I know some. It's similar to being a fan of a team to the point you think you're part of that team (or the team has you convinced of that for marketing reasons). They have spent the last decade or so becoming emotionally invested in Musk, praising all the promises and thinking all the neat cool tech was revolutionary, and that they were part of the "future club" or something like that.

Now, as the wheels are literally falling off, they can't say anything bad, because that would be admitting they were wrong, that they misjudged Musk so their judgement is in question, they repeated Musk's lies and manipulation so they would be part of the lies, they were fooled and are therefore gullible, they bought expensive cars that didn't match the hype. People don't like to admit they were wrong, or were tricked, and this is a big one, so they hang on as long as there's a sliver of a chance it was actually true, regardless of the mental gymnastics needed to get there.

I also know some that have changed their mind. It was like a switch that got thrown, and they went from Musk worship to jilted ex-lover near instantly.

If I were to give Musk credit for anything, it would be for understanding how to manipulate and trap people by telling them what they want to hear.

"We can't offer the $80K version until we sell all of the $100K versions sitting in fields and abandoned mall parking lots, otherwise we'll never sell the $100K versions."

"We also have to keep building more, so we can say we've built a bunch every quarter without directly talking about how many actually sold."

It's the end of cheap cold-war era kitted tanks, sure.

But, drone detection, EW, and anti-drone lasers/CIWS will get slapped on western tanks and vehicles (at least some in each group). Then drones will adapt and not use the same frequencies, have self-targeting and flight, come in from new angles (super low terrain following) that make it hard for tanks to see/deal with, then the tanks get better, then the drones get stealthier and/or faster and/or swarm to overwhelm, the the tanks get more stuff slapped on them to deal with that. At some point in the future, the drones will cost what anti-tank missiles cost now if they expect to have any chance of success, and they will behave like them. Fire and forget, fast, self-targeting, swarms of drones that work together to determine what pattern of attack the tanks can't handle (all one direction or from all directions at once?) and then execute that attack with little warning and high speed to limit reaction abilities. Tanks might look way different in the future, but there's still a role in having a big gun you can bring with you.

That's my guess, but it's a classic arms race thing in general.

The gov't was fine with RC aircraft until Big Tech decided they could monetize the airspace with delivery drones. There were already laws in place about where you could fly, and people that violated them could get into trouble. The Tech Bros don't like the idea of recreational RC aircraft flying around in airspace they could be using for their benefit, so they are using the gov't to get it for themselves. Notice how they were involved in rule-making process, while recreational flyers were not involved or listened to. The FAA didn't even correctly follow the process to make the rules, and were sued, but it didn't matter. "Karens" complaining about drones to congress members (that own stock in the tech companies) is just an excuse.

None of the rules passed so far would prevent anything "bad" that could happen with drones by someone that actually wanted to do something bad, but they do prevent anyone without money and the ability to navigate ever-increasing processes from doing what they've always done. Big Tech doesn't even follow the rules everyone else does, they get waivers to do whatever they want that you will never get. If the FAA was really worried about safety, they would have said "do whatever you want below 400 feet unless you are in these certain areas". But we have RID everywhere, something even full aircraft aren't required to have (some aircraft can fly without radios of any kind, just can't go some places).

Then there's ultralights...no license, no registration, no radio, no required markings, no RID, no altitude limitation like drones, present more danger to other aircraft, but just stay out of controlled airspace and don't fly over people. Those things kill way more people than drones, yet drones are arguably far more regulated now. It doesn't make sense. Why not treat drones the same way, reserving all the regulation for the businesses that do want to operate in controlled airspace, or over people for events like in this post?

So, they are already like small planes...or any aircraft. Anyone can buy a plane, no pilot certification, training, or tests required. There are things you have to do to actually FLY the aircraft as the pilot, but nothing stops you from owning an aircraft as an owner.

You want them regulated more like firearms, where you have to pass a test, background check, or other hurdle to complete the purchase.

He rides the successes of the people that make good decisions (initial Telsa lineup, Falcon rockets), then decides he knows more than them, drives away the original designers/engineers, comes up with his own ideas, and you get things like Cybertruck, Optimus, Starship, Hyperloop, etc. that are being made because Musk fires anyone that doesn't say "yes, that's a great idea".

He's always been this way. All his "ideas" are lifted from others, with him taking sole credit as the original inventor, even at his first companies.

Drone operator doesn't even to get to go home early, they just link them to the next drone in line and continue with a full tank of gas and a fresh pot of coffee.

All of the above. In that order.

Same, I've worked with Boeing engineers for over 20 years on commercial and defense projects. They are bright, want to build great things, and do the right thing. It is the management that forces the bad decisions. The engineers are almost never allowed to have any contact with us without what we call "handlers", who I assume were chosen for their lawyer-like mindsets. They severely limit what the engineers can discuss, what points they can consider, and drive everything to the Boeing position. They also like using the FAA as a scapegoat. If you can get an engineer away from the handler, you will almost always get a different story. They are very scared of retaliation, and what will happen if they step out of line. I've had Boeing engineers "reassigned" overnight in the middle of testing because they agreed with us and not what management wanted.

We always joke that if Boeing spent as much on engineering as they did on lawyers and trying to avoid doing what they should, they wouldn't need the lawyers.

Bought X1C+AMS about a year ago. I use it to make parts and fixtures for some lasers used for a business, for FPV drone parts, and other projects. Also, lots of little things for the kids. Wide variety of things and materials. After using my old home-built Prusa i3 clone since 2015, it's a huge leap. It just works without constant tinkering, and is way faster. But, I'm happy I have that experience to be able to know what the X1C is doing, and tweak settings. The i3 was a hobby, the X1C is a tool.

I've had no problems so far, and switched to Orcaslicer about 8 months ago for a few extra features, like calibrations. I think I could have done without the AMS, I switch colors and materials so much, what I need is never loaded, so I use the non-AMS input 90% of the time. I also live in the midwest with decent humidity, requiring frequent desiccant changes in the summer in the AMS. I recently bought a 4 spool drying box, to keep at least 4 spools of humidity-sensitive filament ready to go, and now just use the AMS for stuff that isn't as picky about moisture.

I'm also kinda lazy, and haven't updated the software/firmware on the printer since last year. Probably not going to without digging into exactly what recent versions have given some people trouble. Very few failed prints, and so far I've been able to determine it was due to me not cleaning the build plate enough, me slicing the model with the wrong settings, or crap filament that I hadn't tested, all fixable pretty quick, and not unique to this printer.

My only gripe would be dealing with broken filament, and having to disconnect the tubing to get to some fragments of trapped filament, annoying (for me) when I have to get to the back of the machine for that (or inside the AMS), it's in a tight space so I have to move other stuff to turn it around and have room to see what's going on. Granted, nearly all my broken filament was older (or cheap) stuff that got brittle, so that's kinda on me.

Yeah, well, this is where regulation comes from. It's rarely forward-looking, and usually is a response to people being stupid or greedy. The people that complain loudly about regulation seem to be those that need it the most.

Earned the "Golden BB" achievement.

I mean, the paint had to have increased its corrosion resistance, so on average it's a functionally better vehicle now than it was before.

There is no requirement to come up with a "better solution" to prove something wrong.

Unusable, but also leaving it as something that Russia is willing to allocate large resourses to protecting. Taking it out would "free up" those assets so they could be used elsewhere.

I say leave it as is, maybe damage it a bit if Russia pulls defense from it, forcing them to re-commit assets to defend it. Tied up protecting a huge bridge means not protecting other things.

The clearance process is "situational" and "discretionary"... which are the weasel words they use so politicians and rich dudes like Elon Musk can get security clearances when they have publicly done things that automatically disqualify anyone else. It's only situational and discretionary for them. Everyone else can get screwed on just a rumor of behavior, or error in a credit report.

I'm actually waiting for the first Cybertruck EV to ICE conversion, including the ability to "roll coal". It would combine two things that are stupid into one thing I would find funny.

Almost like it was designed by people that don't understand trucks, and just used parts intended for cars because they were available and cheap.

Damn. It' looks like it hit the road right next to someone that was standing there...and then they just ran away to the right while the dust is clearing. It says no injuries to crew, but was that person part of the crew, or "other"? At least they could still run.

The S-500 was designed by the same guy that designed the S-400 and claimed it could shoot down HIMARS and ATACMS. You can tell it's the S-500, because if look closely, you can see him handcuffed into the passenger seat for "quality assurance" purposes.

The institutional investors know this. They have contacts in the car, AI, robotics, etc. world that can give an unbiased expert assessment of what Musk claims. They also know there's enough deluded Tesla supporters out there that will keep "buying the dip" for them to slowly and quietly remove Tesla from their portfolio without the price dropping too far. Voting against the package would have risked (immediate) turmoil and losses, which wouldn't be good for their customers, so they vote for stability in the short term, maybe a small bump. The shares for Elon haven't been issued yet, so the dilution hasn't happened yet. I expect many of these large institutions to announce at some point down the road that they've dropped Tesla...after they've actually done it, and only when forced by law or customer requirement. The institutional people will be able to figure it out as each one sells, but the retail folks generally won't look for it, or have access to those detailed services, so they'll be clueless. They'll just brag about "getting a good deal" on Tesla stock. - That's what retail investors are there for, to be left holding the bag so the institutional investors don't lose too much. (Not my words, from ex-BIL)

My brother-in-law used to work on the trading floor, and he told me that stable companies prices were driven by numbers, but the market itself is all emotion and "what someone else might think". You may think Tesla and Musk are all BS, but if it's clear enough other people with money are dumb enough to believe the BS, you can still make money off it. Just get out before the believers realize they've been scammed, which can take surprisingly long for something people have emotional investment in, without something like an Enron event. Some of the analysis going on isn't about numbers as much as it is tracking and trying to predict human behavior.

Tesla (or Musk) assuring anyone they'll keep their word and be honest is to expect them to do what they want later, and let people try to stop them.

Seeing as how I just had 5 Tesla ads at once on a single page, and they show up on almost every other page I've been to today, I think the vote is not going well for Elon, and he is worried. If it wasn't close, why flood the internet with ads?

The vote doesn't matter anyway, the court has ruled, and this vote can't change that. It may (probably) get Telsa into more legal trouble. If the vote passes and the court says no, Musk then has the courts to blame and use as fuel to enrage his supporters. It the shareholders say no, I'm sure he has some other story ready to go that blames anyone other than himself.

I don't see him leaving Tesla (regardless of vote or court actions) without being forced out, it's his only endeavor that brings in money, and supports everything else one way or another, legal or otherwise. He HAS to maintain personal control over it, but I also think the walls are closing in. He can't pump the stock anymore, sales are dropping, market share is dropping, reputation is dropping, competition is starting to eat his lunch. Only the die-hards take what he says seriously now, even his robo-taxi claims are already being discarded by investors. At some point the shareholders are going to sue him and the board into oblivion when it becomes clear they've been left holding the bag while the board has already become ridiculously rich while playing along with Elon's schemes. Numerous investigations and lawsuits are going to peel back the onion, and it's going to get more rotten with each layer, which will spread to his other companies. If he's doing these sorts of things with a public company, imagine what's going on in the private ones that have no visibility, and they are all tied together.

I expect a wild ride regardless of tomorrow's outcome.

Doorstop, coat rack, paperweight, signpost, speed bump are all tasks, right?

They wouldn't be grounded. You'd still be able to fly drones you already have, it's just that no new models from DJI would be approved for use on communication infrastructure by the FCC, and therefore would not be legally usable. Older models already approved could still be sold/used, they aren't retracting prior approvals per the bill.