Apple announced AirPower and then didn’t end up shipping it. In a “functioning economy” should Tim Cook be indicted for misleading investors? Obviously not.
The only decent argument for the criminal case you are talking about would be if it was an outright lie with no intent whatsoever to deliver on the promise, but there’s obviously a huge effort to deliver on the robotaxi promise. Just ask any of the thousands of employees who work on the Tesla robotaxi and self driving software every day, just visit Austin and observe the ubiquitous cybercabs driving around the city.
They obviously haven’t realized the dream yet but it doesn’t mean that they won’t eventually, especially when you can physically see the progress first hand.
Your argument seems mostly driven by your disagreement with the founder’s politics instead of any rational argument against their technology.
As the comment you are replying to does not, on its face, seem to have a political bia you should be explicit about where/how you identified that bias. Without this you are the one injecting politics not the OP.
> > Apple announced AirPower and then didn’t end up shipping it. In a “functioning economy” should Tim Cook be indicted for misleading investors? Obviously not.
Apple doesn't have a history of having to pump the stock to survive. Also it's a pretty ubiquitous company and they delivered a pretty life changing product for all of us.
On the other hand Tesla has a history of lying constantly and also life and customer experience is pretty much the same in the sectors of the economy that they attacked , as a matter of fact a 2002 Mercedes (the year in which Tesla was founded) is better in many departments compared to a 2026 Tesla
I don't recall her agitating for a race war online. Maybe I missed it.
If the salutes were one weird thing it'd be one thing. But Musk spends all day online talking about how much better white society is than everything else and how foreigners are destroying society and need to be dealt with extremely harshly.
“White” has nothing to do with it, but you can’t understand the argument because your intellectual toolbox has only two ideas in it: blank-slate cultural relativism, and Nazism. If it’s not one it must be the other. Thus, the only way you can explain a country like Bangladesh is to chalk its predicament up to exogenous factors that wouldn’t carry over in migration. And anyone who has a different view must be a Nazi, obviously.
If you assume a dichotomy between blank-slate cultural relativism and nazism, then you’re correct that everyone who thinks 100,000 Bangladeshi immigrants is materially different than 100,000 Americans must hold that view solely due to skin-color prejudice. If you take it as axiomatic that America would have turned out materially identically if Bangladeshi settlers had been on the Mayflower rather than British Puritans, then yes, everyone who doesn’t agree with you in immigration is in fact a Nazi.
I'm very sorry but you are simply not going to convince me that "wow this entire national population is just plain worse than this other population and if we let them in it'll ruin our country" is meaningfully distinct here.
What I see here is agreement with Musk's odious beliefs and a desire to avoid mean names being used to describe these beliefs.
The only decent argument for the criminal case you are talking about would be if it was an outright lie with no intent whatsoever to deliver on the promise, but there’s obviously a huge effort to deliver on the robotaxi promise. Just ask any of the thousands of employees who work on the Tesla robotaxi and self driving software every day, just visit Austin and observe the ubiquitous cybercabs driving around the city.
They obviously haven’t realized the dream yet but it doesn’t mean that they won’t eventually, especially when you can physically see the progress first hand.
Your argument seems mostly driven by your disagreement with the founder’s politics instead of any rational argument against their technology.