To me, it will only be valuable if the automaker accepts liability for accidents while using FSD. This not only provides some direct accountability for bugs but means I can actually relax while being driven. Anything short of that means that I'll have to keep as much focus on the road as usual since I'm still legally responsible for what happens.
It's almost a meme stock at this point. Trying to time a market reckoning is very difficult because investor interest is highly decoupled from fundamentals.
You're more complaining that investors who don't own a stock have no influence on its price. Which is true, but I don't see a workable way to change that.
The median investor in Tesla, on the other hand, seems to be happy with the situation since they're not selling.
I'm not complaining really, just think it's a explanation that describes the downward sticky nature of companies that can't seem to justify their valuations.
I agree that the median investor feels that way, I just think that the median Tesla investor (apart from passive broad based funds) is a tiny, tiny, tiny part of the market.
Actually, the reason is the opposite. Tesla is reportedly over 40% owned by retail investors compared with under 20% for most big tech stocks. It's a meme stock.
Who's sensitive? I feel like the people who made the mod are the sensitive ones, so sensitive that they can't exist in a fictional space where trans or non-binary people exist so they had to make a mod to restore their version of reality. The only thing they got right is that a world without trans people is, in fact, a fantasy.
Except that modder explicitly stated that the mod was created to offend trans people. Nexus has a right to not host transphobes who are using their platform in a way that could hurt their business.
Who are these nazis you're talking about? People posting a mod that removes a trigger warning from a remake of a 20 year old game[1]? Some pretty weak-sauce nazis.
Don't forget the ultimate crime against humanity: changing a remade RPG's "body type 1" and "body type 2" character creation options back to "male" and "female" as they were in the original game.
Yes! Thank you! This is actually the perfect example, because that mod wasn't removed and the author was banned after he specifically said he was making the mod for the purpose of upsetting trans people. Even better with the context that he was linking to kiwifarms, a known hotspot for online harassment.
Nothing proves with more certainty that the GP of this thread has it backwards, the removed mods were uploaded with bad intentions.
Lmao that mod is clearly targeted at the worst kind of right-wing snowflakes. People who can't even see a trigger warning without getting incensed and try to legitimize their behavior by saying it's "misinformative," but then dog whistle who they're really talking to with the Pepe frog. Nazis are, by default, weak-sauce; not being able to tolerate something this innocuous is both weak-sauce and perfectly coherent with fascism's inherent insecurity.
You can't claim law of triviality when you rot were the ones that cared enough in the first place to change it. Changing settings back to match reality and original game settings is the only sane approach here, objectively.
How is any of this "objective" at all? The whole discussion from beginning to end is very subjective, both ways, but maybe I've missed out on new usage of this word.
> Nazis are, by default, weak-sauce; not being able to tolerate something this innocuous is both weak-sauce and perfectly coherent with facism's inherent insecurity.
I read stuff like this and I can't help but marvel at the irony when we're talking about people getting mad enough at an optional mod to get it banned.
Who's mad? I am not mad that their mod exists, I think they're sad snowflakes. I'm mad that people think removing intolerance from our communities is somehow hypocritical. The paradox of tolerance tells us that a community that tolerates intolerance turns into an intolerant community. Prune out the racists, the fascists, and the bigots at every opportunity or else they will ruin your society. Those who are intolerant should not be granted tolerance.
The trap a lot of the left has fallen into is often defining genuine disagreement over their ideas as "racist", "fascist", or "bigotry". This keeps those ideas from being challenged and refined thus making them ultimately unconvincing. "Tolerance" itself is a very loose concept here that has come to mean mostly the same as "political agreement". There's also no mechanism that I can see for correcting this issue. In this frame, the bar for what constitutes "fascism" keeps getting lower such that even mainstream political positions from 10-15 years ago are being labelled as "fascist" in some circumstances.
None of this seems healthy for the future of left wing thought and is already leading to a backlash (one naturally being called "fascist").
It's not a trap the left falls into. If anything, the left is overzealous in internal tone policing, to the point where activists and organizers wish it would become less of a distraction. You have organizations and individuals of prominence in the US political sphere who are openly and actively try to promote bigoted and fascist talking points and implement them in government, often using long-debunked arguments or outright lies, and the people insisting that these ideas are not bigoted or fascist are either being duped or arguing in bad faith. I do not and will not attribute good faith to reactionary, white-supremacist, ultra-nationalist right-wing movements as we have in the US.
This made me think of Norton's Dome[1] and how a particle would choose a direction to move when warmed from absolute zero to above absolute zero. Though I guess, "warming" in this context would mean a collision with another particle and that would determine the initial direction?
"Do better" when used in an online debate forecloses discussion. It implies that the one saying "do better" is the authority on what "better" is. What if I disagree?
Then you reply with "Because of the following reasons, doing better must entail the following actions...", rather than argue against the need to do better
It's annoying in the same way gish gallopping is annoying: you're giving me nothing except resistance in a way you've formulated to appear as though it's in good faith, even though it's not.
This condescending tone is what really needs to go away. It reminds me of the 90s right-wing, religious puritanism about swears in music and movies just repurposed for a secular audience.
I think context is important. In a large corporate context, NIH kills you because everything you implement needs to be documented, debugged, and understood by 10s or 100s of other people. In a small or one-man project, a lot of the NIH downsides go away and it makes (some) sense to reinvent the wheel if there are performance or simplicity benefits to be had. Consider Roller Coaster Tycoon as an example of the latter - where the author wrote everything in asm out of personal preference and for performance reason instead of using C and its libraries.
I'm surprised by how many people on HN are yelling at the author to code as if he's working at a company like Adobe, when objectively Adobe's PDF reader is dogshit (especially performance wise) for most people and is probably built on best practices like using standard libraries.
reply