People are also missing that this extra bandwidth will help with mesh systems.

Not everyone is savvy enough, or has the ability to run Ethernet to every access point. The additional bandwidth here will help people who need better Wi-Fi, but are only going to buy an easy off the shelf solution

You can buy a model 3 that goes 0-60 in 3.1 seconds, right now, on their website under 40k after tax rebate. Go look. Under existing inventory. All prices exclude the 7500 credit.

Are you claiming GM never made a lemon? That no car, ever, in the history of their company, was sold with a bad motor?

And stop it. You’re comparing the cost of a new battery now vs what the cost of a used battery will be in 8 years. Claiming that technology doesn’t get cheaper is absurd. You can buy a used Nissan leaf battery for $3,700.

https://www.partrequest.com/catalog/electric-vehicle-batteries/nissan/nissan-leaf

It really isn’t.

The whole point of the crate motor vs battery pack was it’s ridiculous to compare the cost of a new battery vs a used engine. If you blow an engine in a regular car it’s replaced with s used one, even if it’s covered by warranty. Used battery packs will get cheaper with time, especially 8 years from now when the warranty on a new EV is done.

Good for you that your car hasn’t broken yet. I have a friend who got a bad transmission in her Subaru, it was replaced after something like 500 miles. Are you claiming that every new ICE vehicle that had ever been sold have had 100% working drive trains for the entirety of the restraint period?

Or are you comparing your anecdotal experience with a FUD news story about one person who had a lemon of a vehicle that happened to be electric

I swear, everyone on Lemmy have their heads shoved so far up their asses about how everyone should go full internal combustion and that they’re great and have lower maintenance costs just down vote me to hell when I bring anything like this up. I know the tech and work on vehicles and combustion engines. It’s dumb to buy a $40,000 vehicle with a 300 pound engine, 200 pound transmission, mechanically complex 4 wheel drive system with upwards of 3 independently locking differentials. The resale value when the head gaskets is blown is next to nothing, and the great 5 year 60,000 mile power train warranty doesn’t even cover the average mileage people drive in 8 years. It only requires you mosty pay off the average loan length for a new vehicle. My Tesla costs 13 cents to drive about 4 miles, where the equivalent combustion car, with 400 horsepower and 400 foot pounds of torque, costs upwards of a dollar to drive the same. The high strung powerplants in performance cars require regular, expensive, maintenance, and if you actually push them will blow up in under 10,000 miles. An LS3 crate motor costs more than the car is worth and that doesn’t even include the transmission or any of the other drivetrain components. No one should buy and keep a combustion engine for more than 10 years or you risk “being the bag holder” and stuck with a cancer emitting 4,000 pound paperweight.

Even if Meta doesn’t do it themselves there are likely hundreds of companies that do, and Meta can pay them for the data they want.

What about something like the Salem witch trials.

Everyone agreed they were witches.

There is no such thing as a witch

I guess I’m not following your thesis then. Can you say, simply, what you believe ethics are. And why democracies are inherently more ethical

I fully believe a benevolent dictator has more capacity to be ethical than even the strongest democracy.

And it’s ridiculous to argue otherwise.

In reductive terms, there is ultimately the best decision. The thing that is the best. Humans, by definition, have varying capacity, and varying experience. I can say, unequivocally, that younger me was an idiot. And the decisions I make now are much better than the decisions I made when I was younger.

In a democracy you’re optimizing for the most acceptance of outcome. People of varying capacities and varying world views will argue their opinions, and results will be the closest to the middle ground that most people can live with.

So yes. If you’re maximizing for ethics a single person can do that.

And in my scenario the person who owns and controls the wages isn’t taking the stance of paying the lowest wage the market will bear.

Let’s push this a little further though. Let’s say the company paying $100/hour is ethical by your definition. And by your definition the comoany paying $200/hour cannot be.

I would argue the second is still the more ethical company, especially when you consider the community it’s within. There would be more resources for more people.

That’s just not true.

Let’s say a person became a billionaire running a consulting firm. The going rate for consultants at every other consulting firm is paying their employees $100/hour. Our billionaire paid their employees $200/hour.

Are you saying that wouldn’t be ethical?

No. You can confirm the server received it. That’s different from a user opening it and reading it

That’s the whole point. They can force you to agree to updated TOS before they allow you to access their app.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-repudiation

Legally you have to be able to prove someone received a thing. It’s why you get served when you’re sued. An agent physically hands you the complaint (or whatever they’re called). If the papers were put in the mail the person being sued could say they never received them.

Tell me you have never worked in IT security without telling me you never worked in IT security.

To give you an actual answer, instead of pure Internet snark, the concept you’re proposing is called “security through obscurity” if you want to research it.

The TL:DR of it is it doesn’t work. If it did, all software would be proprietary and things like viruses wouldn’t exist. The source code for Windows isn’t available, but Windows gets exploited constantly.

The guy I was responding too has edited his parent comment so many times it’s totally changed what he said.

In its original version he was spouting a bunch of nonsense implying that Elon tanking Twitter’s value somehow was going to end up with him profiting.

In the United States, publicly traded companies have responsibilities to timely and accurately report their financials. By Elon taking the company private, Twitter no longer has those fiduciary requirements.

That’s why I was pointing out how stupid OP was being, and banging on so hard on the public vs private company thing. Elon has, by all accounts, lost tens of billions of dollars in this whole ordeal.

Because he’s lost so much money I find it incredibly ridiculous people think this is some kind of conspiracy. Less people use it, the company is looked upon less and less favorably, and it’s reputation is in tatters. If you’re trying to make a platform to brainwash people into being racist the last thing you’d want is LESS people using it

It really wasn’t.

Great. So we agree. Twitter was a pubic company that is now a private company.

Glad we worked through that

The fiduciary and reporting responsibilities of public companies are drastically different than private.

Musk bought all of the shares, then took the company private, meaning all of those fiduciary and reporting responsibilities are no longer required.

Your understanding how public and private companies in the United States work is lacking.

What is public? A 501c3? c6? A government run organization like the post office? What legal and compliance frameworks did Twitter have to follow when it was publicly traded vs now when it’s not publicly traded. In your terms it was “private” in both instances. So please, educate me. How is Twitter different now

Let’s assume that’s true.

Let’s also assume Twitter collapses under its own weight within the next year.

How does that further Elon’s secret goal of spreading his brand of fascism and racism.

The fact you admit you’re using your own definition of publicly owned, instead of the legal definition of that word in the country in which it applies, and then double down with a bunch of “facts” you don’t understand, while really pouring on the condescension, is simply an amazing execution of trolling.

The sad thing, though, is I don’t think you’re trolling. I think you believe what you just said is true.