Elon Musk will be interviewing Donald Trump on Monday (August 12). The interview will take place on Xitter, which rather famously melted down during Ron DeSantis' campaign launch event. Despite having his account restored, this will be Trump's first appearance on Xitter since his account was "permanently" suspended in 2021. Musk isn't a trained interviewer, so this could go off the rails pretty quickly. Still, the two do have a lot in common (malignant narcisism, racism, fondness for divorce, disappointment in their kids, etc.) that they should be able to find common ground.
So by what legal mechanism is the "well-regulated militia" bit routinely ignored ?
Through judicial interpretation about what that phrase means and how it relates to the rest of the amendment, as @Leorning Cniht notes. There is not, of course, agreement about the interpretation it has been given.
I wouldn't put it past the current US Supreme Court to rule whatever Amendment limits Presidents to two terms unconstitutional or improperly implemented if they thought it was in their political interests.
I'm not sure even this Supreme Court could rule something unconstitutional when it's actually in the constitution.
Indeed, the Constitution by definition cannot be unconstitutional. And there is nothing in the Constitution that allows a president to “suspend” it.
Or disallows?
The Constitution is the fundamental law of the United States. It creates the office of president, and it would need to specifically allow for the executive to suspend its operations. It does not do that. Instead, it requires the president to take an oath that he or she “will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” I have a hard time imagining how a president could, consistent with that oath, suspend any provision of the Constitution.
So by what legal mechanism is the "well-regulated militia" bit routinely ignored ?
A landmark ruling in 2008 - Court of District of Columbia v. Heller: The Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment rights adhere to individuals, that the phrase "well regulated militia" refers to the pool of men available for conscription, and that the right to bear arms includes self-defense (Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute). In other words, five Supreme Court justices couldn't read plain English.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he removes the amendment in the constitution that only allows presidents to serve a maximum of two terms. I wouldn’t even put it past him to try and abolish elections altogether.
Nothing Trump would try to do would surprise me, but he can't just remove a constitutional amendment. I think he'd try to get the courts to help him get around it, maybe get the Supreme Court to interpret the amendment to mean no more than two consecutive terms or some such bullshit. Actually changing the US Constitution isn't easy.
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.
If you can do that sort of thing, potentially, if I were Trump I would say, I never lost the first election - so therefore my term didn’t legitimately end and I’m still on the first term.
Also does the constitution specify how long a term is ? It doesn’t appear to be in the 22nd amendment. ETA - scratch that question, just found it in the constitution.
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.
If you can do that sort of thing, potentially, if I were Trump I would say, I never lost the first election - so therefore my term didn’t legitimately end and I’m still on the first term.
Also does the constitution specify how long a term is ? It doesn’t appear to be in the 22nd amendment. ETA - scratch that question, just found it in the constitution.
There are some ultra right wing crazies who may buy that argument but no self-respecting judge, even a right winger, would.
The only way I can see Trump “suspending” the constitution would be through martial means, and I don’t think the whole military would be on board with that.
Also does the constitution specify how long a term is ? It doesn’t appear to be in the 22nd amendment. ETA - scratch that question, just found it in the constitution.
For the sake of others, Article II, Section 1 says:
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years . . . .
And the Twentieth Amendment, Section 1 says:
The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
(Prior to this amendment, Tem’s began and ended in March.)
As for Trump claiming he never lost the first election, what matters is that the joint session of the Senate and the House of Representatives certified Biden as the winner, and Biden was inaugurated. It also matters that despite the 62 lawsuits Trump’s campaign filed, he ultimately lost them all.
If Trump were to persist even now in claiming that he never lost the election in 2020, that would mean that he's been President for the past four years. If so, despite all evidence and a series of decisions to the contrary his second presidency is shortly to expire and he can't now stand for a third one. So that actually gets in the way of his having a second bite at the cherry.
If Trump were to persist even now in claiming that he never lost the election in 2020, that would mean that he's been President for the past four years.
No, it wouldn’t. The Joint Session of Congress certified the results of the votes of each state’s electors and declared Biden the winner, and that settles the question. Trump can say all he wants to that he really won, but the certification of Biden legally establishes Biden as the winner, and Biden, not Trump, took the oath on January 20, 2021. No one is president without taking that oath.
Even if Trump’s lies weren’t lies, Trump has not been president for the last three-and-a-half years. “Should have served” doesn’t equal “is serving.”
Thanks @Nick Tamen. I like that the constitution 'creates the office of president' and that they must take an oath to it. Powerful things oaths, as Hitler knew.
I mean, I have no idea what is happening in the US political system. But I would make a couple of predictions for the state in 4 years time:
1. Musk will be a failed and probably bankrupt businessman, and will no longer have any influence. He will only be a piece of history.
2. Trumps mental degredation will mean he will not be alive at that time.
Of course, the next few years will be difficult if he is elected. But I have more hopes than I used to that this will not happen.
Musk will be a failed and probably bankrupt businessman, and will no longer have any influence. He will only be a piece of history.
He may have some unpleasant ideas, but I don’t see any reason to think that his businesses are anywhere near failure and bankruptcy. Tesla cars seem to be everywhere these days, and Xitter doesn’t seem to be much less popular than it’s ever been.
Is it likely that his recent comments about 'civil war' will have an adverse effect on sales of Teslas in the UK (not quite a Ratner moment, but along the same lines)? I certainly won't be buying one while he owns the company.
Musk will be a failed and probably bankrupt businessman, and will no longer have any influence. He will only be a piece of history.
He may have some unpleasant ideas, but I don’t see any reason to think that his businesses are anywhere near failure and bankruptcy. Tesla cars seem to be everywhere these days, and Xitter doesn’t seem to be much less popular than it’s ever been.
I'm pretty sure that disappointing earnings reports and massive layoffs are a better gauge of Tesla's health as a business than simply observing that you see a lot of Tesla's in places that you happen to frequent.
As for Xitter, it does not charge a subscription fee to most members so the number of users is only indirectly linked to profitability. That said, Xitter is actually less popular now than when Musk acquired it. At any rate, Xitter's users aren't its customers, they're its product. Xitter makes money by selling all those eyeballs to advertisers and, as previously noted, the demand for advertising on Xitter has declined fairly sharply since Musk implemented his changes at the company.
I'm not sure if these factors will be enough to drive Tesla or Xitter out of business, or even into a bankruptcy reorganization, but they're far from the thriving enterprises you portray them as based on some pretty spurious metrics.
Elon Musk’s X just sued a nonprofit advertising group out of existence
New York
CNN
—
A major ad industry group is shutting down, days after Elon Musk-owned X filed a lawsuit that claimed the group illegally conspired to boycott advertising on his platform.
“GARM is a small, not-for-profit initiative, and recent allegations that unfortunately misconstrue its purpose and activities have caused a distraction and significantly drained its resources and finances,” the group said in a statement Friday. “GARM therefore is making the difficult decision to discontinue its activities.”
It reminds me of Peter Thiel and Gawker. Though in the case of GARM, it didn't even get to court.
Is it likely that his recent comments about 'civil war' will have an adverse effect on sales of Teslas in the UK (not quite a Ratner moment, but along the same lines)? I certainly won't be buying one while he owns the company.
Is it likely that his recent comments about 'civil war' will have an adverse effect on sales of Teslas in the UK (not quite a Ratner moment, but along the same lines)? I certainly won't be buying one while he owns the company.
It’s extremely unlikely that I’ll ever be in a position to afford to buy a Tesla. That said, I’m trying to figure out if there’s a way of refusing a Tesla when ordering an Uber
Is it likely that his recent comments about 'civil war' will have an adverse effect on sales of Teslas in the UK (not quite a Ratner moment, but along the same lines)? I certainly won't be buying one while he owns the company.
Is it likely that his recent comments about 'civil war' will have an adverse effect on sales of Teslas in the UK (not quite a Ratner moment, but along the same lines)? I certainly won't be buying one while he owns the company.
It’s extremely unlikely that I’ll ever be in a position to afford to buy a Tesla. That said, I’m trying to figure out if there’s a way of refusing a Tesla when ordering an Uber
I don't know, will that really affect Musk or even the Tesla company in any way? Or are you thinking about some kind of risk?
It probably won’t make any difference at all but at least I’ll feel better. I’ve been boycotting Nestle products for over 20 years, but they are still going strong.
Since getting my Zoe last year my respect for Tesla has fallen. Mostly because of the Tesla charging network, which is just for Tesla drivers. There's a service station I know with a bank of a dozen Tesla chargers, until earlier this year there were no other chargers there. When I stopped on the way south last week, 5 of the 6 general chargers were in use - and the one that was free had a fault - but there were only 3-4 cars using the Tesla chargers. I had to proceed to the next service station (which I know from experience has awful charging infrastructure, though I did this time notice that there was a section of car park closed off for the installation of additional chargers) where I plugged in at very slow charge rate to get the 15miles extra range to get to the next service station where there's a large number of chargers. Until the general charging infrastructure that everyone can use it's deeply irritating to be unable to charge your car when there's unused Tesla chargers that can't be used. Even if Musk gives up all his shares in Tesla and has no further role in the company I'm not planning on getting a Tesla unless they make all their charging infrastructure available to all (I'd be OK with them keeping their lower costs for Tesla drivers).
Is it likely that his recent comments about 'civil war' will have an adverse effect on sales of Teslas in the UK (not quite a Ratner moment, but along the same lines)? I certainly won't be buying one while he owns the company.
I won’t be buying one at all. I had one as a courtesy car on insurance for three weeks, while ours was being fixed (rear ended by a wagon)
I hated the Tesla. Everything about it was inferior. Too low, uncomfortable seats, screen to the side with no dashboard. Nope. I was glad when our car returned.
@Alan Cresswell, can you charge your car at home? Or do you rely on service stations? If the latter, are there enough of them around? I feel like people aren't going to switch to electric vehicles en masse until the charging part gets easier.
I'm in a flat (apartment) with street parking - so, I can't charge at home and rely on public chargers. There's a bank of 20kW chargers at work that I use most often - an hour a week on one of those gives me the charge I need for most of my use, it'll take about 2h to recharge from <10% to full but I rarely get that low. The infrastructure on motorways is almost good enough to be sure of getting a charge at any stop, there are exceptions usually related to faulty chargers but also in busy locations the number of chargers available. When going somewhere I'm not familiar with it's well worth researching where charging stations are (I use the ZapMap app for that) and planning around that, there are some places where the number of chargers is sub-optimal, ideally there'd be chargers anywhere that people might stop for at least 20 minutes, such as supermarkets and other shopping areas, cinemas etc. The variety of apps needed to access chargers is a bit annoying - I've currently got seven apps for different charging networks on my phone.
Despite the occasional irritation of faulty chargers or none of them free (and, the occasional charger that's ICEd) I've no regrets switching to all electric, and never had any real problems with charging even though sometimes it's been more hassle than it should be - hassle that could be reduced if all public chargers are available for all rather than limiting some to drivers of one make of car.
I hated the Tesla. Everything about it was inferior. Too low, uncomfortable seats, screen to the side with no dashboard. Nope. I was glad when our car returned.
The "shove a big screen in the centre of the car" layout is not one I admire. When I'm driving, I don't want to want to look in that direction. I want to look forwards. So I want everything I want to look at to be in front of me, not beside me. I have a similar complaint about touchscreens - they're a safety hazard. For anything that I might want to operate whilst driving (which includes controls to adjust the music, for example), physical buttons are necessary. Because I don't want to have to look where my hands are.
@Alan Cresswell, can you charge your car at home? Or do you rely on service stations? If the latter, are there enough of them around? I feel like people aren't going to switch to electric vehicles en masse until the charging part gets easier.
For me, the big challenge for electric cars is the time they take to charge. For local use, where charging at home, at work, or wherever can meet all your needs, they seem clearly superior.
For long distance driving, the comparison isn't the same. You don't have to worry about recharging a petrol car, or planning around its recharging needs, because it takes two minutes at the pump to recover 250-300 miles of range, and petrol stations are everywhere.
Electric car advocates talk about how you want to stop for a break anyway, and get out and stretch your legs and have a coffee and go to the loo or whatever, and so claim that the 20+ minutes your car needs on a fast DC charger to gain 250 miles of range doesn't matter. That matches the way that some people use their cars, but it doesn't match the way I use mine, which is a barrier for me switching to electric at the moment. I think if the charge time was 5 minutes or less, my issue would go away, but that presents some significant physics challenges.
@Alan Cresswell also mentions the chaotic proliferation of tools needed to interact with the chargers. The mess of different apps is a poor experience, and the provision of real-time information about a charger's occupancy and operational status is patchy. You'll point out that petrol stations don't offer live status, but they don't need to, because they almost always work, there is almost never more than a few minutes queueing required to wait for an empty pump in even the busiest stations (panic-buying excepted), and if a station has lost power, or its tanks are empty, there's probably another one on the next corner.
Presumably some of this is early-adopter nonsense, but I suspect the app proliferation might stay. There's a modern anti-consumer trend for companies to weaponize their apps to create a captive market.
@Alan Cresswell" Thanks! I don't need to replace my car, but I want to be mentally ready to go electric when the time comes, and knowing fellow apartment-dwellers manage it goes a long way toward that. Though it might take a while -- there are weeks when the only time the car moves is when I'm doing a big grocery run.
About Musk and his fuckery -- I just read in The Guardian that Labour MPs are looking at ditching X because it promoted the far-right rioting in England. I wonder how many will actually quit. I think governments should set up Mastodon instances, but I'm not holding my breath.
And more: Trump is back to posting on X as of this morning, and Musk is going to do a live talk with him on X tonight. Trump Media shares are down 5% today. The thing I wonder here is whether Musk has enough people employed at X to keep the thing from having massive technical problems while he's promoting Trump.
Electric car advocates talk about how you want to stop for a break anyway, and get out and stretch your legs and have a coffee and go to the loo or whatever, and so claim that the 20+ minutes your car needs on a fast DC charger to gain 250 miles of range doesn't matter. That matches the way that some people use their cars, but it doesn't match the way I use mine, which is a barrier for me switching to electric at the moment. I think if the charge time was 5 minutes or less, my issue would go away, but that presents some significant physics challenges.
My car, which is a bit older than newer top range models (which have ultra rapid charging), is limited to 50kW charging and so takes about an hour to add 200 miles to the range (the range on full charge is nominally 250 miles, but in practice closer to 200 miles unless it's a hot summer day with temperatures in the 20C+ range). For my driving, which would include the strongly advised significant break every 2.5h or so, that works out fine. It forces me to take a slightly longer break than I otherwise would, but that's useful as I don't start off again still feeling tired (though, also without the noise and vibration of internal combustion engines driving long distances is a lot less tiring to start with). I'm not capable of spending 2-3h without some form of break, I need the loo around then and also something to eat and drink. I've never understood those who can drive for much longer than that without drinking or eating something (though, I suppose if they aren't eating and drinking then they won't need the loo as often). I can see bigger problems for those who travel with two (or more) drivers and stop to change drivers thus allowing the non-drivers to rest, eat, drink etc while someone else is behind the wheel.
Developments in battery technology and power management are increasing the rate at which batteries can charge, and many newer EV models will accept charging rates significantly faster than the 50kW maximum of my Zoe. A 300kW charger would, in theory, reduce the 1h charging time I need to about 10min, which would allow that quick pop to the loo or buy some coffee for non-drivers to drink on the way stop every 3h or so (which, assuming you're not stuck in traffic is about the range of a full charge), and reduce the need for substantial charging infrastructure (but, still a much greater number of chargers than presently available) as each charger isn't going to be occupied as long allowing more cars to use it.
@Alan Cresswell also mentions the chaotic proliferation of tools needed to interact with the chargers. The mess of different apps is a poor experience, and the provision of real-time information about a charger's occupancy and operational status is patchy.
"Patchy" is an understatement. I get real-time status on my sat-nav, which gives red (not available) and green (available) symbols next to charging stations on the map - but though I've yet to find a green station that's not available (with maybe one or two exceptions of someone pulling in immediately in front of me) it's very common for red stations to be available (especially where there are multiple chargers, it seems to go red for the lot if one is faulty or if most are in use). Even an amber (limited availability) symbol would be useful. But, the biggest issue seems to be with how current the data is - I don't need to know if a charger was available half an hour ago, the question is is it available now? Even better, will it be available in 10 minutes when I get there ... though that would require prescience similar to the lifts at the publishers of the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy which could see into the future to be at each floor when needed, so isn't likely any time soon.
As you note, the app proliferation is likely to stay. Some providers have shared their payments so something like ZapMap allows payment across several networks, but the majority still stick with their own apps. It's OK if a charger uses an app already installed, but it's a massive pain to install a new app before you can use a charger you've not used before, and of course is quite a bit of time. Most of our motorway chargers allow the use of contactless card payment, which is much more convenient - though for at least two providers there's a significant discount for using the app (which you pay for by giving someone the data about where you charge ...). The biggest complaint I've heard about apps for payment is when someone puts chargers in an underground carpark where there's no phone signal ... very clever (not).
And, also returning to Musk ... I see he's inviting Humza Yousef (former First Minister of Scotland) to sue him after Musk tweeted (is that still the right word now it's X?) that Yousef is a massive racist. Is that an example of "free speech" where you can say whatever you want providing you've deep enough pockets to pay for defamation and libel costs?
Elon Musk "interviewed" Trump on Xitter yesterday, and it went about as well as you would expect, with a forty minute delay due to technical difficulties followed by two hours of two insufferable men rattling on about how great they each are. Musk is not a trained interviewer so his contribution was to occasionally agree with whatever Trump said. Trump himself sounded, in the words of one analyst, like "what happens when you give Daffy Duck Speed and force him to watch 24 hours of Hitler Speeches". Naturally the New York Times was available to tidy that all up for their account [ paywall ] of the interview.
And, also returning to Musk ... I see he's inviting Humza Yousef (former First Minister of Scotland) to sue him after Musk tweeted (is that still the right word now it's X?) that Yousef is a massive racist. Is that an example of "free speech" where you can say whatever you want providing you've deep enough pockets to pay for defamation and libel costs?
Can Musk be sued for that in a way that would affect him here as a non-UK citizen, though? I think in the US you could say that anyone is a racist and not be liable for a lawsuit. I don’t know the limits in the US for libel specifically, though—I’m just thinking about someone suing under UK laws affecting someone who isn’t a UK citizen or resident.
Can Musk be sued for that in a way that would affect him here as a non-UK citizen, though? I think in the US you could say that anyone is a racist and not be liable for a lawsuit. I don’t know the limits in the US for libel specifically, though—I’m just thinking about someone suing under UK laws affecting someone who isn’t a UK citizen or resident.
Someone who actually knows should correct me if I'm wrong, but since Musk does business in the UK I would think he can be sued there.
I hated the Tesla. Everything about it was inferior. Too low, uncomfortable seats, screen to the side with no dashboard. Nope. I was glad when our car returned.
The "shove a big screen in the centre of the car" layout is not one I admire. When I'm driving, I don't want to want to look in that direction. I want to look forwards. So I want everything I want to look at to be in front of me, not beside me. I have a similar complaint about touchscreens - they're a safety hazard. For anything that I might want to operate whilst driving (which includes controls to adjust the music, for example), physical buttons are necessary. Because I don't want to have to look where my hands are.
I'm not capable of spending 2-3h without some form of break, I need the loo around then and also something to eat and drink. I've never understood those who can drive for much longer than that without drinking or eating something (though, I suppose if they aren't eating and drinking then they won't need the loo as often). I can see bigger problems for those who travel with two (or more) drivers and stop to change drivers thus allowing the non-drivers to rest, eat, drink etc while someone else is behind the wheel.
When I'm at home or at work, I don't require a meal every 2-3 hours. That doesn't change if I'm driving a car.
If I'm driving a substantial distance, I'll generally bring water with me in the car, and drink when I'm thirsty.
I find that cruise control (and particularly adaptive cruise control) significantly reduces the fatigue I feel after driving a long distance. I don't find the various lane assist features helpful at all, though, because they don't reduce the amount of attention I need to pay.
It's not just long road-warrior journeys, though - I find that a lot of the drives that I do are of moderate distance, but end somewhere without charging facilities, because I'm parked at some rural campsite, or on a random street somewhere or something like that.
It depends on what you're used to. I bet people who live in the sparsely populated areas of North America are very used to taking long drives without stopping. I drove 4-plus hours to my parents' place non-stop more times than I can count over the course of over thirty years. And people regularly drive between SoCal and Vegas without stopping, 5 hours or so.
And, it's also going to depend on the nature of traffic where you are driving. I virtually never use my cruise control, because invariably if I set it then within a few minutes I'm forced to slow because traffic ahead is slowing (or, maybe just a slower moving vehicle but too much traffic to pass without waiting for a space). I've driven significant distances in the US, and the density of traffic between large urban areas is very light in comparison to the UK, and cruise control made sense.
We have done UK and US, and I think if your UK journey is motorways and it is not hugely busy and you can use cruise control, then a 3 hour journey is not unreasonable.
In the US, all of this is more likely, and 3 hours or so should be entirely normal. And you have to drive that far to get to the neighbours.
We have done UK and US, and I think if your UK journey is motorways and it is not hugely busy and you can use cruise control, then a 3 hour journey is not unreasonable.
In the US, all of this is more likely, and 3 hours or so should be entirely normal. And you have to drive that far to get to the neighbours.
Yes. When we did a long five week US road trip a daily five hours seemed a breeze. Over here in the UK five hours is a slog with road works or break downs regularly clogging up the system adding more (unpredictable) hours.
Comments
The Constitution is the fundamental law of the United States. It creates the office of president, and it would need to specifically allow for the executive to suspend its operations. It does not do that. Instead, it requires the president to take an oath that he or she “will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” I have a hard time imagining how a president could, consistent with that oath, suspend any provision of the Constitution.
A landmark ruling in 2008 - Court of District of Columbia v. Heller: The Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment rights adhere to individuals, that the phrase "well regulated militia" refers to the pool of men available for conscription, and that the right to bear arms includes self-defense (Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute). In other words, five Supreme Court justices couldn't read plain English.
Nothing Trump would try to do would surprise me, but he can't just remove a constitutional amendment. I think he'd try to get the courts to help him get around it, maybe get the Supreme Court to interpret the amendment to mean no more than two consecutive terms or some such bullshit. Actually changing the US Constitution isn't easy.
If you can do that sort of thing, potentially, if I were Trump I would say, I never lost the first election - so therefore my term didn’t legitimately end and I’m still on the first term.
Also does the constitution specify how long a term is ? It doesn’t appear to be in the 22nd amendment. ETA - scratch that question, just found it in the constitution.
There are some ultra right wing crazies who may buy that argument but no self-respecting judge, even a right winger, would.
The only way I can see Trump “suspending” the constitution would be through martial means, and I don’t think the whole military would be on board with that.
And the Twentieth Amendment, Section 1 says: (Prior to this amendment, Tem’s began and ended in March.)
As for Trump claiming he never lost the first election, what matters is that the joint session of the Senate and the House of Representatives certified Biden as the winner, and Biden was inaugurated. It also matters that despite the 62 lawsuits Trump’s campaign filed, he ultimately lost them all.
Or so it would appear to me.
Even if Trump’s lies weren’t lies, Trump has not been president for the last three-and-a-half years. “Should have served” doesn’t equal “is serving.”
Amen!
1. Musk will be a failed and probably bankrupt businessman, and will no longer have any influence. He will only be a piece of history.
2. Trumps mental degredation will mean he will not be alive at that time.
Of course, the next few years will be difficult if he is elected. But I have more hopes than I used to that this will not happen.
He may have some unpleasant ideas, but I don’t see any reason to think that his businesses are anywhere near failure and bankruptcy. Tesla cars seem to be everywhere these days, and Xitter doesn’t seem to be much less popular than it’s ever been.
I'm pretty sure that disappointing earnings reports and massive layoffs are a better gauge of Tesla's health as a business than simply observing that you see a lot of Tesla's in places that you happen to frequent.
As for Xitter, it does not charge a subscription fee to most members so the number of users is only indirectly linked to profitability. That said, Xitter is actually less popular now than when Musk acquired it. At any rate, Xitter's users aren't its customers, they're its product. Xitter makes money by selling all those eyeballs to advertisers and, as previously noted, the demand for advertising on Xitter has declined fairly sharply since Musk implemented his changes at the company.
I'm not sure if these factors will be enough to drive Tesla or Xitter out of business, or even into a bankruptcy reorganization, but they're far from the thriving enterprises you portray them as based on some pretty spurious metrics.
And he's also destroyed another organization, just by having lots of money for lawyers.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/09/tech/elon-musk-garm-advertisers-lawsuit/index.html
It reminds me of Peter Thiel and Gawker. Though in the case of GARM, it didn't even get to court.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattdrange/2019/12/23/best-stories-of-the-decade-behind-peter-thiels-plan-to-destroy-gawker/
Oh Jesus, what did he say now? (Looks it up)
https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/tech/elon-musk-civil-war-uk-riots/index.html
ARGHHHH
Is he just competing with Trump now to say/do something horrible every day, like a nonstop firehose of awfulness?
It’s extremely unlikely that I’ll ever be in a position to afford to buy a Tesla. That said, I’m trying to figure out if there’s a way of refusing a Tesla when ordering an Uber
Don't worry @ChastMastr. We've proved this savant trillionaire fascist moral moron wrong for a week now.
I don't know, will that really affect Musk or even the Tesla company in any way? Or are you thinking about some kind of risk?
I won’t be buying one at all. I had one as a courtesy car on insurance for three weeks, while ours was being fixed (rear ended by a wagon)
I hated the Tesla. Everything about it was inferior. Too low, uncomfortable seats, screen to the side with no dashboard. Nope. I was glad when our car returned.
Despite the occasional irritation of faulty chargers or none of them free (and, the occasional charger that's ICEd) I've no regrets switching to all electric, and never had any real problems with charging even though sometimes it's been more hassle than it should be - hassle that could be reduced if all public chargers are available for all rather than limiting some to drivers of one make of car.
The "shove a big screen in the centre of the car" layout is not one I admire. When I'm driving, I don't want to want to look in that direction. I want to look forwards. So I want everything I want to look at to be in front of me, not beside me. I have a similar complaint about touchscreens - they're a safety hazard. For anything that I might want to operate whilst driving (which includes controls to adjust the music, for example), physical buttons are necessary. Because I don't want to have to look where my hands are.
For me, the big challenge for electric cars is the time they take to charge. For local use, where charging at home, at work, or wherever can meet all your needs, they seem clearly superior.
For long distance driving, the comparison isn't the same. You don't have to worry about recharging a petrol car, or planning around its recharging needs, because it takes two minutes at the pump to recover 250-300 miles of range, and petrol stations are everywhere.
Electric car advocates talk about how you want to stop for a break anyway, and get out and stretch your legs and have a coffee and go to the loo or whatever, and so claim that the 20+ minutes your car needs on a fast DC charger to gain 250 miles of range doesn't matter. That matches the way that some people use their cars, but it doesn't match the way I use mine, which is a barrier for me switching to electric at the moment. I think if the charge time was 5 minutes or less, my issue would go away, but that presents some significant physics challenges.
@Alan Cresswell also mentions the chaotic proliferation of tools needed to interact with the chargers. The mess of different apps is a poor experience, and the provision of real-time information about a charger's occupancy and operational status is patchy. You'll point out that petrol stations don't offer live status, but they don't need to, because they almost always work, there is almost never more than a few minutes queueing required to wait for an empty pump in even the busiest stations (panic-buying excepted), and if a station has lost power, or its tanks are empty, there's probably another one on the next corner.
Presumably some of this is early-adopter nonsense, but I suspect the app proliferation might stay. There's a modern anti-consumer trend for companies to weaponize their apps to create a captive market.
About Musk and his fuckery -- I just read in The Guardian that Labour MPs are looking at ditching X because it promoted the far-right rioting in England. I wonder how many will actually quit. I think governments should set up Mastodon instances, but I'm not holding my breath.
And more: Trump is back to posting on X as of this morning, and Musk is going to do a live talk with him on X tonight. Trump Media shares are down 5% today. The thing I wonder here is whether Musk has enough people employed at X to keep the thing from having massive technical problems while he's promoting Trump.
Developments in battery technology and power management are increasing the rate at which batteries can charge, and many newer EV models will accept charging rates significantly faster than the 50kW maximum of my Zoe. A 300kW charger would, in theory, reduce the 1h charging time I need to about 10min, which would allow that quick pop to the loo or buy some coffee for non-drivers to drink on the way stop every 3h or so (which, assuming you're not stuck in traffic is about the range of a full charge), and reduce the need for substantial charging infrastructure (but, still a much greater number of chargers than presently available) as each charger isn't going to be occupied as long allowing more cars to use it.
"Patchy" is an understatement. I get real-time status on my sat-nav, which gives red (not available) and green (available) symbols next to charging stations on the map - but though I've yet to find a green station that's not available (with maybe one or two exceptions of someone pulling in immediately in front of me) it's very common for red stations to be available (especially where there are multiple chargers, it seems to go red for the lot if one is faulty or if most are in use). Even an amber (limited availability) symbol would be useful. But, the biggest issue seems to be with how current the data is - I don't need to know if a charger was available half an hour ago, the question is is it available now? Even better, will it be available in 10 minutes when I get there ... though that would require prescience similar to the lifts at the publishers of the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy which could see into the future to be at each floor when needed, so isn't likely any time soon.
As you note, the app proliferation is likely to stay. Some providers have shared their payments so something like ZapMap allows payment across several networks, but the majority still stick with their own apps. It's OK if a charger uses an app already installed, but it's a massive pain to install a new app before you can use a charger you've not used before, and of course is quite a bit of time. Most of our motorway chargers allow the use of contactless card payment, which is much more convenient - though for at least two providers there's a significant discount for using the app (which you pay for by giving someone the data about where you charge ...). The biggest complaint I've heard about apps for payment is when someone puts chargers in an underground carpark where there's no phone signal ... very clever (not).
Absent a Constitutional amendment, Elon Musk is not qualified to be president. He's not a natural born American citizen.
For their part the Harris/Walz campaign highlighted Trump's praise of Musk's willingness to fire workers who strike for better working conditions.
[x-posted with 2024 U.S. Presidential Election thread]
Today the United Auto Workers filed labor charges against both of them for intimidating workers.
Can Musk be sued for that in a way that would affect him here as a non-UK citizen, though? I think in the US you could say that anyone is a racist and not be liable for a lawsuit. I don’t know the limits in the US for libel specifically, though—I’m just thinking about someone suing under UK laws affecting someone who isn’t a UK citizen or resident.
Someone who actually knows should correct me if I'm wrong, but since Musk does business in the UK I would think he can be sued there.
Exactly
When I'm at home or at work, I don't require a meal every 2-3 hours. That doesn't change if I'm driving a car.
If I'm driving a substantial distance, I'll generally bring water with me in the car, and drink when I'm thirsty.
I find that cruise control (and particularly adaptive cruise control) significantly reduces the fatigue I feel after driving a long distance. I don't find the various lane assist features helpful at all, though, because they don't reduce the amount of attention I need to pay.
It's not just long road-warrior journeys, though - I find that a lot of the drives that I do are of moderate distance, but end somewhere without charging facilities, because I'm parked at some rural campsite, or on a random street somewhere or something like that.
In the US, all of this is more likely, and 3 hours or so should be entirely normal. And you have to drive that far to get to the neighbours.
Yes. When we did a long five week US road trip a daily five hours seemed a breeze. Over here in the UK five hours is a slog with road works or break downs regularly clogging up the system adding more (unpredictable) hours.