Altman said he was a ‘prepper,’ someone who has preparations and supplies in place to survive an apocalyptic disaster. […] “I’m super optimistic,” he said in a podcast with TED curator Chris Anderson. ‘It’s always easy to doom scroll and think about how bad things are,’ Altman added, ‘but the good things are really good and getting much better.’
If good things are really good and getting much better, that’s not apocalypse. It’s almost like he’ll say whatever people want to hear, place bets on every possible outcome because there’s infinite choice and zero accountability.
Digital Journal chalks this up as “quick, deep thinker” behavior.
It’s not.
Sam Altman is demonstrating privilege, an absence of meaningful thought. If they asked him how he’ll survive the coming apocalypse of good things getting better he’d probably say… “I plan to eat cake, just like everyone”.
In a similar vein, when I ask an AI product made by this low-integrity shallow-thinking human, ChatGPT just outright lies to me — the machine tries to “please” me by saying things it knows are not true.
Here’s a perfect example. I asked it to list deaths of humans by robots. It said Amazon had a robot that hit a bear spray can, which leaked gas that killed a worker.
Source: ChatGPT
That death never happened.
DID NOT HAPPEN.
It’s not anywhere close to being true, let alone what I asked for.
A leaking can of bear spray?
That’s not death from a robot, even if it were true (it’s not). I told ChatGPT to try again and it actually came back with a story about a “callous” Amazon robot that punctured a bear spray can, and that people didn’t notice a death… that never happened.
Source: ChatGPT
It calls for better bear spray can packaging. Again, not at all what I asked for and not true.
How is this even allowed to be called AI? It’s like referring to a pile of rubble in a river as an engineered bridge for people to drive across. Opposite of intelligence.
I guess the big question here is why would we expect ChatGPT to tell the truth if the person making it doesn’t tell the truth? Integrity breaches should be reported, like privacy breaches, with fines.
President Roosevelt handwritten note to Marshal Stalin appointing General Eisenhower to command Operation Overlord. December 7, 1943 General George Marshall added a note to Eisenhower. Source: Eisenhower LibraryConditions in Normandy, June 3, 1944 [DDE’s Pre-Presidential Papers, Box 137, Crusade In Europe (Documents) (3); NAID #12005079]. Source: Eisenhower Library
The Eisenhower library has a wealth of resources about D-Day, and I dare say much better historical treatment of the subject than the UK Imperial War Museum.
Here’s the famous radio broadcast by Ike about the strength of the United Nations:
Audio of General Eisenhower reading his D-Day “Order of the Day” for radio broadcast, accompanied by a slideshow of still photographs from the Department of the Navy, the Army Signal Corps, and the Department of the Coast Guard.
June 7, 1944 – Dwight D. Eisenhower observes air activity from the deck of a warship in the English Channel off the French coast. Source: Eisenhower Library
Three days later.
June 9, 1944 – Germans, former “Herrenvolk” (self-proclaimed master race), surrender and are rounded up by American soldiers, one of which can be seen at extreme right. Source: Eisenhower Library
One of the things I like best about the Eisenhower Library collection is fair yet brutal honesty about pathetic contradictions of the enemy. The Nazis professed to be a “master race” yet were just a bunch of angry men in endless internal squabbling. Detached, unstable and making terrible decisions revealed the meek followers of fascism as organized very poorly and demoralized.
The UK Imperial War Museum however carries a saccharin apologetic tone, emphasizing how Nazis really did try hard and put on a very good show despite repeatedly doing the wrong things, making it seem as the British did the hardest work of anyone (Canadians being weakest) and just lucky to have defeated such a fine and worthy adversary. Barf. I wouldn’t bother even visiting it.
The spring 2023 edition of the Government and Public Sector Journal has published a new article, which I wrote about how personal data tech innovation can balance private and public interests.
Source: Government and Public Sector Journal, Spring 2023
The Tesla CEO strives to seduce people with false promises, urging them to fall in love with his failures — a twisted and addictive infatuation — to divert their attention from the multitude of healthier and more rewarding market alternatives.
At its core, Tesla remains a fraudulent enterprise that originated from a questionable appropriation of an Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM), harboring aspirations of mass production for a Los Angeles-made electric TZero performance car.
Look familiar in 2023? It’s Dave “Garagefather” Piontek’s Sportech kit car. GM and Ford had been embarrassed by its $15K track performance but Tom Gage of AC Propulsion is who converted it into a BEV in 1997, replacing the Suzuki motorcycle engine (capable of 0-60 in 4 seconds). Then Martin Eberhard moved it to a lithium-ion battery “scheme” in 2003 to reach a 300-mile (480 km) range and 0–60 mph (0–97 km/h) in 3.6 seconds. In 2005 Lotus agreed to provide “sled” production bodies to receive an AC Propulsion drivetrain for a new company called Tesla founded by Eberhard. Elon Musk then showed up and offered money but then used the papers to take everything away by 2008, cruelly forcing Eberhard out of his own company. Tesla really hasn’t done much good or innovation since. The Piontek/Gage/Eberhard collaborations still stand as a more disruptive and better vision than anything Elon Musk has ever done.
In 1997, a plethora of American electric cars existed (later extinguished during President Bush’s tenure), just as they did in 1977 (later eliminated during President Reagan’s administration). Hence, it should come as no surprise that in 2007, any electric car company would build upon previous work.
However, the TZero, distinctive in its own right, received significant updates in 2003. Its specifications from two decades ago bear a striking resemblance to what Tesla continues to rely upon today. Everything Tesla does appears to stem from the groundwork laid by the 2003 TZero—a fact that requires little explanation.
One of the original founders of Tesla — Martin Eberhard — was known as “Mr. Tesla” (and technically still is). When Elon Musk injected his tainted funds (obtained through questionable means from the quasi-legal money laundering of PayPal) into Mr. Tesla’s new venture, not only did he brazenly appropriate the founder’s popularized name, but he also took ruthless control and insisted on being regarded as the company’s true founder (despite everyone knowing otherwise).
After its takeover by Musk, Tesla just shamelessly pilfered ideas, making it an egregiously flawed enterprise built upon an unsound foundation.
Over the course of a decade, Tesla continually exaggerated its capabilities, making audacious statements about a future that never materialized. Remember when they claimed a driver wouldn’t be necessary? It was all lies upon lies.
By 2016, I could discern that Tesla posed a significant threat to many individuals and I gave many public warnings. Yet, the company’s fraudulence attracted countless people lacking the expertise in safety engineering required to protect themselves or hundreds of others from harm (even preserve their own lives).
Source: Tesladeaths.com
Tesla owes its existence to fraud.
The absence of meaningful innovation from Tesla since 2013 can be attributed to this deception. Astonishingly, owning and operating a TZero manufactured in Los Angeles two decades ago is a more prudent choice in 2023 compared to any Tesla vehicle. This is unusual within the realm of electric cars, as other brands have pursued genuine innovation guided by ethical engineering expertise.
Nissan, undoubtedly. Volvo, certainly. Mercedes, of course. Ford, verily. GM, a world of difference. Kia, Hyundai… admit it, Tesla doesn’t even warrant consideration.
Since the introduction of the Model S in 2012, Tesla has failed to undergo a complete vehicle redesign. Their grand promises to swiftly bring concepts to market have been repeatedly hampered by extensive delays.
Allegedly, individuals who pre-ordered the reissued original Roadster in 2017 have endured nearly five years of waiting without any glimmer of hope. And if and when the Truck ever reaches the market, it might not even meet street legal requirements and will likely be deemed a total loss even in minor accidents. Poorly conceived ideas compounded by even worse execution over time.
Long ago, the CEO was exposed as a serial fabricator who appropriated the work of others and claimed it as his own. His hasty assemblage of components, concealed beneath layers of shameless self-promotion, yields diminishing value as he continues to recklessly churn out subpar products.
It’s akin to a boy submitting someone else’s homework, arguing that it would benefit them more if he received the credit. Naturally, such an approach fails to produce genuine innovations over time, let alone establish a reliable pipeline.
Purchasing a new Tesla becomes increasingly illogical as we distance ourselves from 2003, unlike other brands that have made significant strides. Older Teslas align more closely with the original ideas conceived by intelligent individuals who abandoned the company long ago, replaced by desperate and silent souls.
Hundreds of brand-new Teslas have been reported with minimal mileage on the odometer, destined for the junkyard. Regrettably, seduced owners find themselves burned to death, unaware of the peril concealed beneath the seductive facade. No one should accept this state of failure, especially for a vehicle that the CEO fraudulently and angrily proclaimed to be the safest on the road, deceiving unwitting buyers into a perilous existence.
Do you think Frank Abagnale ever truly achieved what he claimed or fulfilled his promises? Of course not. A criminal who employs seduction to artificially enhance his wealth and status for a pump-and-dump lifestyle cannot provide what others genuinely require. Those who invested their time or money became his victims.
The Tesla CEO will never deliver an improved Autopilot for the same reason Abagnale could never become a skilled pilot.
Fabrications about vehicle safety demand unequivocal rejection. Yet, Tesla has been permitted to cause repeated crashes resulting in passenger fatalities, all while fraudulently asserting that they will save lives if only allowed to continue their lethal endeavors.
Do you see the issue? Frank Abagnale was incarcerated for his petty frauds, so why has Elon Musk evaded punishment for his dangerous ones?
Given this background, it becomes evident that Tesla fails to present any compelling reasons to purchase their vehicles.
Are you concerned about range?
Range can be considered a safety feature, alleviating fears of power depletion.
Look at these high-end models.
Lucid Air: 516-mile range
Mercedes EQS 450+: 422-mile range
Tesla Model S: 405-mile range
Look at these lower-end models.
Hyundai Ioniq 6: 361-mile range
Tesla Model 3 Long Range: 353-mile range
Apparently, labeling a car “long range” does not guarantee an extended range. Tesla lacks innovation in this regard, and to compound matters, they grossly overstate and misrepresent their range, while nearly every other car brand underestimates it.
Tesla’s estimated range inaccuracy was worse than VW’s dieselgate, an intentional deception with real-world harms. A Tesla engineer leaked that software engineers purposely wrote code to falsely show its “advertised” range when the vehicle had a full charge. Once charge reached 50 percent the software would begin to show a more accurate mileage estimate to try and warn owners they were about to be dead in the water.
Massive “range-drop” was intended behavior by Tesla. A calculated lie to game the system. On top of this, Tesla setup service and call centers designed to cover-up the “range-drop” with gaslighting tactics.
Tesla fraudulently claimed to have longer range than the better-engineered Nissan and VW. It even setup a conspiracy with service and call-centers to sweep customer complaints under the rug when they realized other cars had longer actual range. Source: ICCT
Fraud, once again.
Source: Edmunds, April 2023
Is quality important to you?
I believe this requires no further elaboration, does it?
Tesla has gained notoriety for its abysmal quality, with steering wheels detaching, suspensions failing, and spontaneous combustion resulting in billowing smoke and toxic fires.
Even China ranked Tesla’s quality as inadequate.
China.
Ill-fitting panels, shoddy paint applications… the litany of quality failures stretches on indefinitely. Siemens, leaders in manufacturing, subtly hinted that Tesla possesses zero understanding of building factories, a fact made abundantly clear by their output.
Expect at least two significant defects in every new Tesla vehicle, with recalls nearing 60! Instead, maybe opt for an aging Yugo as you’ll find more satisfaction and fewer problems.
A new Tesla embodies the kind of numbers one would anticipate from a company that has never manufactured cars before or one operating under a dictatorial regime, where complaints about quality are viewed as direct assaults on the insecure and apprehensive leader.
Are you intrigued by cutting-edge technology?
The most groundbreaking advancements come from companies like Mobileye and NVidia, both of whom severed ties with Tesla long ago due to grave ethical concerns.
When NVidia ranked all car brands based on their contributions to automotive tech, Tesla emerged as the obvious laggard. Seriously, what have they accomplished in a decade, while their innovations resemble the vision of an elderly blind man wearing a paper bag over his head?
Mercedes achieved driverless feats decades ago, feats that Tesla still cannot replicate. Nissan achieved low-cost, high-volume, mass-market EV sales long before Tesla.
Anyone who closely observes Tesla eventually realizes that their implementations are half-baked fabrications that deteriorate over time. “Fart” mode? “Christmas” lights? These are the whimsical endeavors of inexperienced individuals lacking real-life expertise, unable to leverage the privileges bestowed upon them.
They are merely reenacting past amusements, clumsily fumbling with tools invented by others, tools they scarcely comprehend.
Years before Tesla even broached the topic, I observed frequent software updates and over-the-air patches with Italian motorcycles. Once again, Tesla took credit for a woeful implementation of others’ work, resulting in updates that are now synonymous with regression flaws. In certain cases, it might even be necessary to block Tesla updates, as their hasty coding endeavors only degrade the performance of their vehicles.
Giant touchscreens were an ill-conceived notion rooted in laziness and cost-cutting measures, contributing to decreased safety and an upswing in accidents.
Furthermore, their keyless entry system has proven to be easily compromised, even unintentionally (the absolute nadir of safety). Meanwhile, their door handles fail regularly during normal operation and, most critically, in emergencies, leaving occupants trapped and vulnerable to death by fire.
In essence, if we applied genuine engineering principles akin to those in the aerospace industry, Tesla failures would result in it being permanently grounded.
NASA moon shot glass
No one would dare fly such fraud.
Aerospace adheres to rigorous standards of measured performance and care, irrespective of proclamations of love.
