I never understood why some people take one comment of “I don’t agree with that criticism” and think you are some diehard fanboy? I don’t like Apple, I don’t like Tesla or Elon Musk, but sometimes I disagree with some criticism they get and basically every single time someone thinks I must be a loyal fan.

I’m sure there are those who will or could make great use of USB3 speeds, but I think like 99% of the users won’t notice the difference because they just don’t use it. I know I’ve never used USB for data transfer in my last couple Android phones, I only use it for charging and even that is greatly reduced since I mainly use wireless charging now.

I feel like not many people actually use the data port on their phones anymore, I know I haven’t used my android USB port for anything other than fast charging for I feel like 10 years. Do you even use the data connector on your phone?

If they could find a better liar and hype man than musk, that would be a miracle.

If you had someone honest at the head of Tesla saying realistic stuff like “we won’t have FSD for at least a decade, robotaxis even longer, and it’s going to take more than just the cameras we have” and “due to legal liability concerns we are pulling FSD from the market until it’s ready” , I don’t think you would have nearly that market cap.

Tesla built that market cap off Mr Hypeman, the market cap only begins to make sense if those hype promises are realistic. If Mr Reality takes over Tesla that market cap is going to crash hard, they need Mr Hypeman.

It’s not just the share percent, it’s the whole company culture, he is the face of Tesla and his crazy thinking and over promising got the company this far. I doubt it would have gotten this far with a more rational and ethical CEO.

He is the ultimate hype man, without him Tesla just wouldn’t have the same pull IMO.

You have eyes that are way more amazing than any cameras that are used in self driving, with stereoscopic vision, on a movable platform, and most importantly, controlled via a biological brain with millions of years of evolution behind it.

I’m sorry, you can’t attach a couple cameras to a processor, add some neural nets, and think it’s anything close to your brain and eyes.

It’s ok, it’s in beta, so some features may not be complete just yet, but hey, let’s just release this to the public anyways.

I agree that Tesla has done a lot to push us towards a more sustainable future with cars, and unfortunately I have to give Musk some credit for that also. The thing is, I don’t think you can separate Musk and Tesla like you are trying to.

Without Musk there really isn’t a Tesla. Even now they are very tied to him and his way of thinking. Nobody but Musk would ask someone to design the Cyber truck, and nobody but Musk would even call it that, or name the other vehicles so they spell S3XY, or release beta driver assist /self driving software to the public.

A lot of the problem with Tesla is Musk though, especially when it comes to the whole FSD and Autopilot thing. Tesla is spreading misleading data and releasing software to the public that they really shouldn’t be, and it’s Musk that is pushing for that to happen.

I hate to say this, but Facebook Messenger is one of the most fully featured messaging apps. It has its own internal messaging standard that offers iMessage like features between Facebook users, and it also is one of the better SMS apps out there.

I can see why they make it its own app, it’s supposed to replace other messaging apps.

This could be true of basically any Android phone on specific carriers, at least in the US.

Lucky until we get actual quantum computing, it’s not worth the years on a supercomputer to crack a single stolen set of encrypted passwords.

Yes really, I’m part of that pro gun community, I own some myself. In the US, we have certain rights that are in our constitution, like the right to freedom of speech, freedom of the press, a trial by jury, and along with all those is the right to bear arms. It was so important to early America it’s the second amendment, right behind free speech.

Just having a gun, or any item that is also a weapon really, doesn’t oppose the right to live. Both exist, it’s illegal to kill someone with your fists, a knife, a bat, or a gun, it doesn’t matter what tool is used.

Most mass shooters fit the definition of “law abiding gun owner” right up to the minute they start firing into crowds.

So they aren’t law abiding? Glad we can agree on that. Yes it’s legal to carry a gun around as long as you don’t go shooting random people with it, what’s the point? I carry a pocket knife everywhere I go, that’s also legal also as long as I don’t go stabbing people.

Who blocks expanded checks and red flag laws that would have prevented mass shooters from buying semi-automatic weapons on a whim

So about red flag laws. Should red flags prevent the ability to practice a right? I’m not mentioning any specific right because constitutionally they all have the same protections. If it’s illegal to use two flags to prevent free speech, it’s illegal to use it for any other right, that’s how rights work.

The people wanting to single out one right are destroying the integrity of the most important document in US history. There are correct ways to do it, but they aren’t being done, instead they are trying to do things unconstitutionally. Removing a right is hard, and requires agreement, and there isn’t enough support to do it so the left resorts to unconstitutional methods and the right fights to stop it.

And surprise surprise, it’s the same groups that routinely strips other people of their rights without a glimmer of guilt or self awareness.

I’m also against the recent movements to remove stuff like the right to abortion, but I was honestly shocked to see how weak the argument that made abortion a “right” was. Did you know how the original Roe V Wade decision was made?

It starts with the 14th amendment, known as the amendment that gave citizenship to anyone born in the USA, and providing them equal protection under the law. There is one line in the 14th amendment that reads “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law”. The supreme court decided that one little phrase gives us the implied right of privacy. From that right to privacy, they determined that means we also have the right to abortion, but only some abortion, no late term abortion.

So not surprising it was a very controversial decision that many saw as the right result in the wrong way. I’m honestly surprised it lasted 50 years.

They do have that right actually, which is why we punish those who take those rights away. Just because it’s illegal doesn’t mean people can’t break the laws

You can’t sue “the availability of guns”, but you can sue YouTube, Reddit, the manufacturer, and whoever else is involved and at least try to get some money out of them.

I know you are intentionally exaggerating a bit, but they do make pretty small portable chargers. I have an Anker PowerCore 5000, it has 1-2 full charges depending on your phone, and easily fits in a pocket

There are lots of people who just want to hear that they are right, that others agree with them. They would rather hang out in an echo chamber where it’s constantly reinforced that their opinions are right rather than hear people who disagree with them.

Personally I value hearing and understanding why others have different opinions than I do.

They probably didn’t make much on the software locked car, so they are banking on people that buy it to pay for the upgrades. They also didn’t want to invest in a new assembly like just to produce this limited run vehicle

In this particular case I think this was a one off where they needed to make the car cheaper so that it was eligible for some rebate. To do that they took the model 3 they were already making, software locked the rear heated seats, some battery capacity, and maybe some other stuff, then sold the car for just under the limit. Then of course they added the option to pay to unlock these features.

As far as I know, they are not doing this kind of thing today besides unlocking some performance, but I could be wrong. Even with the performance I think the cost mostly covers the extra stress breaking stuff under warranty.

If I remember correctly, rear heated seats were only extra (and pre-installed just needing a software update to enable) once. There was a time when the cheapest model 3 was slightly too expensive for some rebates, so they sold a software locked version that was just barely was under the limit for the rebate. To reduce the initial price they software locked the rear heated seats, along with some battery capacity, and maybe one or two other things, all of which you could pay to unlock afterwards.