Replying to @⁨elonmuskszahnbuerste@feddit.org⁩

The saddest thing about billionaires is their lack of high quality, constructive hobbies. Where are the public gardens they’ve built, where is the community neighborhoods they’ve designed and founded? Where are the terraforming and farmland reclaimation projects they’ve done? Where are their great library wings, public water features, hospitals and healthcare systems.

They contribute nothing. I don’t want to see them dead, I just want to see them demoted to the lowest rungs of society.

Replying to @⁨DarkCloud@lemmy.world⁩

This rings true. Of course, you can get the odd philanthropist here and there, but they’re the exception. One of the problems other than the billionaires’ insatiable greed is that they know how much everyone hates them. And instead of showing people that they’re worthy of love, they choose to hate everyone right back. Where this circle started is like the chicken and the egg.

Replying to an earlier post

Yeah the Waltons aren’t super liked outside of that little town, and there are plenty inside it who aren’t fond of them anymore as the city bends to their whims. Sometimes you benefit from what they do, sometimes it fucks up something you liked already. A little of their guilt money is in my nonprofit’s bank account. I am happy to be using it for things they’d probably hate.

Replying to @⁨Yewb@lemmy.world⁩

He is a scam artist, but this specific argument in the broader reality doesn’t really stick. The argument is that no one ever sells something that yields value to anyone else, which is obviously off.

It works better if you highlight that Tesla is less like those companies. They are demonstrably big on vertical integration, including the ride shares, so for them, it is out of character, but as a generic business strategy, it’s perfectly routine.

Replying to @⁨elonmuskszahnbuerste@feddit.org⁩

mechahitler controlled optimus robots are expected on the same “income plan”. Musk has been saying FSD/full autonomous was 1 year away since 2015. OP is right to be skeptical. First Tesla shows it can run a robotaxi fleet, then you can consider buying one/several for same purpose, even though price would rise if it made money and didn’t crash too often.

Replying to @⁨elonmuskszahnbuerste@feddit.org⁩

I mean, fuck Musk, but the same would apply for literally any manufacturer of commercial or industrial equipment.

By this logic ASML would never sell their world-leading computer chip lithography machines. They would just run their own production lines instead.

On the other end of the cost spectrum, no manufacturer would ever sell robot vacuum cleaners or lawn mowers, instead contracting these out as cleaning services.

The truth is companies will sell profitable machines to other companies simply because the entirety of civilization is built on the specialization of labor. This applies to both individuals and groups of individuals. Sure, ASML could raise capital and try to invest in their own chip fabs, but why? If they have the money to invest, they would be better off buying more equipment and hiring more employees to make more of the tools they already sell. This company’s machines are one of the major bottlenecks in global compute production. They can sell machines as fast as they can make them. They know how to make a really good lithography machine. They don’t know how to run a full fab well. Instead they focus on just their one part of the industry.

Specialization of labor built civilization. It’s why we’re not still living in caves. I would never by a Cybercab because I don’t want to give money to nazis. And it’s actually likely that Musk is lying about the profitability of these things. At the same time, however, it is very poor logic to assume that simply because a company is selling a piece of commercial or industrial equipment means that equipment is unprofitable to own.

Replying to @⁨isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone⁩

Broadly, you have a point. However with Tesla Musk has been pretty consistent that they would be directly doing it and they have the Tesla app managing the rides.

Their strategy has been all in one, they make the cars, they own the chargers, and they don’t really partner with anyone in any significant way.

While it does happen that companies end up partnering and competing at the same time, it’s relatively less likely. So for Tesla it is extra strange to be pitching being a supplier for other autonomous taxis while simultaneously being in the market.

So yeah, generally it is a poor argument, but in the context of Tesla, it is at least a bit out of character for them.

Replying to an earlier post

it is very poor logic to assume that simply because a company is selling a piece of commercial or industrial equipment means that equipment is unprofitable to own.

The article is not making this generalization, it’s specifically about Tesla’s situation and offer.

Your ASML analogy would work, if 1) ASML already ran their own chip foundries, 2) ASML was offering you the chance to buy a lithography machine that would not work except inside an ASML foundry, 3) ASML promised they would lease “your” lithography machine back from you, on terms they set, at some unspecified future date.