bjl

10 ms·

31.
by bjl 8y ago
Not really surprising. Hard to imagine a more cut and dried way he could've violated his settlement than lying about production rates. At least this time he tweeted outside of market hours.
32.
by bjl 8y ago
> Can someone point me to the starting point? I must be missing something. Why can't non-conscious matter, arranged precisely, think? The hard problem of consciousness has a long history, but two of the most influential contemporary
33.
by bjl 8y ago
Not to mention the charity fraud scheme from a couple months ago, which they still haven't stopped doing.
34.
by bjl 8y ago
>> Why would you attack some guy trying to help you achieve your goal of rescuing the trapped boys, and call him names on twitter >Something I've been wondering about too. Because it was a distracting and transparent PR stunt
35.
by bjl 8y ago
This is Musk's PR budget in action, folks.
36.
by bjl 8y ago
Dude, that UI was not merely 'confusing', it was clearly intentionally deceptive. Nobody here is dumb enough to fall for such blatant PR spin.
37.
by bjl 8y ago
> In response to your other comments, I feel good assuming we're somewhere in the general brand feel of the EFF and Firefox. That's laughable. Trust me, among the people who know about Brave at all, you're associated more
38.
by bjl 8y ago
Come on, man. The 'donation' UI was clearly designed to deceive visitors into thinking that the creator signed up and customized it themselves. Brave fucked up big time, and you aren't doing your employer any favors by commen
39.
by bjl 8y ago
You're on a thread about Brave shamelessly committing donation fraud and you're surprised people aren't giving you the benefit of the doubt?
40.
by bjl 8y ago
You realise those people didn't break the law, right? You can't just throw someone in prison because you don't like what they did, their actions actually have to be illegal.
41.
by bjl 8y ago
Did you even click the link? "His reporting with a partner and CNN exposed rampant fraud in California's drug rehab system for the poor, winning an Investigative Reporters and Editors Award."
42.
by bjl 8y ago
> I'm not sure if this answer is in anything posted, however: 1) is that claim of someone with a "crushed spine denied an ambulance" proven, and 2) is "because it would've shown up on OSHA logs" proven as Te
43.
by bjl 8y ago
I find it somewhat amusing that you're trying to discredit a report by one of the premiere institutions of investigative journalism using a blog post on a site ran by a self-admitted Tesla fanboy. That's even setting aside the mon
44.
by bjl 8y ago
That statement isn't exactly compelling. It just resorts to ad hominem attacks in an attempt to discredit a minor piece of the article, while deflecting/ignoring the major claims (like the worker with a crushed spine who was denie
45.
by bjl 8y ago
He'd bankrupt himself if he tried to do that. If the share price drops to low all his creditors will margin call him, which would wipe out the vast majority of his wealth.
46.
by bjl 8y ago
You speculated that this deal was more to his liking than the previous one. I was just pointing out how absurd that statement was given that this deal is worse than the other one in every respect.
47.
by bjl 8y ago
This deal is strictly worse than the one he refused. Fines doubled from 10M to 20M, chairman ban increased from two years to three, new communication review process (not in the original deal), and they still have to install two new board me
48.
by bjl 8y ago
Why the short seller hate? They play a very important role in exposing fraud and inefficient allocation of capital.
49.
by bjl 8y ago
For something to be insider trading, one of the people involved has to have breached their fiduciary responsibilities. Low-level employees typically don't have any fiduciary responsibilities to their company, so the firm that collects
50.
by bjl 8y ago
That tweet was a classic non-apology. He tried to shift as much of the blame as possible for his actions onto the British ex-pat; I can't understand how people think that shows genuine remorse.
51.
by bjl 8y ago
The first part of the tweet is entirely irrelevant, since whether or not it was true is unknowable. The second statement, on the other hand was a material statement of fact. Literally the only thing that matters is whether or not the state
52.
by bjl 8y ago
'Funding secured' has a very specific meaning in finance. And it definitely implies that he has a party that, contingent on a shareholder vote, has a legal obligation to buy out all existing shares (if necessary).
53.
by bjl 8y ago
Not really. Accounts payable ballooned to around $3B, and cash on hand is only ~$2B (of which about $1B is in the form of revokable deposits).
54.
by bjl 8y ago
If the software was known to be unreliable, then it shouldn't have been on the road. Everyone at Uber who worked on that project shares the blame.
55.
by bjl 8y ago
Eh, I don't know, I've never felt the need to call someone a 'pedo' with absolutely no evidence. That kind of thing is completely beyond the pale.
56.
by bjl 8y ago
That's not at all surprising, though, that's how journalism has always worked (protecting one's sources). I certainly trust the WSJ over anything that comes out of Musk's mouth, especially after those pedo accusations.
57.
by bjl 8y ago
A sizeable majority of US Treasuries are owned by American citizens.
58.
by bjl 8y ago
It amazes me how many people seem to have bought into his cult of personality. Hopefully his recent pedophile outburst will give them some pause, and lead them to consider the long-term societal effects of worshipping corporate oligarchs.
59.
by bjl 8y ago
How is this out of character? He's constantly insulting people on Twitter. Honestly, I'm surprised this one blew up more than the time he called a guy from South Africa a 'chimp'.
60.
by bjl 8y ago
Absolutely disgusting on Musk's part. Calling an actual hero a child molestor simply because he called out an obvious PR stunt. Hopefully Unsworth sues him for libel.

More ›