservice to their own reputation (imo).
These are just a few of the reasons "oligarchy" is a word seeing increased usage. The politicians, the wealthy, the credentialed elite, the media - by and large are complicit.
Many of us here, myself included - the technocratic elite - are central and complicit in the world we built and pushed. We too have earned the peoples' ire, something I think we should reflect on and course correct. What do we actually want to bring to the world with our skills? What are we going to build and push in the age of Ai?
I'm aware, I just think the gripes are overblown, hysterical overreaction to either nonissues ('Hitler salutes' get a grip, please.) or garden-variety cost-cutting common in all conservative-leaning administrations.
I'm against all billionaires (and millionaires, generally the 1%) being able to put unlimited money into politics. Citizens United is not free speech. Constitutional amendments are required.
It says something when you project the bipartisan-ness onto others because they speak out about one of them in a single comment. We need to stop these kinds of reactions. They do not help us come to shared understanding or consensus.
Daron Acemoglu's 2024 Nobel Laureate lecture is a good one, even though he is a credentialed elite, his research and perspectives are important ones to encounter. The subject is the interplay of technology, automation, politics, and economy. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for reframing economics in a larger social and political landscape which the models have not, and likely cannot, capture. Simon Johnson (who speaks after him) talks about the history of European colonialism, extractive institutions, and their predictive power into the global inequality (does a former colony print chips or sew shirts?)
It doesn't fly, but the 2000 lbs of downforce on the McMurtry Spéirling Electric Hypercar means it can drive upside down. Sort of. A bit. [0] Top Gear took the car for a spin around the track in a very entertaining video, where a jaded car reviewer is in disbelief about the cars performance pretty much the whole time [1].
It's also 0.57 slower on 0-60 mph, but we also know that's with a human in it. Hopefully they're trying to build a version with two fans pointed backwards (and slightly up) as well to improve cornering. Though it remains to be seen if the weight penalty from that makes up for the added directional thrust.
What most impressed me was the precision control after the flip. It doesn't visibly wobble. The other flying car does. All systems, even RC EE circuits have a "wobble".
Gezz so much vitriol.
> Freeze frame photos show what appears to be a lightweight hollowed out car shell prop, likely using magnets, suction, and compressed gas to help the country's richest nazi once again lie to the gullible American public and boost the valuation of a car company that stopped being innovative more than a decade ago.
It's obviously a stunt. But IMO it's a real stunt probably developed by the controls engineers at SpaceX to show off some pretty crazy control capabilities.
This is NASA SkyCrane on steroids.
Musk has earned the vitriol, largely due to his political stunts. When the world's richest person starts dumping his money into elections and interfering in politics across the globe, why are we surprised people are angry and critical? When he takes a golden chainsaw to USAID, how many preventable deaths are directly attributable to these changes? How is it fair that an unelected, private citizen can contribute so much money to one person's political campaign, and then receive carte blanche to change our public services as a reward? How is it that this same person can unilaterally change how our military assets are used by an ally?
Something is deeply wrong with this. This is the heart of people's anger.
The 'CEO Said a Thing' in journalism is pervasive and detrimental when the critical analysis is missing (most cases). This part of the article is very on point, as is the basic analysis of the de jour technical stunt. That being said, I agree with you that this author puts too much click bait and feeding the fans language into this, doing a disservice to their own reputation (imo).
These are just a few of the reasons "oligarchy" is a word seeing increased usage. The politicians, the wealthy, the credentialed elite, the media - by and large are complicit.
Many of us here, myself included - the technocratic elite - are central and complicit in the world we built and pushed. We too have earned the peoples' ire, something I think we should reflect on and course correct. What do we actually want to bring to the world with our skills? What are we going to build and push in the age of Ai?
Plenty of billionaires donate heavily to various causes; why on earth should Musk be singled out?
...is it because you don't care for his priorities, vs. say those of the Widow Jobs or George Soros?
Errr.. it’s pretty obvious why. Even if one doesn’t agree like I presume you don’t, it’s very well known why a large portion of people loath musk.
It’s the nazi salutes, the way he openly buys votes with illegal raffles, spearheaded the destructive chaos that was doge etc etc
Everyone knows a large part of America hates musk for those types of antics.
How are you unaware of their gripes?
I'm aware, I just think the gripes are overblown, hysterical overreaction to either nonissues ('Hitler salutes' get a grip, please.) or garden-variety cost-cutting common in all conservative-leaning administrations.
I'm against all billionaires (and millionaires, generally the 1%) being able to put unlimited money into politics. Citizens United is not free speech. Constitutional amendments are required.
It says something when you project the bipartisan-ness onto others because they speak out about one of them in a single comment. We need to stop these kinds of reactions. They do not help us come to shared understanding or consensus.
Daron Acemoglu's 2024 Nobel Laureate lecture is a good one, even though he is a credentialed elite, his research and perspectives are important ones to encounter. The subject is the interplay of technology, automation, politics, and economy. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for reframing economics in a larger social and political landscape which the models have not, and likely cannot, capture. Simon Johnson (who speaks after him) talks about the history of European colonialism, extractive institutions, and their predictive power into the global inequality (does a former colony print chips or sew shirts?)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmVL30sS2yU
It doesn't fly, but the 2000 lbs of downforce on the McMurtry Spéirling Electric Hypercar means it can drive upside down. Sort of. A bit. [0] Top Gear took the car for a spin around the track in a very entertaining video, where a jaded car reviewer is in disbelief about the cars performance pretty much the whole time [1].
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6LYcgaQ46c
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPZxcfglU2Q
It's also 0.57 slower on 0-60 mph, but we also know that's with a human in it. Hopefully they're trying to build a version with two fans pointed backwards (and slightly up) as well to improve cornering. Though it remains to be seen if the weight penalty from that makes up for the added directional thrust.
What most impressed me was the precision control after the flip. It doesn't visibly wobble. The other flying car does. All systems, even RC EE circuits have a "wobble".