He made a comment in a discussion, as can anyone. People disagree with his comment. Intervention my ass, all he did is express his opinion, which everyone is free to ignore.

Where are you getting the “deep-fake” from? The article doesn’t mention that. All the footage is real, it was just cut to take his words out of context.

No AI was involved here, did you read the article? The video was just edited to reorder what he said, changing the context.

Sure. But they are often copies of best selling products from third party sellers, again throwing them under the bus.

Their customers are the sellers, and the sellers are getting fleeced just fine.

The buyers are a product they provide to the sellers.

It’s supposed to be outside the scale, like a fuel gauge before you start the car. Which I agree is not great, but I can see what they were going for.

Yes, what’s your point? Airplane mode turns off the cellular, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth. You can then turn Wi-Fi and Bluetooth back on if you choose to, which only leaves the cellular network disabled.

I don’t know your threat model, but if airplane mode is not enough, then I wouldn’t trust wrapping it in tinfoil either, as that would be less reliable. There are of course better ways than both of these methods. Like leaving your phone home.

I’ve never had a phone that keeps Bluetooth or Wi-Fi on when enabling airplane mode, but sure, if yours does that then of course also disable them separately.

Airplane mode is supposed to stop any radio transmission from your device. GPS does not transmit anything, so there is no reason to disable it.

So does, you know, airplane mode

Sure, but the public perception was completely different. Tesla was a leftist political statement. Electric cars? Saving the climate? What a ridiculous idea only libs would subscribe to, electric cars will never work. Teslas were keyed by coal-rolling right wingers.

The opinion went a total 180°, and many people still own Teslas from that time. I have no sympathy for e.g. Cybertruck owners, but many Tesla owners were buying them years ago, when they were seen as tech for progressives that care about the environment.

If he didn’t mean it it would be very simple to at the very least post a tweet afterwards saying he’s sorry for the misunderstanding and that he didn’t mean it to look thay way. Like any innocent person would do in that situation.

The fact he didn’t shows all you need to know.

Do you have any evidence pointing at that? So far it seems SafetyCore is a local-only service that despite all the uproar no researchers actually found doing anything suspicious.

And the only thing I hate more than Google is misinformation and fearmongering.

Still a worse safety record than SpaceX’s.

• Soyuz-2: 143 successes / 148 launches (96.6%)
• Falcon 9: 446 successes / 448 launches (99.6%)

With 446 successful missions out of 448 total launches, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket has literally the best safety record in the history of human spaceflight. No safer rocket has ever existed. So that would be a weird reaction. They’d be worried about a Boeing spacecraft.

Of course they might be against flying with a Nazi’s company, but that has nothing to do with safety.

To be fair, only their crazy concept rocket keeps falling tests. The actual in use rockets have literally the best success/safety rate in history. Just a shame a Nazi owns the company.

So they will fight the fraud, and all the saved money instead of going to dead people will go to living people, meaning people will get more under these programs?

Right? /s

Did anyone read the tweet? They are defending their decision not to change the name, because the change isn’t official. No, they haven’t “announced they will change the name”.

Yeah, you can logically conclude based on that that they will update it once it’s official, but the reporting is the opposite of what they said.

Yeah, the “may” totally changes it. If the jury thinks the defendant is not guilty, then it’s just a not guilty verdict, not jury nullification. For it to be jury nullification, the jury has to think the defendant is guilty.