It was extremely good at the other side too. You just have to ask. I can imagine most people don't try this, but LLMs literally just do what you ask them to. And they're extremely good and weighing both sides if that's what you specifically want.

So who's fault is it if you only ask for one side, or if the LLM is too sycophantic? I'm not sure it's the LLMs fault actually.

LOL. Maybe you are referring to OpenAI and Anthropic? Yes they have codex and opus. But about 1-2 months behind them is Grok, Gemini, and then 2-3 months behind them are all the other models available in cursor, from chinese open source models to composer etc.

How you can possibly use this "big company takes everything away" narrative is ridiculous, when you can probably use models for free that are abour 2 months behind the best models. This is probably the most uncentralised tech boom ever.

(I mean openAI is in such a bad state, I wouldn't be surprised if they lose almost their entire lead and user base within 6-12 months and are basically at the level of small chinese llm developers).

You could take a good will attitude to DOGE then. I think many (including Elon) genuinely believed they could cut fraud and waste. But by their own admission, they were only mostly an advisory committee.

You can only do so much. Congress still has authority, and that's how it works, that's how the system is intended. And the reason DOGE hasn't done much is exactly because congress isn't willing to cut spending. It NEVER will. It didn't under any president including Reagan.

So basically you have an ever increasing deficit and spending because the way the political system is setup drives this. In fact, it happens in basically every democracy, so maybe it's just something that happens in democracies.

So - you could call the promise of DOGE lies, but I think they were a lie from Trump and not Elon. I think Trump promised Elon cuts, to get his help in the election, then backtracked, and that's exactly why Elon stormed out, he didn't get what he wanted.

And the US government is still massively overspending. Trump didn't really cut anything.

Amazon Leo will have 14k satellites in space in a few months? Wow! Amazing!

Maybe just maybe the guy does actually get things done, and if you didn't hate him you'd see that?

(yes, there are some things he hasn't gotten done. That doesn't take away from what he has gotten done)

I strongly suspect some sort of fab built by Elon associated companies will be announced soon. Almost all supply can be bought by Tesla and xAI.

It makes sense, IF he can get the tech to work at the bleeding edge. But he seems to be quite good at this.

But! Magically NHS waiting lists got shorter! The government could say this on Question Time on the BBC, woohoo!

I imagine this is the kind of thing that's happening now with petty crime reports.

It’s also extremely hard saying no to certain shows to my kids, and it would be much easier to just not have them there.

I’m pretty sure the politically oriented people at Disney want this to your kids watch as much of the content as possible, and especially the new ones.

At least netflix allows me to hide certain shows...

Turning the impossible into late is a legitimate business strategy, because you create markets that weren't there before (like cheap satellite launches).

And he has a history of doing this, and he's trying to do it again with optimus and robotaxi. There's massive potential in humanoid robots and robotaxis, which is why people are willing to take a risk. You might think that's irrational, and that's fine. Others do not.

Compare this to other car companies, they don't offer any vision of changing the future in any major way or bringing new products to market. That is boring and predictable. Still valuable, but not as much as Tesla.

Considering there was literally just an attack on a UK synagogue by an arab, after which many people protested on the side of the attacker in London, you don't think there's a tiny legitimacy to his views?

Of course this is a rhetorical question, because your obviously don't think his views has legitimacy.

I can both argue that it’s cruel to not have housing for everyone,

while also arguing it’s cruel to tax away 40-50% of an entire country’s productivity (people’s actual work) to pay for houses for people who have never worked or paid taxes in their life.

Who’s right? Who’s cruel? Both sides and both. This is why I find this cruelty argument so bad.

And where you are from matters a lot, you will probably answer very differently if you are from California or if you are from Birmingham UK.

People seem to have this concept that there is some supra national legal system, or even moral system that can hold a higher truth than what powerful countries want, but there isn't. When it comes to geopolitics, the biggest and most powerful sets the rules and lives by them (or not). The USA has zero motivation to do something the UN wants it to do, if it doesn't itself want to do it. No one is going to hold it to account.

Ultimately - whoever controls the violence can set the rules. For the last 80 years that's been the US. Maybe that is changing, but not quite yet.

The UN isn't an international democratic institution. For the last 20-30 years it's been a powerless theatre. And it didn't have much power before then either. Because ultimately, whoever has the most nukes and the biggest army rules the world.