Isn’t it basically impossible to tell if someone is using A.I. to write these essays?

I am not obsessed with Musk in any form, but the fact of the matter is when you have FSD systems that fail to do the thing they are supposed to do, then maybe it’s not the best idea to roll them out the entire world. Maybe it’s better to continue with more limited testing. You act as if all drunk driving/distracted will stop when FSD is used and that simply isn’t the care. Many people still use gasoline powered cars and drink and drive even though it’s dangerous to do so. Furthermore, FSD will lead to more distracted driving because people will assume the self driving means the car will take of everything and there is no need to be vigilant.

The plain truth is that while FSD can be the future, rolling it out despite knowing that it isn’t ready is not the solution it’s irresponsible and will cause harm. The almost accidents that you aren’t concerned with would have most likely killed the driver and probably other people to. Our difference of opinion here is that you believe it’s okay if people die as long the the testing shoes that there is a chance they won’t die in the future and think if anyone dies it’s too much. The feature clearly isn’t ready for prime time and needs more limited real world testing, but the fact of the matter is testing doesn’t bring in money.

Your inability to ever consider the fact that a worldwide roll out might not be the best idea right now since the testing shows the car isn’t ready shows that you really aren’t arguing in good faith. You have chosen the position that FSD is good and is ready even when confronted with articles like the above show it isn’t. I would wager that a lot of people want the era, of FSD, they just want it when it works. Keep the roll out more limited and do further testing. When mistakes happen, take the time to figure out why and how it can be prevented in the future. You argue testing is needed, but are in favor of a roll out now even though we need lots more limited real world testing. Both can’t be true. Time to think what you really want, because I don’t think you know… And accusing any person who doesn’t want a complete roll out of FSD today of having a bias against Musk shows that.

I read it just fine. He asked for an example of a life threatening accident caused by Full Self Driving. I noted that 2 examples were listed in the article. The ONLY difference was that the driver prevented the accidents by being aware. The FSD was going to cause accidents without intervention. I guess in your would people are supposed to do nothing to avoid a major accident. Hilarious that you want to love FSD driving so much that you’re willing to defend a billionaire who wouldn’t piss on you if you were on fire. Billionaires are not your friends. FSD is BETA feature that doesn’t work properly. Take your love somewhere else and away from my comment because you read it, didn’t understand it, and fired off a reply stating I didn’t do something I did because you can understand me. The next time you want to have a discussion come prepared, or don’t come at all!

The article listed 2 life threatening near accidents that were only prevented because the person behind the wheel took over and kicked out FSD. Read the article and then comment.

This outrage is going to be had by several people who want protection of children who had monsters do a terrible thing to them and who exacerbated the situation by uploading it to the cloud, which makes sharing it easier. However, these people aren’t seeing the bigger implications of this. I don’t really think many of the people that are against CSAM scanning are against protection for children or prevention of the very thing this is designed to prevent, myself included. However, what people are against is the scanning of material on your phone (which is what Apple proposed). People don’t want pictures scanned on their phones, even if it’s only as those photos will be uploaded to the cloud. Several companies were doing the scanning after the content was placed on the cloud, which many people against the previously mentioned scanning were in favor of. Apple, who is not in favor of scanning of your cloud data, was against this, which I think is admirable.

The fact of the matter is that scanning data for any purpose is at odds with the protection of your privacy. I, for one, am in favor of privacy protection. And although at times it may seem like people are against things like the protection for children, the fact is we’re actually in favor of protection for everyone.

No, people don’t want this. To be clear, I AM NOT saying that people don’t want the end to CSAM. I would say most people want that. What I am saying is that people don’t want someone to spy on your data to stop it. Spying on everyone to catch the few sickos out their is not cool. Apple protects privacy, and that’s what I want.

This is exactly what Apple wanted to do and lots of people (myself included) were against that because it would involve Apple scanning data on your phone. Sure, it was only at the point to deciders to upload photos to the cloud, but still it was unacceptable to scan our phones for data that hasn’t been uploaded yet.

The fact of the matter is when your company revolves around you being able to communicate and work from anywhere, it is a bad look for you tell people you can’t communicate effectively over the product you make. Anyone who knows business should know this and should know to keep their mouth shut and their policies focused on trying to destroy business.

The author notes that he would like to see more people take public transportation, and I’m all for that. There’s one problem for me: In Michigan where I live there is no public transportation that really gets you around Detroit, or gets you from the suburbs to Detroit. There is the joke of a QLine that goes no where and the People Mover that also doesn’t do much, but other than that nothing. Convincing people that have private transportation (read: cars) that they should invest/have their taxes used for public transportation is a no-go. Convincing the rich that they should pay more than $0 a year in taxes is even harder. This is probably the case a in several states around the country, but definitely in Michigan (and believe me, we tried with a bus system). So while I get that smaller cars can be and maybe should be thing, I think public transportation, as the author points out, could also be a thing. However, trying to get anyone, especially millionaires and billionaires, to pay a cent more than they are forced to is like pulling teeth.

From reading this article is sounds like Musk was never good at any of the shit that made him money. He surrounded himself with people that were so he seemed good because the group as a whole did good. And by the time people realized all this he had too much power to be removed.

deleted by creator

So Apple uses ALAC, which is it’s own version. Do you mean how much data is used when streaming? If so, I’m not sure. If you mean what’s available it’s:

High Quality (AAC 256 Kbps)

Lossless (ALAC up to 24-bit/48 kHz)

Hi-Res (ALAC up to 24-bit/192 kHz)

Switch to Apple Music. It has all the music Spotify has, the music is higher quality (all the way up to the highest quality you can get), exclusive radio shows you can’t get on Spotify, handmade playlists that are curated by a real human, a completely separate classical music site included at no extra charge, and more all for $10 bucks a month.