Presumably you're not a admin cabinet member or related to one or have inside info from those in the cabinet, which is the key differentiator.

Totally with you on the corruption angle. I was just pointing out that loaning businesses money isn’t inherently evil. I’m also unconvinced anyone I lent to actually wants to go through the trouble and political risk of fighting for a refund.

That won’t matter. Hypocrisy is a given.

The correct default position with this admin is bad faith and/or malice.

If you were developing this site wouldn’t you just develop a formula to calculate the discount? Hate to that’s a typo unless you didn’t do any testing.

Luckily we are able to tos\ spot lazy bs here.

This document is full of all kinds of vile behavior by several men, including Trump (forced oral and penetration on 13-14 yo girls, ...). Hopefully this file was widely downloaded because this file no longer exists on the site.

> I wouldn’t be too surprised if robotaxi replaces 90% of taxis and Ubers in the next 5-7 years

I'd bet a kidney that doesn't happen.

Not Tesla’s version anyway

He didn't specify the year.

He said it's on April 1st [1]. So, yeah.

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2025/11/06/tesla-delays-reveal-of-pro...

On an earnings call, everyone expects it to be this year. Unless specified, it should be this year.

Also, if you compare the entire model line up sales, Tesla isn't even in the top ten in sales. Tesla could disappear entirely and the car industry wouldn't even notice.

But the metric is good since it incentivizes car companies to make 1 good model instead of many different with the intent to confuse buyers

Car buyers are not confused. The market is naturally highly segmented. My needs "every day low distance compact car that can cope with city centre narrow streets with once a month motorway driving" is not met by the same car as "family of 5 with big dog living in a village"

I'm going to go with the fool being followed. At least the following fool realizes that they need guidance, but just chose the wrong leader.

> but regardless we shouldn't be trying imply that intending to overturn elections in cases of fraud is bad in and of itself

The only rational viewpoint is to assume everything this administration does is in bad faith, until proven otherwise.

In the legal realm, journalist and legal analyst Emily Bazelon analyzes the legal "presumption of regularity" which has been trashed by the current administration.

The voluntary rapid disassembly of the world’s largest superpower, which is home to most large tech companies, seems very relevant, even without the tech component. I mean how often do you get to witness something like this?