The number of times I shout “your car is supposed to be smarter than that!” As a Tesla does something like, without signaling, whips around me and into oncoming traffic to pass a stopped city bus is staggering.
The number of times I shout “your car is supposed to be smarter than that!” As a Tesla does something like, without signaling, whips around me and into oncoming traffic to pass a stopped city bus is staggering.
A coworker of mine was recently bragging about their new electric mustang and its zero to sixty time. “Have you ever gone zero to sixty?” was my only response. Of all the facts and figures, 0-60 has you to be one of the least important when buying a car.
Competition is the answer, though. The problem is companies ended up competing the wrong way. If I could watch “The Office” on any streaming platform, suddenly they’re all in competition to create a better platform (quicker loads, different pricing models, integration with different devices, etc). By limiting shows to only certain platforms, sure, you’re creating an easy way to differentiate between platforms, but you’re letting the competition stagnate as you just create cable TV with extra steps: minimal choice, minimal ease of use, minimal cost upside.
I was having this same conversation the other day. Have you ever seen that picture where different people involved in the creation of the video game Kirby draw the title character? Two look really good, and the rest are awkward blobs that only look like Kirby because of the power of suggestion.
Anyway, I genuinely think a team of Tesla employees (independent of Musk) were talking about building a truck, and all took turns drawing something while pulling together numbers before the pitch to Musk. As a joke, the design team mocked up the worst sketch in 3D, and Musk accidentally saw the design in the Slack chat history and demanded it.
Either that, or some sort of “have your kid draw the next Tesla” employee contest, and the design teams modeled the funniest ones as actual cars for the company newsletter. Like those companies that’ll turn your kid’s drawings into real life stuffed toys.
For a service like Twitter, where user numbers define value, using it is 100% supporting it. Again, the metaphor falls apart because suggesting they can’t use other options suggests they might die, which is painfully untrue for the vast majority of Twitter users (literally no user in a developed country relies on Twitter for life/death information in a way other sources can’t provide).
Oh, shit, well as long as they got to the restaurant before the Nazi bought it, I guess there’s no harm in continuing to support it. Especially if they don’t have the technical knowledge to… Stop using a website?
This metaphor falls down when you realize the table is in a restaurant owned by a Nazi, and the table by the window makes the restaurant look really popular.
Refusing to concede the table is literally adding value to the Nazi owned table, and giving others cover to say “no we also hate Nazis; we’re just here because that table looks cool” which furthers the problem.
I wonder who makes the mainframes used at NSA domestic spying server farms, or who run the computing for predator drone targeting systems. “Not profitable to be vocal in support of antisemitism” hardly means “currently on the moral high ground”…
STARK: “wow, your intellect is stunning. I look forward to seeing what you’ll be able to accomplish in the next few years”
CAMERA PANS
GRETA THUNBERG SMILES