Best or worst idea? Getting a Velotaxi/Rikshaw for private use

[Z-Man]

I think he means immigrants. Oh wait, he's one himself... Poor immigrants?

[kyle]

Everywhere in America will be like the nightmare that is downtown San Francisco

Wow, is he referring to the gay capital of America here by any chance? What a guy...

No, he's referring a a city that is run down by criminals, because the police are no longer allowed to do their jobs. Nothing related at all to sexual preferences, just policies enabling the city to fall apart because they won't arrest criminals.

Also if you are accusing Elon of being anti-gay, that again is the Mainstream media brainwashing you, Tesla and SpaceX have both been voted top places to work by those groups, Elon just strongly opposes Kids from getting trans medications and surgeries.

That is incredibly discriminatory! I ignore all users by default.

I should have said that better, I take what they have to say with far less importance, as chances of them being a bot is much higher.

[delinquent]

Well, this thread took a sharp turn.

I will say this. I was raised by a narcissist. Emotional abuse played a very big part in my upbringing. There's a whole mess of many different cans of worms there that I won't open here, but I will note in particular that I have learned to recognise the signs of narcissistic behaviour in other individuals. I see all of the red flags in Musk, and I began to notice them when he threw a hissy fit over the incident in Thailand with the trapped divers. He went as far as to send a major news publication a long, written tirade accusing the British diving expert who was actually skilled enough to advise the rescue effort a homosexual paedophile.

I noticed the same sort of unpleasant behaviour in his attitude towards Grimes. His attitude toward her is manipulative and entirely inappropriate, and I would not hesitate to posit that she exhibits signs of stockholm syndrome. Her entire character has changed during their relationship, and this has been noted by many thousands of onlookers. I feel confident in saying that Musk is not a likeable character.

As for Tesla itself, there have been more than a small number of lawsuits filed in the US alone, accusing the organisation of institutionalised discrimination. I can't comment on whether or not those lawsuits are filed in good faith, or whether or not there is actual cause for those same lawsuits, but the presence of them alone is broadly concerning. There are other issues with the organisational capability of the company - anyone here remember how long it took Rich Rebuilds to get a used model 3?

Truthfully, though, I don't hate the concept of electric vehicles. I do consider them a non-solution to the issues we are presently facing, but all the same I am glad that they exist, and that innovation in the field of transportation is still ongoing. But I am a simple man, and a combustion engine goes vroom. I like things that go vroom, so I am fully intent on making things go vroom without also making the planet go poof.

[Z-Man]

No, he's referring a city that is run down by criminals,

Is that backed by real data? It is well established that people feel unsafe even though factually, crime rates have been on a general robust downward trend in western democratic states for the past 50 years or so.

Also if you are accusing Elon of being anti-gay, that again is the Mainstream media brainwashing you, Tesla and SpaceX have both been voted top places to work by those groups

Well, if you are referring to the "The Human Rights Campaign Corporate Equality Index", it's not quite as outstanding as that sounds, as the "Best places to work" title is shared among hundreds of companies. But still, points for Musk.

Elon just strongly opposes Kids from getting trans medications and surgeries.

The 'just' is doing very heavy lifting there. Yeah, surgery should probably wait, but if we're talking medication, specifically puberty blockers, to my limited knowledge there is little doubt that they can save lives and no evidence that they do harm. Anyway, that should be a question for doctors and scientists, not techbros or politics.

That is incredibly discriminatory! I ignore all users by default.

I should have said that better, I take what they have to say with far less importance, as chances of them being a bot is much higher.

No worries, I was mostly replying to make my stupid joke.

[kyle]

No, he's referring a city that is run down by criminals,

Is that backed by real data? It is well established that people feel unsafe even though factually, crime rates have been on a general robust downward trend in western democratic states for the past 50 years or so.

I'm not sure how they are cherry picking the statistics that they claim its down. My area in Indiana crime has picked up a lot, or at least more violent crime. I think they are under-reporting in larger cities as police don't always show up any more. I've heard some pretty bad things about parts of downtown San Francisco, they now have to lock all grocery store shelves, why would they do that if crime was down?

Elon just strongly opposes Kids from getting trans medications and surgeries.

The 'just' is doing very heavy lifting there. Yeah, surgery should probably wait, but if we're talking medication, specifically puberty blockers, to my limited knowledge there is little doubt that they can save lives and no evidence that they do harm. Anyway, that should be a question for doctors and scientists, not techbros or politics.

I've not done much research on the drugs, but it sounds like there are issues with blockers. Regardless, I think there is an over medication issue. there are too many incentives to hook people on drugs for life. and the sad part about this is your brain really does not mature until in your 20's. life is going to have ups and downs.

[Lucifer]

I'm not sure how they are cherry picking the statistics that they claim its down. ... they now have to lock all grocery store shelves, why would they do that if crime was down?

I don't think they are the ones doing the cherry picking, here. It's a pretty solid fact that crime in western countries has been dropping since it's 90s peak, and there have been a few upticks in recent years. Also in recent years, income inequality is the highest it's been since the 19th century. You know what goes up when people have less money? You guessed it: crime rates.

Anyway, that should be a question for doctors and scientists, not techbros or politics.

I've not done much research on the drugs, but it sounds like there are issues with blockers. Regardless, I think there is an over medication issue. there are too many incentives to hook people on drugs for life. and the sad part about this is your brain really does not mature until in your 20's. life is going to have ups and downs.

Whether or not there is an overmedication issue, it's not an issue that should be solved by techbros or people who believe that transgender people don't exist. They do. Hell, we do. The thing is, puberty blockers have been shown to save lives, and the whole idea is to block puberty until someone's brain has developed enough that they can be sure and there are no questions left to ask. Then, either you remove the puberty blockers and let puberty proceed as normal, or you start HRT and let puberty proceed from there. In either case, the correct puberty will occur. There's actually a protocol that has to be followed, and doctors who don't follow it lose their licenses. There is not an epidemic of kids getting HRT just because they told a teacher they think they might identify as a different gender. There are a lot of parents who are trying to do right by their kids who are getting them counseling and starting that protocol much younger than before. And admittedly, we're in new territory here. But the solution isn't whatever Elon thinks is the solution, because he doesn't know what he's talking about.

It's not even just transgender people. Intersex people exist, as well. It turns out, and there's a wonderful YouTube video by Forrest Valkai of Valkai Labs discussing this, but it turns out that developing a "normal" adult sex is an insanely complicated process that breaks down far more often than any of us are even aware. So when people try to reduce it to genetics, they're just showing their ignorance on the subject.

[Z-Man]

Crime:
I correct my 50 year span. It's more like Lucifer says, for many crime stats, there was a peak in the 80s and 90s, for some earlier. But since then, the prevailing trend is down. For example, long term homicide data worldwide, by country.

I'm not sure how they are cherry picking the statistics that they claim its down. My area in Indiana crime has picked up a lot, or at least more violent crime. I think they are under-reporting in larger cities as police don't always show up any more. I've heard some pretty bad things about parts of downtown San Francisco, they now have to lock all grocery store shelves, why would they do that if crime was down?

Local and temporal hotspots may of course exist. I don't know about your specific area, here are the first Indiana stats I could dig up, from Indianapolis: https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-I ... diana.html
All largely flat or declining. Burglaries (the most frequent crime in this stat and the one I'm personally worried about most) are way down, as is general theft. Homicides are yikes, though, with a 'healthy' bump in the pandemic years when everyone was sitting on top of everyone else. Of course, for the lesser crimes, there may be a reporting bias.
As far as I read, downtown SF has the structural challenge that it used to house a lot of tech industry offices, many of which closed when remote work became the new norm briefly. That naturally leads to follow up problems. Less busy people with jobs means less customers for local shops etc. According to this article (Bias possible, they have SF in their url and may be local cheerleaders painting things more rosy than they are), shoplifting isn't actually as bad as in other cities. Another possible bias there is that shopkeepers care about the number of shoplifting incidents in relation to their shop size and customer count, which is not what would commonly be measured. Anyway, it's not too uncommon to have the shelves with high value items locked, or on a wall behind the cashiers. Locking ALL shelves seems like overkill, I mean, then you're back to the days when you would walk into a shop, tell the shopkeep what you want and they'll fetch it for you.. just with way less charm? Or what is the deal there?

Speaking of companies leaving SF, I knew I remembered something else: https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohan ... -to-texas/ For new laws apparently designed to protect trans youth from their own, potentially antagonistic, parents. Harrumph. Also, CEOs moving offices across states is a tad annoying for the people who work there, especially if remote work is not an option... but there are of course ways to soften the blow and we don't know yet how that will play out.

[sinewav]

Kyle you should relax man. It sounds like you've been indulging in a little too much outrage porn. Just remember these important facts:

• The World Wide Web is awash in content that is deliberately designed to have a psychological impact.
• The people making this content do not have your best interests in mind and a lot of it is made purposefully to confuse and destabilize society.
• We've been in a hot information war with adversaries such as Russia and China for a long time now. Your feelings and some of your opinions are surely a by-product of that conflict, as are most people's (mine too).
• If you read something that makes you upset, question why you are being targeted and who is doing it.
• We are all casualties and the only way to not suffer is to keep a level head and stay positive.

I also recommend reading the book Future Shock. It's old but surprisingly relevant today.

[Lucifer]

Crime:
I correct my 50 year span. It's more like Lucifer says, for many crime stats, there was a peak in the 80s and 90s, for some earlier. But since then, the prevailing trend is down. For example, long term homicide data worldwide, by country.

I'm sure you're familiar with the leaded gasoline hypothesis that explains this? If not, it's worth a google. It's really interesting, and the only reason they can't prove it is because the evidence has already been biologically processed, meaning there's nobody to test.

Another factor for homicides going up in the US is guns, specifically ghost guns, which were a thing during Trump's presidency, but the ATF under Biden made a rule banning them in 2022. The SCOTUS is looking at yet another case trying to get ghost guns made legal again, and one of the arguments put forth during oral arguments (today? yesterday?) is that homicides with guns skyrocketed by 1000% during the period where ghost guns were legal.

I guess my main point here is that criminal activity is way more complex than just "are cops doing their jobs?" (The answer to the question is: No, and they've been refusing to do their jobs for decades, which is why the "defund the police" movement kicked off to begin with) or "Are we giving the cops enough money to do their jobs?"

Whichever side you fall on on how much funding the police should receive, there are still hundreds of posts on nextdoor about people providing security footage to the police, and the police saying "We can't do anything unless we catch them in the act. Also, we're not sending additional patrols to known hot areas because nobody will commit crimes when the police are there to see it." You can't simplify it down to how much money we're giving the cops, there are numerous and complex factors involved in criminal activity.

Lest we forget, I am a criminal, too. Living in a vehicle is illegal in Texas. Even if you have consent from private property owners to use their property, you violate city codes. So if I get cited, that'll become part of the statistic.

[Z-Man]

I'm sure you're familiar with the leaded gasoline hypothesis that explains this?

No, but I can imagine it. I'm familiar with the hypothesis that lead in water lines is partially responsible for the fall of the Roman Empire, because lead (or some compound) is a neurotoxin that turns people into sociopaths.

Now "ghost guns" is something I had to google (to save others time: "build your own gun" kits that don't have the usual serial number required for finished guns so they can't be tracked). I knew about 3d printed guns and considered them a novelty that would not find widespread use, given the risk they might blow up in your face. The 1000% increase in gun violence you refer to is the rise EXCLUSIVE for ghost gun violence. Which is meaningless because it was zero at some recent point in the past, so it may just be a rise from 1 to 11 crimes.
Still, I don't quite get how anyone could defend these things. All the usual excuses don't apply. Shooting sports? If you must, get a regular gun. Self-defense? If you must, get a regular gun.

"We can't do anything unless we catch them in the act."

Is that really so? Is that why the Police has to chase down speeders in the US? I always wondered. What is the limit of the severity of a crime so you don't have to catch people? I mean, there has to be one, otherwise every police procedural drama would be boring. "Sorry, we did not catch the murderer in the act, can't do nothing, case closed"

"Also, we're not sending additional patrols to known hot areas because nobody will commit crimes when the police are there to see it."

You'd think that it would also be the job of the Police to PREVENT crimes where possible...

[Lucifer]

I'm sure you're familiar with the leaded gasoline hypothesis that explains this?

No, but I can imagine it. I'm familiar with the hypothesis that lead in water lines is partially responsible for the fall of the Roman Empire, because lead (or some compound) is a neurotoxin that turns people into sociopaths.

I'll summarize it anyway, for anybody else reading. In the 1920s or so, they started added lead to gasoline as an octane booster. Octane, contrary to popular belief, isn't about increasing performance of gas engines. Instead, it's about preventing gas from combusting too early during compression. To get more performance out of gasoline, you have to finely time combustion to happen at a specific point. Now, ethanol is also an octane booster, so people whining about how 10% ethanol in their gasoline is making their engines run poorly clearly don't know what they're talking about.

Anyway, so lead was added, then cars grew in popularity.

If you track leaded gasoline sales over time, and this holds true all the way down to precinct (which is the most fine grained information we have for both gasoline sales and crime rates), you find that the sales curves for leaded gasoline are exactly copied about 20 years later, but in crime rates. So the hypothesis is that the lead coming out of exhaust pipes seeped into the ground/air/whatever and caused people to do more crimes.

Leaded gasoline was banned in the US in the early 80s, but it took another 15 years for all the leaded gasoline cars to leave the market or find suitable octane booster replacements. When you combine population growth, leaded gasoline sales, and the 20 year gap I mentioned, you would predict the crime peak to be in the mid 90s, and sure enough, that's when it happened.

We have crime rate statistics going all the way back to close to the founding of the country, so even comparing to 19th century crime rates is reasonable, even if the laws changed a lot so that different things were classified as crimes at different times.

This also means that the boomers that run the country grew up in a lead-filled country, so when they stir up crime fears, just remember, they were traumatized as children/young adults because of this crimewave that swept the country.

When taking this hypothesis to other countries that still haven't banned leaded gasoline, we find that it holds true, but there are caveats about crime rate tracking and statistics. That's one of the reasons it's so difficult to confirm this hypothesis and turn it into a theory.

However, the EU and its member countries have similarly accurate data to the US since at least the 1930s, and it holds up there, too.

The 1000% increase in gun violence you refer to is the rise EXCLUSIVE for ghost gun violence. Which is meaningless because it was zero at some recent point in the past, so it may just be a rise from 1 to 11 crimes.

I didn't notice that in the article I read. The article I read was about the current SCOTUS case, and it strongly suggested this was a 1000% increase in gun crimes in general. This is one of the ways the liberal media gets you!

Still, I don't quite get how anyone could defend these things. All the usual excuses don't apply. Shooting sports? If you must, get a regular gun. Self-defense? If you must, get a regular gun.

It's the same defense used by head shops, or drug paraphernelia shops if you're unfamiliar with that slang. The water bong is for smoking tobacco, and that's why you can't return it after you've used it.

"We can't do anything unless we catch them in the act."

Is that really so? Is that why the Police has to chase down speeders in the US? I always wondered. What is the limit of the severity of a crime so you don't have to catch people? I mean, there has to be one, otherwise every police procedural drama would be boring. "Sorry, we did not catch the murderer in the act, can't do nothing, case closed"

That sounds like a fun series of YouTube skits. And yes, that's really what happens. When I reported my motorcycle stolen, the cop even said that if we had surveillance footage, it wouldn't be useful because they have to see the crime.

Some of this is a political reaction to the defund the police movement, and cops should be apolitical, but they're not. However, as much as their supporters and the cops themselves try to frame it as a response to the defund the police movement, they're lying. They've been pulling this crap for so long, there's even a supreme court case where the court decided cops had no obligation to protect anybody. Even though that's literally their jobs.

This, of course, is why so many liberals have been pointing out the lineage of modern police forces and how they're all ultimately descendants of the original slave-hunting parties formed during the antebellum period. And it annoys conservatives and Elon Musk to no end, so naturally I'm on board.

Now, I live in an area that's been trying to defund the police. What they did was they took money used to train officers for mental health that wasn't being used and started funneling it into hiring social workers to send on mental health calls. They did a few other things, too. Anyway, the sheriff, who is elected, was on board with all of this. But APD, who isn't elected, fought back. This resulted in the Texas state government passing minimum funding laws for local police departments. So now the city is trying to figure out where they're going to get the money for all the social workers they need to take over 1/3 of the jobs that cops are expected to do, but rarely actually do, and when they do, they do it badly.

For me, I've been the person making the mental health call, and I'd rather have been escorted by a social worker to an ambulance than put in handcuffs in the back of a squad car. Guess which one actually happened.

"Also, we're not sending additional patrols to known hot areas because nobody will commit crimes when the police are there to see it."

You'd think that it would also be the job of the Police to PREVENT crimes where possible...

Nah, that's not their job. If it was, they wouldn't be so heavily invested in catching speeders, because the obvious best way to get people to obey the speed limit is for squad cars to just drive the speed limit down the thoroughfares where they need people to slow down. But that doesn't result in tickets being written.

The police situation is crap, here. And it doesn't help that so many EU countries and formerly EU countries are doing it better, even though they're all far from perfect, as well. I love how in the UK the cops don't even carry guns, and when there's an issue that requires a gun, they call in a squad with guns. We could do that, easily. We figured out how to station ambulances and fire trucks all over the city so that they can respond quickly to health and fire emergencies. Why can't we figure out how to station SWAT teams in a similar fashion, and then disarm the regular cops?

And for people whining about how wearing a cop uniform makes you a target, for those of us in the streets, cops are just another faction, no different from Crips or Bloods or Latin Kings or whatever. They're just as lawless as anybody else. If they want the respect they demand, they need to justify their existence by doing a hell of a lot more than they're doing now.

[kyle]

Local and temporal hotspots may of course exist. I don't know about your specific area, here are the first Indiana stats I could dig up, from Indianapolis: https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-I ... diana.html

I was going to post some more on this, but I guess my main issue with this data is it ends in 22, 23 and definably this year feel a lot worse, but I'll admit that I did not think about basing it on per person, and I'm in a growing city, so total counts would go up. For what it's worth, in my specific City theft and robberies did go up from 21 to 22.

Cops are a very interesting subject, but when they do their job they get punished, when they don't then it leads to more unsafe places. If a cop pulls people over for speeding routinely, then people generally get the message and don't speed. once that goes away, everyone speeds. Making matters even worse in my state, they just started adding camera based speed traps on interstate roads, but they say you must go at least 11 mph over to get a ticket, so what does everyone do, go 10 mph over, and if you don't you become a sitting duck and more of a road hazard. Then you have cases where they pull someone over for a reason, they fail to identify themselves, and the cops are forced to pull them out of the car to arrest them. this leads to backlash, where IMO pulling them out is the right things to do as they are unable to respond to simple orders. This gets ever more interesting when the subject has a visible gun. What do you do when someone had a gun on a college campus, and they start to aim it? do you shoot and kill them, then get backlash about it? or do you just let them run away to find out they go on to kill other people? Both of the cases happened this year in my city. The cops ended up choosing to shoot (and killed) before the subject could fire.

I think the last 2 years, the income inequality has really been driven further apart, which would lead to this.


Sinewav: I agree 100% with the stuff you said, and have a large guard up against consumption of new stuff. I actually think logically about what I read and call out the rats so to speak. I just don't think it's right to relax with things are having a very negative impact on society. This is why I initially posted something on here about Elon and Ev's, to call out the tremendous amount of disinformation that is spreading to everyone via the news about him and his companies. That's what makes me not want to relax. As I've said I follow every Tesla/SpaceX event, press conference, you name it, then the next day I look at the news and they spread all kinds of lies about it. This kind of stuff is what is making people think what Elon says or does it always wrong, when it's far from wrong, most of the time anyway. Then this lead into this rabbit hole of more sensitive topics, because the big media machine is good at making up stuff about someone, just to try to deimage someone.

Let's go into another very sinister thing I've come to a conclusion on, maybe wrongly but curious what you think. I 'm not sure if you guys know that Elon Musk's Tesla pay package from 2018 was blocked down by a judge by a case brought on by someone with around 8 shares of Tesla. This year as the court ruled it to be null and void, because they did not adequately state the relationships some of the people had to Elon in the proxy to vote. Tesla had another vote on it with additional information that court said was missing. It got passed again. Interestingly my broker, voted against it, I did not know this until yesterday. Anyway after it got passed, Tesla's stock went up like 30% and out of the blue my investment advisor(I had never spoken with) from there called me up, trying to get me to get out of my Tesla position. Is it wrong for me to think that that broker had a large sort interest in Tesla, and were scrambling to do anything they could just to get the stock to go down?

My views on Trans have changed a lot over the last 10 years or so. I could go into the simple reason for my views if that's wanted, but if not I will not share.

[Lucifer]

when they do their job they get punished, when they don't then it leads to more unsafe places.

Neither of these statements are true. Cops do manage to do their jobs plenty of times without getting punished. Also, cops aren't the barrier between our cities being civilized and being lawless apocalypses. In a lot of places, particularly areas where there are fewer white people and more non-white people, cops contribute to the places being more dangerous.

If a cop pulls people over for speeding routinely, then people generally get the message and don't speed. once that goes away, everyone speeds.

Actually, the natural consequence of speeding is getting in a wreck. That's why most people don't speed more than 10mph over, and in most places I've driven, people generally go the speed limit. Now, I live in the biggest state in the contiguous US, and here, people speed. And Austin recently lowered speed limits by 10mph to get people to slow down 10mph, and it worked. They're still driving 10 over, mind you.

But as I pointed out, the most effective way for cops to get people to drive the speed limit is for themselves to drive the speed limit, in traffic, while other people are there.

With your approach, people only drive the speed limit when they think there are cops around. With my approach, people will learn they should drive the speed limit at all times.

Then you have cases where they pull someone over for a reason, they fail to identify themselves, and the cops are forced to pull them out of the car to arrest them.

Since when is failing to identify yourself a violently arrestable offense? That's why there's backlash! Especially when this "failure" is something more like "Do you have your license and registration?" "Yes, officer, let me get it real--" *cop yanks the door open and pulls the 80yo woman out of the car because she's obviously a threat to public safety*

The number of "routine" traffic stops that turn into violent arrests where the only chargeable offense is that the person didn't do what the cop said brings me back to this: If you meet an asshole in the morning, you met an asshole. If you meet assholes all day, you're the asshole.

On the important subject of being woke, I've actually taken a lot of time to talk to people from various ethnicities, and there's a huge difference in how cops treat people who aren't white. It's real. I know people who have been stopped for driving while black in the last four weeks. So, "routine" traffic stops include "I saw a black person, so I stopped them". Of *course* there's backlash.

this leads to backlash, where IMO pulling them out is the right things to do as they are unable to respond to simple orders.

Why? IMO, not identifying yourself to a cop until they've identified a lawful reason for asking is the right thing to do. So many cops are just street gangsters funded by tax dollars that if they don't give a reason for why they're stopping you, then you should be able to just drive away.

This gets ever more interesting when the subject has a visible gun.

Whether I agree with it or not, we have the right to carry guns. So when a cop sees a gun, they have to respect that right. Of course, I've known plenty of white people who have had visible guns during traffic stops who haven't had any issues at all, and plenty of non-white people who have been violently yanked out of their cars for it. So the obvious response here is that cops need to respect all of our rights at all times.

What do you do when someone had a gun on a college campus, and they start to aim it? do you shoot and kill them, then get backlash about it? or do you just let them run away to find out they go on to kill other people? Both of the cases happened this year in my city. The cops ended up choosing to shoot (and killed) before the subject could fire.

I generally agree that if a cop sees someone taking aim, they should shoot the person. But the number of times cops, who are trained to know the difference, mind you, shoot someone who's wielding something that's not a gun is just disturbing.

But in a country where people can legally carry guns, you're just going to have to live with the idea that cops may very well have to wait until the shooting starts before they can be sure enough to fire, because when a cop shoots an innocent person, they should be executed (as long as we have the death penalty, anyway). We spend millions of dollars training them, we should get something for it.

If you want cops to shoot when they see guns, then guns have to be illegal to carry. As long as guns are legal, there's no procedure we can put in place that can empower cops to stop all bad guys with guns without shooting innocents along the way.

[sinewav]

...tremendous amount of disinformation that is spreading to everyone via the news about him and his companies.

Hey I just want to point out that Elon Musk is a terrible person. The media didn't tell me that, I formed my opinion based on things he says and does (he makes himself very visible). He's not a force for good in the world, just the opposite in fact. I don't have an opinion on his companies. He's basically just a rich investor guy, he's not actually running anything because clearly he's an idiot (see his Twitter purchase and posts on X). Whatever motivations those companies have for keeping him around are just basic capitalism. He's a means to an end, which in itself is pretty shitty as well. You may "think logically" about things but that isn't how society works, it's how math and science works. You need wisdom and social skills that make you a good judge of character to know what is right, and that clown embodies everything that is wrong with the world.

My justified hatred of police and love of "alternative lifestyles" mean we aren't going to agree on anything else so I'll leave this thread since the others are covering those topics. Kyle man you're in a bubble and the only way to break out of it is to stop "othering" and expand who you put inside your special circle. Peace.

[kyle]

Lucifer, I think for the most part I generally agree with you, here is the body cam from the traffic stop / failure to identify, Warning it does get a bit graphic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVibrohMoyc I don't agree with everything the cops did in this, but she was not complying with the reasonable orders, courts can decide if he had the right to pull her over or not, but her actions because she believe she was right, was not right. At least in that case should be a pretty easy to prove or disprove.

Sinewav, we can agree to disagree, again I just came here to make my point about why you should not force yourself to not buy a Tesla because of Elon. One thing unique about Elon is he's not afraid to tell us where he stands, so many other CEO's could be far worse, at least with Elon we know where he stands on things, as long as you don't just listen to the sound bytes the media likes to play.
But if Elon Musk is such a terrible person and an an idiot, how can he attract the talent the ends up making stuff happen that is not easy to do. why has Boeing basically failed with starliner, but Dragon has been very successful? why has no other companies come close to reusing an orbital rocket booster? How has his company been able to implant a device into the brain to allow them to control a mouse better or as good as most people? I agree that he does not have to do a lot of the day to day stuff, but I also think that he is able to see how to get past roadblocks that people come up against. I think too many people see oh it's a billionaire or oh it's a trump supporter and automatically judge based on either or both those two things.

I don't always agree with the ways Elon does stuff, I think his mass layoffs at Tesla were a little bit too deep. Some of his tweets and his scene of humour can be a bit off too. The whole Taylor swift Joke he made. I also don't think Donald Trump is the best President ever, but I think If we want to discuss US election, that's another thread, as much of this is. It makes me a be depressed this year.

I'll also probably leave this thread untouched now, and remain the unicorn in the way I think or Musk vs the rest of you. with exception of I want to know what Lucifer / others think of that police body cam.

We can get back to the Topic of getting an EV is awesome, and great to be able to displace the gasoline that is likely causing a lot of health issues.