Most people's associations with the US were fanciful and unrealistic to begin with. It's just that now the reality has diverged so far from their mental images that they're forced to acknowledge the disparity.
While we do produce a lot of porn, remember that the pre-US colonies were founded by conservative religious people who were too conservative even for Europe at the time.
A couple years ago (~2018-9 or so) I realized that Firefox had a weird leak, I opened a lot of tabs often (heavy internet user plus dev) and I never really restart my pc unless absolutely necessary because I have too many things at once I'm working on and it's a pain to reopen everything including Windows Explorer instances (now tabs).
I talked about this leak and they kept gaslighting me like it didn't exist, Firefox at one point was taking 24 gbs of ram on my pc. (It did)
Another issue, Firefox Nighly, I 100% understand that it's an early bird preview and all that, but they would literally brick your browser whenever they wanted you to force to update it... what? I complain and they say "then don't use nighly", like brother, I understand that, I completely understand to use stable for stability, but there is no reason to FORCEFULLY brick a user's browser whenever you release an update, just have a popup and if they WANT TO they restart at the moment if not at the next restart period... and if you REALLY need for some critical issue you can have a flag with the update that forces a bricking but is only used in extremely important scenarios.
The amount of mismanagement at Mozilla is incredible really, I was a die hard Firefox user, I remember opening my youtube channel trying to right click on a background and not being able to copy the url/view image with chrome back in the day, that was when I realized that Google would force "its" web standards so I decided to go all in on Firefox, yet now I'm back on a chromium browser because Mozilla has completely destroyed the browser I loved, even worse now with all the weird privacy invasive stuff they've added in.
As a younger people who didn't live those days, I wish there was a modern game that felt at least close if not as good as classic world of warcraft but that was as in-depth as everquest...
Transluscency has always been a beautiful effect I don't care what brainwashed "UI/UX"designers post ~2013 think, they are literally conditioned to just repeat mantras.
The original reason for dropping transluscency was that "old people can't tell apart things", well we're way past the era of "no phone" generations, are we forever going to have things stay ugly?
I'll be honest, SpaceX is his as long as he respects the country he is at, and what he was allowed to do, he "joked" about decommisioning the dragon but I don't think a single person in government will allow him to sabotage the ISS like that. Actual room for criminal investigation and possibly expropiation. If he was in Canada or South Africa he wouldn't have access to the technical knowledge or talent that he has in the US, due to law, and said law exists to protect critical industries in America, it goes both ways, you are also not allowed as an individual to sabotage the nation.
Pretty sure his relatively quick walk back on that "joke" was due to the realization that if it was left open as a credible threat it is very likely the government would have just seized control of SpaceX immediately.
There's not really any need to charge him with anything to do that when he is making active threats to weaken national security, though its possible they might have separately gone after him.
And if the government did take that action they would have had incredibly high popular support for doing so among virtually everyone on both sides.
I think you need to wake up and smell the coffee - the US is not the same place it was a decade ago.
And this isn't just a random expropriation. While I may have to cry myself to sleep at the thought of our once great nation having devolved into a bitchy slap fest by a couple of narcissistic man babies, the fact is that SpaceX probably wouldn't exist today without the US government, so with Musk having a temper tantrum and saying "I'm taking my toys and going home", the US government would have at least somewhat valid national security reasons to take over SpaceX.
Couple that with the fact that Musk is hated, extremely, by many folks out both sides of the political aisle, means that the rule of law concerns about a SpaceX expropriation would largely be ignored.
Yes, but every large company in the US would view the nationalization of SpaceX as “shots fired” and investors would likely panic worrying that their stock portfolios would be at arbitrary whims of a tiff between the administration and the CEO.
Your rationalization of it is not unreasonable, but the market would panic in a bad way if the government showed it was willing to take extremes.
> Yes, but every large company in the US would view the nationalization of SpaceX as “shots fired” and investors would likely panic worrying that their stock portfolios would be at arbitrary whims of a tiff between the administration and the CEO.
I don't agree with this.
Like if it were merely a "tiff" between the administration and a CEO, then yes that would be destabilizing, but there is important context here that you are entirely glossing over.
Elon threatened to take his ball and go home in a literally life threatening (to astronauts) way after making SpaceX an essential aspect of the space program. If he didn't walk back that threat I think it would have been very easy for large companies to see the outcome as entirely Elon's fault and maybe just double-check in on their own CEOs to make sure they make sane decisions.
I'm personally convinced Elon realizing the likelihood of this outcome (probably because someone else reminded him of it) is exactly why he started walking the threat back.
And as a side effect of this mess, Elon also unintentionally gave everyone a pretty good reason to reconsider if its a great idea to allow any privatized entity to become "too big to fail" (or, more exactly, too big to easily replace if their CEO goes crazy) within any important government function.
> Elon threatened to take his ball and go home in a literally life threatening (to astronauts) way after making SpaceX an essential aspect of the space program
It’s sort of a given in American capitalism that owners are free to be idiots with their money. Nationalising SpaceX would wipe hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth to zero (or close to it). That’s a taking of private property triggered by the personal animus of the President; that characterises Argentina more than America. It would absolutely freak investors out, because now you need to diversify your assets geopolitically in a way Americans aren’t used to (but Argentinians, Russians and Chinese are).
Better: target Elon personally. Yank his credentials. Force him to revoke his super voting status, potentially trim his shareholding.
> Elon also unintentionally gave everyone a pretty good reason to reconsider if its a great idea to allow any privatized entity to become "too big to fail" (or, more exactly, too big to easily replace if their CEO goes crazy) within any important government function
We’re overdue for antitrust reform. The Whigs, in particular, were animated by concerns around undue concentrations of power.
> wake up and smell the coffee - the US is not the same place it was a decade ago
I hear this from folks on the coast a lot. Then our candidates lose in the middle of the country because when someone suggests taking a rich person’s stuff, every small business owner self identifies with them because that’s how American optimism has a habit of working.
> What? Where? If you mean expropriation, no, that has never been popular here, it’s part of why we have a massive economy.
Right here where I live, in the United States.
I never suggested expropriation in general would be widely supported, but when you have the richest man in the world (who has spent the last year making enemies of virtually everyone other than a small cadre of twitter shitposters) manically making decisions while reportedly on a downward spiral drug bender and he suggests taking action that would lead to endangering the lives of astronauts and an overall weakening of America's national security, yeah the government would have had massive popular support for seizing SpaceX.
If you don't think so I think you might be living in a libertarian bubble.
I wouldn’t have thought a south african script kiddie would be allowed to do it, but as long as it had the Oompa-Loompa president’s OK, apparently everyone is good with it.
> criminal investigation and possibly expropiation
Criminal investigation into lying on clearance forms about drug use effectively sidelines him SpaceX’s chain of command without stealing his or anyone else’s shareholdings.
That said, it would be an authoritarian shot across the bow for Silicon Valley from this White House.
They do - a range of 800 km is possible with CATL latest battery. And about 100 km of range can be added per minute, so it's now very close to adding range as fast as petrol cars.
To me that is the turning point and not using lithium is an added bonus.
It's purely anecdotal but does have some provenance going back at least to the 19th century, with one of the early liver specialists.
He was reportedly at a cocktail party one evening when a messenger burst in and informed the esteemed doctor that one of his patients appeared to be dying from a heart attack.
"My good man," he replied, "that can't possibly be true. When I treat a patient for liver disease he dies of liver disease."
