Flock helped solve over 1 million crimes last year. There were 7 reported cases of misuse by cops last year, where Flock’s audit logs were used as evidence against them. That's 1 reported misuse case, caught by guardrails, for every 140,000 crime victims that got justice.

Reuters is proud, bragging even, that their gently massaged interpretation of Tesla's FSD safety data is being cited as grounds to launch a senate investigation. Shameful.

It's true but he's dead and Maduro is in jail ❤️

Idc about all morons saying that society shouldn’t have trillionaires. I was born in USSR and grew up in Russia in the 90s. For me it’s a true marvel that: - an engineer can get rich by being a good engineer - an entrepreneur can get rich by building something people want and not grifting on the government or natural resources - an entrepreneur engineer can become a trillionaire and not be in prison

Or you could have invested social security in the S&P 500 instead of treasuries, and the problem would be solved.

We need so many more trillionaires.

Congrats to @elonmusk our first trillionaire, a noble accomplishment

Message received

“but 80% of workloads will be running on 99% cheaper models within 12-18 months” Yup need for token usage growing exponentially does not mean willingness to shoulder costs go up exponentially

A government that can't count votes in a timely manner shouldn't be allowed to run so many aspects of our lives.

China is making a big push for outbound investment. China is also building tools to hit back at other countries if they “take discriminatory measures against Chinese foreign investment” in Beijing’s view: “First, in response to investment barriers related to trade or other obstacles to investment and business operations imposed by foreign countries or regions, the State Council’s commerce department may conduct investigations on its own or jointly with other relevant departments. Based on the investigation results, relevant State Council departments may take measures such as adjusting country-specific investment policies and prohibiting or restricting the import and export of relevant goods and technologies. Second, in response to discriminatory prohibitions, restrictions, or other similar measures adopted by foreign countries or regions, or international organizations, in areas such as investment and business operations, the Chinese government has the right to take corresponding measures based on actual circumstances. It may also, in accordance with the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law of the People’s Republic of China and its supporting regulations, impose countermeasures on organizations and individuals that directly or indirectly participate in formulating, deciding, or implementing such measures. Third, in response to foreign organizations or individuals that harm China’s national sovereignty, security, or development interests; interrupt transactions in violation of normal market transaction principles; or adopt discriminatory measures that unreasonably deprive or restrict investors and their legitimate rights and interests in outbound investment, relevant State Council departments may take measures against them, including prohibiting or restricting their investment in China, entry into China, and relevant transactions or cooperation.”

Huawei is in the news again, so it’s a good time to re-up my High Capacity post fitting Huawei into China’s broader tech-industrial policy story: highcapacity.org/p/huawei-th…

America's postal system is a sort of negative lootbox where 99.9% of items are trash but the other 0.1% are special quest items that if not promptly handled result in crippling debts or your arrest.

The Shanghai Billionaire Behind America's Anti-Data Center Movement bit.ly/43AYqe3

Have you actually read Mamdani's housing policy document? It is openly disdainful of market rate housing as anything other than a thing to be extorted for taxes, and focuses entirely on expanding subsidies. x.com/AnechoicMedia_/status/…

I skimmed the report; It's about what I expected. Section 1: Taking more from landlords; organizing the rabble - "affordable housing" is defined explicitly as regulated housing, rather than "making housing more affordable" in the market - push for stricter enforcement action against landlords to meet standards, without any corresponding relief on price controls to meet those obligations. - "aggressive" use of the 7A program, a forced conservatorship where outside management is appointed to assume control of a building and use rents for repairs. The program typically has a couple hundred buildings at a time, which are turned around within a few months; Activists envision thousands of buildings can be taken over this way and for a longer period of time. There's also been talk of putting tenants' groups in charge rather than professional managers. Prosecuting negligent landlords is necessary, but you can't sue your way to greater housing supply. It's a way to effect greater state control over housing rather than incentivizing more of it to be created. - pressure lenders to foreclose on problem landlords, then arrange for the properties to be bought up by administration-supported buyers. They mention a target list of housing portfolios. It sounds like the plan is to effect a taking by getting owners/lenders to take a hit on the buildings, then buy them up for the cheap. - more funding to hire lawyers to represent tenants in eviction proceedings. This is the government spending money to make housing more expensive. These are all proposals you make when you view the supply of market housing as a fixed thing to be taken over by your constituents, not a dynamic system that needs to remain functional and capable of expanding itself. Section 2: I have to subsidize demand The report acknowledges the fundamental problem that for regulated affordable housing, operating costs exceed rents. The solution to this is a basket of problems to push the costs of favored groups onto other people: - drives to enroll more residents in a program that provides subsidized electricity and gas - expand program that provides residents with subsidized water and sewer service - new city-backed insurance program to sell subsidized coverage to regulated units - expand program that subsidizes various capital improvements related to energy efficiency or "decarbonization" to meet new emissions compliance standards - keep trying to get landlords to participate in a program that offers $50k per unit to renovate vacant units that are below standards and can't be economically rented at the regulated rent. Basically nobody has applied for this program because the requirements to get the money are onerous and still don't make it profitable to get a unit back on the market under the price controls. - nudge the Department of Finance to lower valuations of rent-stabilized buildings to reduce their property taxes. The argument being made is that, since the legislature passed some laws that make it harder for landlords to turn over rent-stabilized tenants, purchases of rent-stabilized buildings have decreased, thereby depressing value. It seems to go unnoticed this argument is demonstrating exactly how the kinds of policies they advocate have the effect of preventing the market from wanting to invest in affordable housing! I don't think anybody ever incentivized a housing boom by crashing property values with regulations and price controls. Perhaps that's the point. - tax breaks and subsidizes for converting unregulated buildings to public ownership or regulation - a bunch of money to subsidize capital improvements in city-regulated subsidized private housing which is facing steep costs of meeting the new emissions reduction mandates. There's only so many different ways you can restate "we're going to spend more money subsidizing regulated housing, while also lowering taxes on that housing, the gap to be made up by further raising taxes on the remaining unregulated housing stock". - "ownership transfers" of currently unprofitable property where operating costs exceed regulated rent, to be bought out by tax subsidized landlords or tenant/community trusts. - another version of the same program but this one targets buildings with back taxes and water bills for transfer to new owners Again we have the overt theme of "the government is going to regulate private property into a financial crisis, then the solution to that crisis is the state redistributes your property to a new entity which receives subsidizes or other exemptions from the fiscal burden". Section 3: Expanding public housing There's a big push to fix up leaking pipes, mold, broken elevators, heat, remove lead, etc. These are some of the same issues as above but without the annoyance of private landlords. But even with state ownership there's a giant backlog of work to be done, and the vacant unit problem that remediating units to the standard required to re-rent them is really expensive. Notably, the report estimates that the cost to turn around vacant units in NYCHA is $59k - more than the money being offered to private landlords to remediate their rent-regulated vacant units, which still don't have positive operating cash flow. A depiction of the impossible task given to private owners in this system. Section 4: Everything bagel leftism - we have a housing crisis. To meet that crisis we're going to build a record amount of subsidized, regulated housing. - Also at the same time we're going to subject public building to a "construction justice" mandate that nobody who works on those projects is paid less than $40/hr; a wage that would disqualify those workers for the affordable housing in question. - housing and support services for homeless people in the same buildings as affordable housing units - subsidized housing sites for criminals leaving prison - preferences and subsidies for developers by sex, religion, and race - preferences and aid for smaller developers who have difficulty bidding in public projects - inclusionary zoning, where all increases in permitted capacity come with the requirement of building subsidized housing - preferentially giving bid opportunities on city-owned properties to non-profit, minority, or women-owned developers - require new private development on city-controlled land to cross-subsidize regulated affordable units (to an extent greater than is possible with usual inclusionary zoning mandates) ------ anyway you get the idea, I'm not a fan

Actually they’ve got 700 vehicles. 42 is the number that don’t have a safety monitor on board. One year after Waymo One launched, Waymo had ~300 vehicles in Phoenix. And only a few dozen were fully driverless. Nobody has ever deployed driverless Robotaxis faster than Tesla.

My block went from most car break ins in the country to very safe / no car break ins at all because a Flock camera was installed.

Every time I see these stats I am just as astonished at the first time I read any version of them. “There are about 450,000 socially rented homes in inner London. This is about one in three homes. About half of the 450,000 are occupied by lead tenants who are not working, either because they are retired (18%), disabled (13%), caring for someone else (7%), studying (2%), or unemployed/otherwise inactive (11%).”

it’s in gemini, just create it in ai studio. oh, that’s for your personal google one account. for workspace you need gemini business. no, not gemini advanced, that’s ai pro now. unless you need ai ultra. oh agents? you do that in spark actually. no, not gemini api managed agents, that’s different. for coding use jules. unless you mean the agentic ide, that’s antigravity. no, that’s the old antigravity, download the new one. actually gemini cli is being deprecated, use antigravity cli. no the flash model is smarter than the pro model. unless you need pro. if it’s video, use flow. no, flow uses veo. no, nano banana is images. actually that’s in gemini now. unless you’re in search, then it’s ai mode. no, research is notebooklm. anyway it’s all very simple.