I read some comment somewhere earlier about the new Bing being “sassy”, I think it was. Now I get it…

Yea I understand the issue farmers are having with this, I'm just saying only farmers are going to get the right to repair and the rest of us are gonna be told to pound sand.

That quote in the article killed me.

Should be every state and it should be all equipment, not just farming equipment.

This varies based on country though. Just so that people keep it in mind that the rules are different depending on where you are.

For example, in Japan you cannot take a picture, or video, of someone without their explicit permission.

[removed]

The MOU with Farm Bureua was a promised continuation of the status quo and probably the simplest PR both could do.

OK, Bing chat seems waaaaaay more fun than ChatGPT.

Already exists.

Hmm. Puts on John deere and CAT?

I think Elon thinks AI is a threat to the billionaire power structure.

I can get into software for $1800. That's cheaper than the radiator I put a fan through last harvest. For the price of the radiator, I can have OEM cable and software or third-party that comes with a laptop.

[deleted]

"The filing did not name the recipient, or recipients, of the donation."

Own charity I bet:

- cronies/family members on the board/employed at outrageous salaries

- tax write-off

- attempt to repair image

I urge everyone to pause and consider how ubiquitous these sorts of deep fake tools will become over the next decade. There is zero - I repeat, zero - chance of preventing bad actors from creating this sort of content and distributing it online. You MAY be able to stop people from profiting from it. Even so, an unregulated marketplace will persist.

[removed]

>we specifically could not refer to ourselves as a rest stop in advertising

"service plaza"

But yet it doesn’t

> You mean why should only Teslas be allowed to use the charging network that Tesla solely funded and built themselves?

Yes. That's what I mean. Why should Tesla be allowed to build an exclusionary network? They aren't allowed to in Europe. The US should show the same vision.

> I'm glad they're opening the supercharger network up but you're comparing a privately owned and funded charging network to public ones.

All the networks are privately owned. There as far as I know no publicly-owned DCFC charging networks.

Tesla's stations are not privately funded, they charge people to charge their cars. It used to be free to Tesla owners (part of the purchase price) but not for a long time now.

Yes, I'm asking why one company should be allowed to build out an EV charging system that creates vendor lock in for them when a wider EV infrastructure is a benefit to all. Again, the EU prohibited it. Seems like a great model to follow.

If a company like say Walmart wants to put in chargers at their distribution centers and say that they are private to them, only for charging their trucks they own, then that's one thing. But if a company wants to build out a network that is usable by members of the public and it charges them to do so then they shouldn't be allowed to exclude some members of the public just because of what car they own.

More accurately, the US state is the biggest threat to civilization.

Billionaire fascists are a greater threat…

Ahh see but the facts do not.

I can go to the Texas legislature link you posted and it backs up it’s odd years.

[removed]

It's less than 1% of his net worth.

It's a tax write off.

It's essentially him saying, "Instead of paying my ridiculously low relative share of taxes, I'm going to take as much of that money as I can and allocate it to causes I want to further in my own personal interests".

Since it's not transparent, we don't know how much is being given to things like AI research or other things where he may be directly benefiting from those donations.

All of this combined makes the headline not quite what it appears to be.

[removed]