I'm a Tesla owner and want Elon fired because I want my car to be supported far into the future. I don't want him to tank the company like he did Twitter.
How do you know he tanked twitter? It wasn't profitable when he took over and now that it's a private company you don't have insight into the financials.
Whether you like or don't like the politics/policies of the company since he's taken over, it's not clear whether he's made Twitter more or less viable as a company going forward.
Fidelity, who remains a stakeholder in the private company and gets insight to internal financials, has cut the valuation of their holding by 75% so far [1]. While twitter might not have been profitable when purchased, it was structured as a growth stock (that is, expected to invest most profit back into the product, in order to continue to multiply revenue) and had yearly revenues of $5B.
Elon wants to run an AI company and not a vehicle manufacturer. Since he doesn't own a majority of the stock, he's chosen to make his vision inevitable by tanking the vehicle and charging-related parts of the business.
AI is happening, but it doesn't mean Tesla should destroy its successful vehicle, energy or charging businesses. It also doesn't mean Tesla is going to win on AI. That's why you do don't destroy the underlying company to make AI inevitable.
Unlikely in the near term. As I understand it, rescheduling to Schedule III would mean that marijuana (and marijuana-based products) can be sold with a prescription. But, for a doctor to prescribe something, it needs FDA approval. I don't know when/if FDA will approve any marijuana-based treatments. And even if they did, this would not authorize recreational use.
you can get a prescription for marijuana within 15 mins of walking into a doctors office. we are past the peak of this, but 10 years ago you used to be able to go to a doctor that did nothing but marijuana prescriptions. and the line was out the door to the office. you walk in, pay $100-$150, and walk out with a prescription for 1 year
> you can get a prescription for marijuana within 15 mins of walking into a doctors office.
Not one that will work for the purposes of the Controlled Substances Act, as I understand it. I believe permissible use of a Schedule III has to be pursuant to a doctor's prescription for an FDA approved drug.
Moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, without other legal changes, would not bring the state-legal medical or recreational marijuana industry into compliance with federal controlled substances law. With respect to medical marijuana, a key difference between placement in Schedule I and Schedule III is that substances in Schedule III have an accepted medical use and may lawfully be dispensed by prescription, while Substances in Schedule I cannot. However, prescription drugs must be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Although FDA has approved some drugs derived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug. Moreover, if one or more marijuana products obtained FDA approval, manufacturers and distributors would need to register with DEA and comply with regulatory requirements that apply to Schedule III substances in order to handle those products. Users of medical marijuana would need to obtain valid prescriptions for the substance from medical providers, subject to federal legal requirements that differ from existing state regulatory requirements for medical marijuana.
it's possible that there might be a move to cheek swaps instead of urine tests for routine testing, making it possible to enjoy some recreational pot during off times.
It's funny how many of the comments here have really no idea the level of restrictions that are on US (or European) companies who want to operate in China (not just manufacture for export).
The goal isn't to supplant Linux as a commodity kernel, but instead as a microkernel for integrated mobile devices. E.g., as a platform OS, not a general one.
So the short answer is "no, unless you use one of Google's hypothetical future post-Android devices".
Any idea of that part was killed several years back, ensuing brain drain combined with firings makes it sort of a non-sequitor to even wonder. It is on life support already, and an obvious target for more Efficiencies™ should the 2020s turn rougher.
I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion, but that's not true. Well neither narratives are rather. There is no reason to believe fuchsia doesn't have a future anywhere Linux currently runs, but also, the goal isn't necessarily to supplant Linux.
For those who are confused about this statement, like me, Google started bringing Chrome/Chromium support to Fuchsia a few years ago. But, earlier this year, they officially cancelled those plans: https://9to5google.com/2024/01/15/google-is-no-longer-bringi...
It's worse than that - imagine if you had a team focused on a pie in the sky AI-based UI that ran on Fuchsia, but over-funded that, and it went nowhere, so it was killed, and then all of a sudden an LLM came out and all the miraculous UI parts seemed possible, but you were stuck with poorly run Android?
reply