fabian2k

This is with safety drivers. So at this point you can't really make any conclusions about how good the Robotaxi is at avoiding major crashes since those should ideally be handled by the safety drivers. Without the actual data around all driver interventions you cannot make any positive conclusions about safety here.

My suspicion is that these kinds of minor crashes are simply harder to catch for safety drivers, or maybe the safety drivers did intervene here and slow down the car before the crashes. I don't know if that would show in this data.

It's impressive how bad they're at hiring the safety drivers. This is not even measuring how good the Robotaxi itself is, right now it's only measuring how good Tesla is at running this kind of test. This is not inspiring any confidence.

Though maybe the safety drivers are good enough for the major stuff, and the software is just bad enough at low speed and low distance collisions where the drivers don't notice as easily that the car is doing something wrong before it happens.

I don't think you need a NOTAM for that, you could just close the airport directly. And so far this administration hasn't shown itself to be particularly concerned about preventing the spread of infectious diseases like measles.

There is a circular restriction around the airport and a trapezoid one next to the city (https://elpasomatters.org/2026/02/11/unexplained-faa-order-s...).

What are the plausible explanations here? I can't think of anything except military action against Mexico (or the cartels inside Mexico). But even that doesn't fit well.

A suspected terror attack could explain the airspace around the airport, but not the weird trapezoid restriction next to the city.

The duration of 10 days is also weird, that seems very long for any kind of emergency situation. And as far as I understand, it is unusual to have no exceptions at all here e.g. for medical transports via helicopter.

This kind of story seems to be very common for all kinds of US prisons or detention facilities. The most prominent one right now probably the ones from ICE. Like this story about the ICE prison for children (https://www.propublica.org/article/life-inside-ice-dilley-ch...)

> Moms told me that their kids had lost their appetites after finding worms and mold on their food, had trouble sleeping on the facility’s hard metal bunk beds in rooms shared by at least a dozen other people, and were constantly sick.

Nothing in your argument is proof that the investors aren't idiots.

Yeah, I'm not buying that. I don't see how that could be any cheaper than regular datacenters. It might just be technically feasible, but launching stuff into space will always be more expensive than not launching stuff into space. And all those pesky technical issues like cooling might be solvable, but I doubt they're that cheap to solve.

There's an epic conflict of interest here with Musk owning most of both companies. And they're in entirely separate fields, there is no plausible synergy here to be gained.

I'm a bit hesitant to draw strong conclusions here because there is so little data. I would personally assume that it means the AI isn't ready at all, but without knowing any details at all about the crashes this is hard to state for sure.

But if the number of crashes had been lower than for human drivers, this would tell us nothing at all.

I think it's fair to put the burden of proof here on Tesla. They should convince people that their Robotaxis are safe. If they redact the details about all incidents so that you cannot figure out who's at fault, that's on Tesla alone.

As long as there are still safety drivers, the data doesn't really tell you if the AI is any good. Unless you had reliable data about the number of interventions by the driver, which I assume Tesla doesn't provide.

Still damning that the data is so bad even then. Good data wouldn't tell us anything, the bad data likely means the AI is bad unless they were spectacularly unlucky. But since Tesla redacts all information, I'm not inclined to give them any benefit of the doubt here.

Your list is misleading, the TÜV is about safety, but you're only listing the more trivial things, I wonder why. They also check major things like steering.

I think it is reasonably safe to assume that the issues that are not directly related to the specific model of the car are roughly evenly distributed among cars of the same age.

Looks like the Tesla Model Y has roughly the same amount of faults after less than 3 years as the top cars in this comparison have after 11-13 years (https://www.tuvsud.com/de-de/publikationen/tuev-report/maeng...). That's not a good look.

I also don't buy the argument brought up several times in the comments here that this is caused by the lack of regular inspections. This is about very new cars, there shouldn't be that many issues to catch in inspections when the car is less than 3 years old.

> "The decision is rooted in the poor U.S. government finances, which make us think that we need to make an effort to find an alternative way of conducting our liquidity and risk management," Investment Director Anders Schelde said in a written statement.

Not a political decision. Still a bad sign for the US, but not really unexpected.

Sufficiently aggressive and inconsiderate scraping is indistinguishable from a DDOS attack.

Haven't read this one, and there is certainly plenty of useless rage bait on the internet. But in general it is important and serves a purpose to criticize people wielding a lot of power. This doesn't have to be constructive, if those people are idiots and doing harmful things.

Shooting her did absolutely nothing to disable the threat. The car continued and arguably even accelerated after the driver was shot.

It's not a bodycam, he had his smartphone in the hand and was filming with it.

Taking a step to the side certainly is an "other objectively reasonable means of defense".

It is trigger-happy because there was no good reason to draw the weapon or shoot at all. Shooting the woman did not do anything to stop the car, to the contrary it resulted in the car accelerating and hitting another vehicle.

He could have stepped aside instead of drawing his weapon and there wouldn't have been any issue. He also shouldn't have walked around the car that way, that was entirely unnecessary and dangerous.

The woman is clearly distracted by the other ICE officer, that's just an all around dangerous situation they created entirely unnecessarily.

There are at least two videos available from different perspectives. None of them show her trying to run anyone over.

There is no reward for closing questions.

The gamification is mostly via reputation, and only asking, answering (and very limited editing) grant reputation.

I just recently switched to Linux since I had some weird Windows issues I couldn't fix. I've tried to switch a few times before, but the main problem at some point was that I didn't have proper fractional scaling on Linux. And that alone pretty much made Linux unusable for me on my specific hardware.

Wayland fixes that, so that part is a huge improvement to me. Unfortunately this also limited my choice of Distros as not all of them use Wayland. I landed on Ubuntu again, despite some issues I have with it. The most annoying initially was that the Snap version of Firefox didn't use hardware acceleration, which is just barely usable.

People answer on SO because it's fun. Why should they spend their time fixing AI answers?

It's very tedious as the kind of mistakes LLMs make can be rather subtle and AI can generate a lot of text very fast. It's a sisyphean taks, I doubt enough people would do it.

Stack Overflow moderation is very transparent compared to whatever Reddit considers moderation.

For programming my main problem with Reddit is that the quality of posts is very low compared to SO. It's not quite comparable because the more subjective questions are not allowed on SO, but there's a lot of advice on Reddit that I would consider harmful (often in the direction of adding many more libraries than most people should).

You don't need any reputation to ask questions, you only need to create an account.

Fixing loads of LLM-generated content is neither easy nor fun. You'll have a very hard time getting people to do that.

Not zero, but it is smaller than when it launched originally. And this is questions asked, not how many people are visiting and reading posts.

There is an obvious acceleration of the downwards trend at the time ChatGPT got popular. AI is clearly a part of this, but not the only thing that affects SO activity.

I think it is even more important now to look at the individual people making these decisions instead of looking at the country. The interests of the US don't matter in this administration, the interests of the people in charge drive this.

And even then I wouldn't look too deep. Maybe Trump just wants to blow stuff up, to show he's strong. Odds are, some people nudging him have their own reasons for encouraging this.