Elon Musk (No Politics)

[tszaboo]

that can shoot at you from 160km

If it can arrive to its target without being intercepted, which is far from guaranteed. Something like ZALA Lancet is way more effective against such targets.

What exactly are you going to use to "intercept" an AIM-120?
Have you ever seen how a BVR battle looks like? That thing goes to the edge of space, and comes down at Mach 3 on the plane. A Lancet is not even the same category of a weapon.

S-300 is up to Mach 9, depending on modification, S-400 is Mach 14, S500 - speed unknown but supposedly it has 600km range. AIM-120 is air-to-air missile, so cannot even target them.

A Lancet is not even the same category of a weapon.

Thanks, Captain Obvious, that's the whole point. Those missles are very expensive and totally suck compared to much cheaper weapons in real-world conditions when your enemy is not some 3rd world country that has nothing to respond to those. Guess why these days Russia uses their fighter-bomber and fighter jets almost entirely to launch UMPK equipped dumb FAB bombs, not missiles.

Dude just cut your losses and move on, all you are showing that you have no idea what you are talking about. There never was an intercept of an AA missile with an SAM. How do you think a BVR battle between two planes look like?  Rusky planes defending themselves SAM missiles?
Just like Elon, you look up some numbers on Wikipedia and think you know enough to comment about something. And if number A is bigger than number B then the dude with number A wins.

[wraper]

How do you think a BVR battle between two planes look like?

Such kind of fight is essentially dead unless USA decides to beat some poor 3rd world country that has some Soviet-era jets left and they're dumb enough to actually use them. What's real is this due to FPV drones and similar stuff:

[Psi]

First we need to define what we are actually talking about.
"Hate is an intense feeling of dislike or aversion towards someone or something, often accompanied by hostility or anger."

Agreed

I find your "curiosity" very curious. You mean to tell me you have no clue why countless poor people who can barely feed their family might hate a entitled person born into wealth, who pays little or no taxes, receives huge tax payer subsidies and is effectively above the law?. The fact "it doesn't make any sense" to you when it's blatantly obvious to most people is in itself very telling imo.

I get why they would be jealous of him but not why that should rises to the level of personal hate.
But I do understand hate towards anyone who is 'above the law', but that isn't something I see with regard to Musk much at all. He definitely gets legal perks that come with being rich but that's more hate towards the system rather than an individual.

Personally, I'm for companies/trusts paying more tax and not being able to 'work' the books to legally reduce the tax they need to pay. Tax rates for individuals are much less of the problem. The vast majority of Musk's wealth came from companies. So taxing the rich as individuals makes less sense. Tax the companies that's where the money is. (I think that approach is probably better than trying to do a capital gains tax on personal shares/investments).
There's definitely disparity with regard to paying tax that should be fixed, but again it's a system issue, so I don't get hate towards Musk specifically. Especially since Musk's lifestyle isn't that lavish by rich people standards. (Don't get me wrong it's still very lavish vs your average person).

how do you think all the poor people who rely on social programs for food and health services felt when Musk and DOGE slashed and burned said programs?. I mean, a guy worth hundreds of billions of dollars couldn't mind his own damn business and took it upon himself to destroy whatever hope millions of people had left. Your not so ignorant to not understand how they might feel are you?. I mean, if he actually gave a damn maybe he could try paying taxes like everyone else for a change.

You're responding as if I said there was no reasons to hate him. I never said that.
If you read my original post i was being curious how much of the hate comes from legit factual things vs from random made up crap in peoples heads. Like assuming his intentions and then getting mad over it as if it's factually true. Anyone directly affected negatively by Musk's actions with regard to their livelihood would understandably feel some hate.  But only a small percentage of the hate he gets comes from that. It's existed long before DOGE did anything.

If the hate was focused towards the system instead of focused on individual people doing both good & bad then maybe it would spark less debating about the individual being good vs bad and bring about actual change in the system. Both sides should be able to agree on the system being broken way easier than agreeing about the person being good vs bad.

Anything anyone does always has repercussions and some small % of those will be bad or undesirable no matter how hard you try to avoid it. The scaling of this always causes issues because rich/powerful people, even if they are good, will do lots of bad purely due to the scale they are working at. If you assign that amount of bad to one man in your mind it makes them seem like a monster

[5U4GB]

Who is this Elon guy?  He sounds interesting!

Apparently he's big in the NFL:

[Analog Kid]

Looks like he's big with Grok, not necessarily with the NFL.

Figures.

[SteveThackery]

The US's technological and scientific achievements in the 20th century were outstanding.

and would be nothing if they hadn't stolen borrowed them from other country's.

Uh oh, I detect some serious anti-American bias here. You seriously believe that the US contributed nothing original?  Oh dear. 

And where did those other countries get them from? Does everybody do original research apart from the US?

Mind you, all science, technology and engineering is built incrementally, so you could claim that every step forward is "stolen" from whoever made the previous step (regardless of what country they are in). But that would be a very silly way of looking at the world. Are you saying that everything invented after that first stone axe, 3.3 million years ago, is stolen borrowed?

[Siwastaja]

If I was super rich and had my own AI, I would definitely train it to praise me, if for nothing else, just for lulz and butt pain it causes.

[tom66]

If I was super rich and had my own AI, I would definitely train it to praise me, if for nothing else, just for lulz and butt pain it causes.

I imagine Musk is a bit like the kid in Blank Check - he becomes a millionaire through some kind of bank error.  Lots of things just for the lulz because he's got billions to do it.

[EEVblog]

If I was super rich and had my own AI, I would definitely train it to praise me, if for nothing else, just for lulz and butt pain it causes.

I imagine Musk is a bit like the kid in Blank Check - he becomes a millionaire through some kind of bank error.  Lots of things just for the lulz because he's got billions to do it.

Musk loves the thrill of the troll. He is in fact a master level troll. He would have definitely gone through with the $1BN offer for Wikipedia to change their name to Dickipedia, just for kicks.
If I had billions I'd probably do a ton of childish stuff just for kicks as well, why not.

[tggzzz]

If I was super rich and had my own AI, I would definitely train it to praise me, if for nothing else, just for lulz and butt pain it causes.

I imagine Musk is a bit like the kid in Blank Check - he becomes a millionaire through some kind of bank error.  Lots of things just for the lulz because he's got billions to do it.

Musk loves the thrill of the troll. He is in fact a master level troll. He would have definitely gone through with the $1BN offer for Wikipedia to change their name to Dickipedia, just for kicks.
If I had billions I'd probably do a ton of childish stuff just for kicks as well, why not.

If it was limited to trolling, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that sometimes it isn't trolling and it damages by  stomping over things that other people value. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that rich entitled riff raff should do it.

One example was his enshittification of Twitter.

Another is the very biassed training set used for grok. The examples below are obvious, but there will be many that aren't and which will radicalise people; some are noted in the article.








https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/825675/groks-elon-musk-worship-is-getting-weird

[EEVblog]

If it was limited to trolling, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that sometimes it isn't trolling and it damages by  stomping over things that other people value. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that rich entitled riff raff should do it.
One example was his enshittification of Twitter.

Twitter is VASTLY better than what it was before. Musk improved it more in 6 months than in the entire history of Twitter, with 75% less staff.

[tggzzz]

If it was limited to trolling, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that sometimes it isn't trolling and it damages by  stomping over things that other people value. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that rich entitled riff raff should do it.
One example was his enshittification of Twitter.

Twitter is VASTLY better than what it was before. Musk improved it more in 6 months than in the entire history of Twitter, with 75% less staff.

Not that I can see. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[wraper]

If it was limited to trolling, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that sometimes it isn't trolling and it damages by  stomping over things that other people value. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that rich entitled riff raff should do it.
One example was his enshittification of Twitter.

Twitter is VASTLY better than what it was before. Musk improved it more in 6 months than in the entire history of Twitter, with 75% less staff.

Not that I can see. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Really? What about video functionality, streaming, community notes, grok, much faster response and a quite a bit of other features?

[EEVblog]

If it was limited to trolling, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that sometimes it isn't trolling and it damages by  stomping over things that other people value. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that rich entitled riff raff should do it.
One example was his enshittification of Twitter.

Twitter is VASTLY better than what it was before. Musk improved it more in 6 months than in the entire history of Twitter, with 75% less staff.

Not that I can see. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Just off the top of my head:
- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"
- Community Notes (massive)
- Monetisation
- Hiding Likes (very underrated upgrade)
- Vastly improved video support (I can upload 4k native content now, and any length long form videos)
- Communities
- Paid subscriptions
- Elimination of the one sided woke "blue check" brigade, and all the associated algorithmic promotion.
- Secure encrypted messages and chat
- Really long form posts
- Post editing (the #1 requested feature forever that Twitter never added)
- AI integration via Grok (like it or hate it)
- Direct stock ticker integration
- View counts
- Job postings

And a Payment system is coming soon.

[Monkeh]

- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"

Instead, people get banned for being critical of Musk, his companies, his politics, his pet politicians.. Don't forget for calling attention to things like reporters (regularly banned) being arrested under false charges due to the political nature of their coverage.

- Monetisation

Absolutely a negative for anyone who isn't looking to earn money from social media - so all normal people.

- Paid subscriptions
- Elimination of the one sided woke "blue check" brigade, and all the associated algorithmic promotion.

Yes, now you can pay to be 'trusted' and pushed to people. What an improvement.

- Secure encrypted messages and chat

You'd have to be a fool to trust that. But I'm sure Grok will tell you it's okay and that Elon is a far better choice to develop a secure platform than any actual expert.

- Direct stock ticker integration
- View counts
- Job postings

And a Payment system is coming soon.

I cannot for a second comprehend why any of these would be considered valuable in the context of Twitter.

Now, if the real goal is a US based version of WeChat where Elon has ultimate control over your participation in society, this all makes a lot more sense.

[wraper]

- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"

Instead, people get banned for being critical of Musk, his companies, his politics, his pet politicians.. Don't forget for calling attention to things like reporters (regularly banned) being arrested under false charges due to the political nature of their coverage.

Really? AFAIK it's really hard to get banned unless you doxx or threaten to kill someone. Thunderf00t and many others post shit about Elon to no end and nothing happens to them.

[Monkeh]

- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"

Instead, people get banned for being critical of Musk, his companies, his politics, his pet politicians.. Don't forget for calling attention to things like reporters (regularly banned) being arrested under false charges due to the political nature of their coverage.

Really? AFAIK it's really hard to get banned unless you doxx or threaten to kill someone. Thunderf00t and many others post shit about Elon to no end and nothing happens to them.

Happened in the past, certainly. Among other things, like firing employees for personal opinions (the hypocrisy is strong there). As I've pointed out in the past, however, what happens on Twitter in realtime today is a complete unknown to me. I'm not allowed to see any of it. Because obviously keeping everything secret from untracked views which don't have their perception of the content on the platform biased by the platform makes it better.

[Analog Kid]

Since we're now on the topic of Xitter, one definite enshittification for me:
You can't see anything except the one post that was linked to somewhere else if you're not a member.
I have no intention of ever joining that club.

You used to be able to scroll through all the replies to a post even if you weren't a Twitter member. No more.

[Monkeh]

Since we're now on the topic of Xitter, one definite enshittification for me:
You can't see anything except the one post that was linked to somewhere else if you're not a member.
I have no intention of ever joining that club.

You used to be able to scroll through all the replies to a post even if you weren't a Twitter member. No more.

Nor can you locate any posts at all without those links. It's a closed platform so no unbiased view of it is possible. The only reason for this is to control what people see. But of course it's now a free speech friendly, uncensored platform without bias!

[Analog Kid]

It's a closed platform so no unbiased view of it is possible.

Well, unless you're a member.

[wraper]

Log is now required is to prevent AI scraping it to no end. There is a limit how many posts user can view for the same reason.

[Monkeh]

It's a closed platform so no unbiased view of it is possible.

Well, unless you're a member.

No, that's exactly the point. When you're a member and they track what you view (not just posts, but comments) and how you respond to it (likes, replies, viewing time, what you view afterward..) they can build a profile which allows them to adjust what they show you. Any active, tracked accounts view of the platform is biased on purpose, on top of the bias of manually choosing who to follow.

Log is now requires is to prevent AI scraping it to no end. There is a limit how many posts user can view for the same reason.

Direct Messages (daily): The limit is 500 messages sent per day.
posts: 2,400 per day. The daily update limit is further broken down into smaller limits for semi-hourly intervals. Reposts are counted as posts.
Changes to account email: 4 per hour.
Following (daily): The technical follow limit is 400 per day. Please note that this is a technical account limit only, and there are additional rules prohibiting aggressive following behavior.
Following (account-based): Once an account is following 5,000 other accounts, additional follow attempts are limited by account-specific ratios.

While they scrape it with their own AI all day long. A thin excuse, and not a good enough one by far. None of those limits, by the way, says anything about views - those are all account actions.

[EEVblog]

- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"

Instead, people get banned for being critical of Musk, his companies, his politics, his pet politicians.. Don't forget for calling attention to things like reporters (regularly banned) being arrested under false charges due to the political nature of their coverage.

Cite exact examples.

- Paid subscriptions
- Elimination of the one sided woke "blue check" brigade, and all the associated algorithmic promotion.
Yes, now you can pay to be 'trusted' and pushed to people. What an improvement.

So being on the right (left) side of the socio-political spectrum was the best way to determine if someone got a Blue Check?

At least now everyone gets the same opportunity.
Personally, as a relatively high profile legit public person on the old Twitter, I would never have gotten Blue Check verified under the old system.

- Secure encrypted messages and chat
You'd have to be a fool to trust that.

How is it not better than no encryption before?

- Direct stock ticker integration
- View counts
- Job postings
And a Payment system is coming soon.

I cannot for a second comprehend why any of these would be considered valuable in the context of Twitter.

It's called adding features, which the old Twitter practically never did, hence this discussion of your original claim. Not all features are of use to all people.

[EEVblog]

- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"

Instead, people get banned for being critical of Musk, his companies, his politics, his pet politicians.. Don't forget for calling attention to things like reporters (regularly banned) being arrested under false charges due to the political nature of their coverage.

Really? AFAIK it's really hard to get banned unless you doxx or threaten to kill someone. Thunderf00t and many others post shit about Elon to no end and nothing happens to them.

Others like CommonSenseSkeptic trounce Musk on a daily basis, way worse than Thunderf00t does, and none of them ever get banned. Barnacules Nerdgasm is another one that comes to mind that I know of (and they have had personal tussles in the past), and there are countless others. None of them get banned.
This rumor started because the mainstream media went with a story one time that must was permanently banning journalists. They were just temporarily banned due to breaking the T&C for various reasons.

Again, if you think Musk is banning people he hates then provide provide actual examples.
He let the ultimate litmus test Alex Jones back on the platform, and he hates his guts.

[wraper]

It's a closed platform so no unbiased view of it is possible.

Well, unless you're a member.

No, that's exactly the point. When you're a member and they track what you view (not just posts, but comments) and how you respond to it (likes, replies, viewing time, what you view afterward..) they can build a profile which allows them to adjust what they show you. Any active, tracked accounts view of the platform is biased on purpose, on top of the bias of manually choosing who to follow.

Also not logging in does nothing to prevent tracking. Those who think websites need that for tracking your behavior are naive.