With good records.

Because it's beta, you are supposed to maintain attention and control as you would driving normally. Thus, there's no extra danger, issues are generally on the driver.

If the driver fell asleep, or didn't see a car, that happens all the time with human drivers. Beta FSD will save most of them from themselves, but it may miss a few.

It is kind of big, but they are selective as to who can join.

The only answer is “Automatic Pilot” light that flashes on and off with a beeping sound.

Neither is Waymo. They’ve had lots of accidents even with being restricted to low-speed preplanned routes.

Beta testers are real customers. They’re just willing to follow certain rules and live with bugs in exchange for early access.

My point is that the Soviets mastered this design almost 50 years ago, yet BO is having problems doing it just with a different fuel. Nobody's ever mastered full-flow staged combustion (didn't go beyond testing), yet SpaceX appears further along with that than BE-4, in about the same amount of time. My bet is that it's mostly management issues.

Edit: New news: ULA is having problems qualifying one of the engines for flight because it keeps pumping out too much oxygen. You'd think BO would at least have something like this right before they shipped, but apparently the engines had only minimal testing.

I like SpaceX, but I don't want them being the only cheap, reusable medium+ launch service out there. BO needs to get its act together.

That was in testing. This thing does have a very complicated startup.

I've been downvoted because people can't read. I've already had two responses thinking I'm on the side of the police.

They lit 31 engines, a world record. The last time someone tried 30 they blew up four rockets in a row, the second one destroying the launch facility.

>IIRC it also started development before the BE-4

They were kind of playing around with ideas before BE-4, but real design didn't start until around the same time.

>if we ignore that a full flow staged combustion engine also has an oxygen-rich side

We'd have to. It's amazing to me that a modern company absolutely flush with cash is having serious issues designing roughly a methane variant of what's just a dual-chamber version of what was at the time a 25+ year-old engine. Something's been very wrong at BO. I'm just hoping now that Bezos is actively involved they can clean up their act.

Why would a cop be glad the court went against cops?

I did hear rumblings about inefficient management being related to why Bezos quit Amazon to be more involved in BO.

No, I'm complaining the law is written so broadly that it invites such retaliation.

I wonder why they had so many problems with that engine, slipping the deadline again and again. Really, it's yet another oxygen-rich staged combustion engine, even simpler than the dual-chamber RD-180 it replaces. The Raptor is doing fine, and it's a much more complicated engine to engineer (full flow staged combustion).

No, I'm correct because the police can use this law to arrest you, and the prosecutors can use it to prosecute you. That doesn't make it right, but you will end up spending a lot of money to defend yourself until some higher court throws it out, as in this case.

Again, the laws are so broad that they enable such charges, and let the prosecutors prosecute. You have to hope it ends on appeal. There is no downside for them. You can't successfully sue a prosecutor for abusing these laws.

It can be done, especially by the targets of undercover journalists. It really depends on whether the prosecutor doesn't like the message.

And yes, it was retaliation. But the laws are written so broadly that it was easy to do. Had to go way up to get this crap stopped.

Right, but any target of such recording likes to leverage such laws to strike back. I’m glad this was overturned.

The laws are written so that if you make any audio recording without consent of one of the parties, it's illegal. The cop was one of the parties. It's against wiretapping, but it's written so broadly as to cover this.

Two party consent state.

They do have to worry about the US government. "You can export restricted satellite technology for communications" is not the same permission as "You can export restricted satellite technology to guide bombs." Dual-use tech is a fun area of ITAR regulations.

And then another physicist comes along and says “Well, actually…”

That might apply to a McDonald's worker, but not here. They only had jobs in the first place because of AI. It's abusive because they knew their jobs were temporary, and they're using a unionization attempt to artificially extend them.

Putting them in other jobs would be a good idea, but these are pretty low-talent jobs. Look at an image on a computer, tell the computer what it is, next image. Google has been using us to tag images through captchas for years.

Tesla always planned for the human labeling to exist only until it wasn't needed anymore, because at some point you will have done enough labeling and the supercomputers can take it from there. They already announced cuts in labeling last year. These people already knew their jobs had an end date not too far out. It sounds like they may have started unionizing just to put a legal wrench into the plans. I'm okay with unions, but this sounds like an abuse of union laws.

Yes he did, one of six principle founders. He was also the founder of SpaceX. He didn’t found Tesla, but it was just three guys with an idea when he joined.