Why is a typical human driver at typical performance the baseline? The bad outcomes from driving come from the poor end of the performance, if the average autonomous vehicle avoids those long tail bad outcomes, some inconveniences like slow turns etc is a very worthy tradeoff.
Autonomous vehicles don't get drunk or sleepy, don't speed, don't leave the scene of an accident...
The target market is enterprise. If I showed up for my first day of work and they handed me a 2019 MacBook Air I'd be pretty unhappy.
I really don't get this attitude of indignation when a powerful machine's resources are fully utilized. What else are you doing with with that computing power? There's not some finite pool of computing power we are depleting here, they are figuring out how to make more all the time!
Twitter was a second tier advertising destination before there was any inkling of a Musk deal, and advertisers started leaving before the deal closed when he was trying to get out of it. The biggest advertising firms in the world are advising their clients to leave.
Why would they come back? Musk is the Donald Trump of tech - plenty of devoted fans, but not someone brands want to associate themselves with. Even if he wanted to, it doesn't seem that Musk can stop impulsively tweeting controversial things.
The advertiser exodus (already well underway) is a far bigger threat to Twitter than a user exodus. The subscription model is dead on arrival.
There's plenty of options if you want a forum without "corporate ESG posing" - 4chan et al. They just don't make money, or interest the majority of people.
You couldn't previously buy a checkmark, now you can. This opens new methods of attacking the network.
This move perhaps limits spam as practiced today, but the attacks that will happen once the network changes will be different in ways that are difficult to predict.
The critical thing for the platform is that if I want to find the Twitter account for {celebrity foo} I can do so with a high degree of confidence that it will be real.
I think the loss of trust from consumers is the bigger risk, successful impersonations are relatively high profile and people don't like being tricked.
These MMO's are the real absolute ceiling of whatever Meta is trying to do, but that's insufficiently gigantic to justify a pivot of Meta.
So they are pitching it as something that will extend past niche audiences (in absolute numbers they are huge but niche in terms of FB scale).
The incoherency of why non-gamers would be interested in this is revealed in their advertising. For example, a fitness buff talking about how swinging around a foam stick with a headset strapped to her face is the best workout of her life.
> Their audience just got older and rather than abandon them they acquired companies more suited to younger generations e.g. Instagram, Oculus instead.
This strategy has run it's course. Regulators are keen to weaken FB and will obstruct further acquisitions. Acquisition targets know they can beat FB in the long run and will no longer agree to be purchased.
A drop in retail assets north of 10% in a quarter does not sound like stability to me, especially for a company spending like they are in hyper growth mode. It sounds more like an existential risk to the business.
Autonomous vehicles don't get drunk or sleepy, don't speed, don't leave the scene of an accident...