bane_killgrind

There are way better resources than Reddit comments

https://openlearning.mit.edu/courses-programs/open-learning-library

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjVwd8FlHBASO5vLBtMYNOzm8Q9DegSjO

Or like... Khan academy???

So.... Everyone else isn't owed his words

No, they'll just arrest the most capable of organising, the people that fit their narrative, and so on.

They can't arrest all of us should be rehashed to, they can't unmask all of us.

I think dumping stock is less the fraud, could have been structuring sales to take advantage of tax year stuff. Like they delayed reporting.

Or they regain less from writing them off then giving them away and taking the credit.... Hmmm....

The batteries are good, we can buy the batteries not the whole car.

The cars themselves are built to be a locally sourced and consumed commodity. They don't have the certification to sell in NA. The whole car being cheaper is a reflection of all these things.

Instead of cheap, I could have said less expensive.

Yeah how do you think it's the cheapest? They have the most clever engineering methods or something?

No. It's cheap material, cheap labor, concessions on everything.

Her degrees are ECE and conservation so no.

So on one hand, yes. On the other hand, there are tasks that are onerous to non technicians.

If you asked me to do it manually, sure. I've interacted with a bunch of software, understand measurement systems, done some programming etc.

My wife on the other hand... There's no overlap between ecology or life sciences in this task. Outside her ability.

Maybe support agent was being lazy, or ignorant.

The portal the agents use should be able to bring up internal info via keywords like "colour registration"

No lol

If it doesn't have real revenue, it can't pay for it's carbon footprint and will/should be regulated.

If there's no known way to prevent these models from regurgitating copywrited works if they are trained on those works, how will it not be regulated that way?

Like I said, the way it's driven now. It could be done differently.

They are losing money on their 200$ subscriber plan afaik. These "goalposts" are all saying the same thing.

It is a dead end because of the way it's being driven.

You brought up 100 billion by 2030. There's no revenue, and it's not useful to people. Saying there's some speculated value but not showing that there's real services or a real product makes this a speculative investment vehicle, not science or technology.

Small research projects and niche production use cases aren't 100b. You aren't disproving it's hypetrain with such small real examples.