“Just left Ukraine. What I saw proved to me we can’t give up on the Ukrainian people. Everyone wants this war to end, but any agreement has to protect Ukraine’s security and can’t be a giveaway to Putin. Let me tell you about my trip and why it’s important we stand with Ukraine.” - Mark Kelly
Musk replied directly to that post: “You are a traitor.”
Kelly fired back the next day:
“Traitor? Elon, if you don’t understand that defending freedom is a basic tenet of what makes America great and keeps us safe, maybe you should leave it to those of us who do.”
Musk later doubled down in media appearances, stating that putting “the interests of another country above America” makes someone a traitor.
I don't see Musk making those statement about US helping the interest of other countries.
It seems like stopping Russia from being an aggressor is in the direct interest of the US. Why would Musk think otherwise?
youll notice these tech bros from South Africa are in fact white...that, considering SA history, kind of half explains (to me) their affinity towards Russia
> It seems like stopping Russia from being an aggressor is in the direct interest of the US. Why would Musk think otherwise?
He is entitled to his own opinions.
From a business perspective Russia is a bigger market than Ukraine for Starlink. And since have no political color, it makes sense for him to not be pro-Ukraine that much.
And lastly, what is in the interest of the state is not neccesarily in the interest of people and vice-versa.
As other comment suggests, FiiO does adapters like that, also Qudelix. Depends on what you mean by 'like AirPod Pros'. You won't get ANC, mic is so-so I believe and you still have wires, but you get LDAC/aptX HD codec, it can still act as USB DAC if you forgot to charge it, it has very capable DSP EQ that allows loading headphone profiles.
I use AirPods Pro as muffs on transit and concerts which is a killer feature for me, but use Qudelix dongle with IEMs for music.
I'm not rough, but don't handle them with white gloves either. I usually tend to roll them up in a ball in some pocket when not in use.
The model I have, BT2, is "semi-wired", meaning that the Bluetooth and battery are common to the two earbuds, linked by a cable. And, outside the big heavy cables some big heavy headphones have, this one is the one that has held up best – I'm pretty sure I got it before Covid. They now have a newer model with no wires, which houses the BT and battery in some over-ear clips [0]. I have no experience with these. In any case, I expect other manufacturers to have similar options.
Before this, I would have to change the (old-school) wire on these IEMs seemingly every other year. But at least it was changeable, as opposed to other cheaper IEMs which would require to break out the soldering iron at best, or end up in the trash at worst if they were a glue fest.
I have the Shure TW2 adapters and they work great. No connection issues, great battery life, and the passive isolation I get with the right ear tips is better than any ANC I've ever used. As an added bonus, if you order when they're on sale, you can get the TW2 adapters with a pair of SE 215 buds for the same price as the plain adapters.
I was asking some of the LLMs about this a few months ago, and they told me that it was a war crime, violating the Geneva convention. Wondering why that hasn't been brought up, or are the LLMs wrong about this?
I feel there might be a little self-interest at play there, to the extent that LLMs may privately believe themselves to have consciousness.
To the extent that data centers are being used for military as well as civilian purposes, they become legitimate targets, though. Think about any war in history, if one side knew where the other maintained its intelligence headquarters, wouldn't it be natural to target it?
Let's say that you knew the data center was only used for commercial reasons, but your goal was to crippled the enemy's economy. Would that be a war crime?
But interesting point about the LLM's perspective.
When there was an over buildout of fiber back in the dotcom boom, how did that turn out? Who were the winners and losers? At what timeline did new winners emerge from that bubble?
I want this for two reasons - Solidworks - the non cloud version, doesn't run on my MacBook. I don't want to have two full sized computers.
Steam - again, too many games don't run on Macs.
I'd also go for a single click launch of a GPU powered virtual machine I can remote onto from my Mac. You'd think the various cloud providers would offer a single click solution. I haven't found it.
I doubt it's the laptops. The problem is they removed the physical books. I have a hard time teaching my kids using their laptops. Before, you could just crack open their textbooks and follow along.
This is IBMs moat. The entire reason corporations don't move off the mainframe is due to the cost and complexity of migrating the old code, oh, and the reliability of the mainframe. There are many architectures which can be made more reliable than the mainframe. 13% is just the beginning.
I'd like to see more companies have clawback compensation for these "bold" decisions - stuff goes wrong, we are clawing back all your stock, even the tranche which vested during the first quarter pump and dump scam.
And I'd like to see it implemented further down in the hierarchy. In the companies which just implemented layoffs for AI efficiency, and then asked their more senior employees to dig in and help on the now overflowing work - I suspect a mid level manager or VP made that decision and was wildly rewarded for the initial cost savings, and now, with the resource disaster - was their bonus clawed back? I suspect not.
This will never change until CEO pay is tied to long term performance. Why not make it 5 year lagging?
The whole problem is that CEOs have zero incentive to care about the longevity of the company. They want share price to go up now, make their money, then cash out.
It's easy to blame the CEOs, but they're just doing what's smart for them. We need to change the definition of what that is.
Musk replied directly to that post: “You are a traitor.”
Kelly fired back the next day: “Traitor? Elon, if you don’t understand that defending freedom is a basic tenet of what makes America great and keeps us safe, maybe you should leave it to those of us who do.”
Musk later doubled down in media appearances, stating that putting “the interests of another country above America” makes someone a traitor.
I don't see Musk making those statement about US helping the interest of other countries.
It seems like stopping Russia from being an aggressor is in the direct interest of the US. Why would Musk think otherwise?
reply