I think a good portion of their sales have been ideological in nature.
Back when it came out, Apple was starting to add firmware locks to more and more components like the battery and the rest of the industry were getting worse and worse ifixit repair scores. Nowadays, a lot of companies are starting to take repairability by the end user more seriously (look at the neo) which is hurting the value proposition of Framework's laptop.
I much prefer the parts pairing that is required by Apple. Parts pairing is a mitigation to theft, but in my opinion should be a stronger anti-theft measure. I don't think Apple goes far enough with this. At the moment, a locked part, that is a part that has been taken from a mac with the activation lock still enabled, should render unusable on another mac, or at least show up in the parts setting as marked lost or stolen, and should at render as completely inferior to that of a genuine or authenticated part.
This doesn't hinder repairability, as you will find with the Macbook Neo. It just thwarts a secondary market for stolen Macbooks and/or parts.
Try working on a software project as a non-developer and see if you still respond so negatively to their sentiment. I can’t tell you how many times developers tried to arrogantly and dismissively explain design principles to me, as an experienced, degree-holding designer, because they skimmed a whole Tufte book at some point.
I was a developer for a decade before I went to school for design, so I’ve seen it from the other side. It’s not all bad: that overconfidence can lead people to tackle problems they’d abandon if they really understood the domain’s complexities. But often it presents like developers acting like their genius developer brain allows them to solve difficult problems in completely different fields with a few glib analogies and a few brief thought experiments.
Wouldn't source that this is happening in 1 of the member states be enough to raise alarms? Why do all of them need to for you to consider this an issue?
> This report is insanely vague though. It's very preliminary, opened yesterday.
Yeah I think posting this here is premature without any details.
Maybe I'm misremembering things, but I feel like 4-5 years ago we didn't have these clickbait headlines that fed political discourse. It feels like reddit culture has permeated this place for a while.
Anytime one of Elon Musk's company has a misstep, the headlines violently shoots to the top of the front page.
It's not premature. Every single expert in this field has warned about these issues since even ~2012 days when these types of platforms were being publicly discussed.
This is an expected and understood result given the hardware and software involved.
You will not get past these issues without a RADICAL improvement in camera technology paired with specialized, dedicated processing hardware matched against several (and I mean several several) "common" environment profiles.
FSD is a scam. It's not safe. It is not technically sound.
The fact that there aren't many more accidents with the system is a by product of consistent and well thought out road standards, car standards, other safety systems present on cars, and driver education.
You’re just reciting your priors, which I think supports GP’s point: no one is getting new information out of the posted link, so it’s probably premature to comment on it.
I was agreeing with kvuj and rguyorama that the original link is to an announcement that an investigation is happening, and it's too early in the process to productively discuss it. People have very strong and emotional pro or anti stances on the Tesla Vision system in general, and love an excuse to have the debate again, but in the comments here where people are talking about their stance you might notice that they don't reference any specific facts from the linked report to support their arguments. This is because the report is still vague at this stage and doesn't provide any specifics that inform the discussion.
People have been warning about this for over a decade, others have died as a result of the lack of action, and yet we're still sitting on our hands waiting for the government to catch up to what expects have known for years - Tesla Autonomy is fundamentally busted/cooked/broken, and needs to be outlawed.
The reason this stuff shoots to the top is because Elon Musk and his companies are a red alert menaces to society. People are sick of him and the damage he causes with his money, and wish he and his cars would just fuck off for good. From his cars slamming into people and property, his website spreading hate, his starships raining fiery debris, or he's personally taking an axe to government programs we rely on, everyone has cause to be absolutely done with his antics.
But since businesses can apparently unleash autonomous murderbots onto the public roadways with zero repercussions for 10+ years, I guess we'll have to settle for endless flamewars about Musk's campaign of destruction on HackerNews instead.
> “We don’t know who their vendors are,” he said, adding that beyond a few steps in long chains of subcontractors, “nobody actually knows who’s providing these metals, these minerals, the parts. And it just becomes a maze.”
So how can you predict the impact on the US defense industry? How can you predict it will be strangled?
What the hell is this shitty article that doesn't use a single hard number? No graphs, no prediction based on previous wars, no investigative dig into the supply chains...
It's reasonable to assume that a fuller version exists in which Morgan D. Bazilian and Macdonald Amoah lay out the background data which Lt. Col. Jahara “Franky” Matisek et al have seen.
Morgan D. Bazilian is the director of the Payne Institute for Public Policy and professor at the Colorado School of Mines, with over thirty years of experience in global energy policy and investment. A former World Bank lead energy specialist and senior diplomat at the UN, he has held roles in the Irish government and advisory positions with the World Economic Forum and the International Energy Agency. A Fulbright fellow, he has published widely on energy security and international affairs.
Macdonald Amoah is an independent researcher with interests across critical mineral supply chains, advanced manufacturing gaps, the industrial base, and geopolitical risks in the mining sector.
Lt. Col. Jahara “Franky” Matisek (PhD) is a US Air Force command pilot, nonresident research fellow at the US Naval War College, and senior fellow at the Payne Institute for Public Policy, and a visiting scholar at Northwestern University. He is the most published active duty officer currently serving, with over 150 articles on industrial base issues, strategy, and warfare.
Those are some serious qualifications and the linked article shows quite a few examples, but I would still like to be shown data instead of a appeal to authority.
Maybe I'm just used to high quality reporting on the subjects I read like Irrational analysis or Chips and cheese where a minimum of 10 graphs are needed for any deep dive.
> but I would still like to be shown data instead of a appeal to authority.
Sure .. 18 years ago you could have logged into the W.Australian mineral intelligence company Interria and seen such data - that business was sold to Standard & Poor and portaled there (and updated) for 14 years or so - recently it's no longer visible .. but such several such databases do exist .. I guess you just need the contacts and an account for access.
You can ask S&P, Rio Tinto and other majors, the Colorado School of Mines, US Military, the Chinese companies that were leaching data all those decades, ROSATOM (Russian Uranium) peers that track other minerals, etc.
I’ve seen a lot of subreddits devolve into posting political rage bait articles plastered with ads and very little substance. I hope that doesn’t happen here.
> What the hell is this shitty article that doesn't use a single hard number? No graphs, no prediction based on previous wars, no investigative dig into the supply chains...
That used to be the case, but modern Toyotas have a lot of problems with their engines. This doesn't inspire confidence in the brand's overall quality.
Add the fact that EVs are a lot simpler, and I don't really see the reasons to pay the Toyota premium. Perhaps less depreciation?
From what I've seen, it's simply an aversion to mass scale surveillance, even in public setting. The worry being how easy it could slide into a tool used by the state for nefarious purposes (punish political dissidents, etc).
Is there actually evidence of flock being used to stop street crime? I've never heard anything about Flock (or Shotspooter) stopping street crime.
Where I am, the local speed cameras have annual documents about the street their on detailing pre-camera vehicle speeds and fatal (pedestrian) accidents and the decreases in both of them since the usage.
Afaik, the concern isn't that it "could slide" its that flock _is used_ by say Texas to monitor out of state abortions. That isn't solving street crime and certainly didn't benefit the local residents.
For me the longer software support would play a role in my decisions. The M1 MBA will probably lose support in 4-5 years whereas the Neo has a longer road ahead.
Combine that with the enormously improved single core performance (which matters more in the real world than sustained load for an entry level notebook), fun colors and 499 price tag for students and I can see the interest.
The screen is good compared to the MBA (only loses P3 colors) but the bummer seems to be ports and the "normal" trackpad.
I think the downvotes come from the friction of the language used and the lack of sources to back the claim. If you linked some stories, it would add some weight to the statement.
How many people on this site are unaware of the amount of times the government's courts have found its executive, legislative, (and lower judicial) branches acting without authority?
How many people on this site are unaware of the extent to which we are monitored? And openly? We have an entire agency whose primary task is to mass surveil.
I think all the things are true at the same time... that most people already believe it, they don't need sources in this instance, but they still don't like the way the comment was worded.
Unfortunately, I think that's likely the case for anyone on the younger side. Most of that came to light in 2013, 13 years ago. Anyone 20-30 years old today would've been a teenager then in high school, and likely not paying attention very closely.
It was big news for a little bit, and then the media by design quickly forgot about it barely a year later, and that is why history is doomed to repeat.
> The Iranians are pragmatic. Look beyond their relationship with the US. There are other state actors that Iran wants to remain in good relations with.
Which is why they're sending missiles and drone strikes on the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar.
Back when it came out, Apple was starting to add firmware locks to more and more components like the battery and the rest of the industry were getting worse and worse ifixit repair scores. Nowadays, a lot of companies are starting to take repairability by the end user more seriously (look at the neo) which is hurting the value proposition of Framework's laptop.
reply