I have read the Google deal makes xAI profitable. In the short term, anyway.

xAI failed to produce a frontier model. They got involved into nudifying and other questionable activities as well. People started leaving in droves: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/elon-musk/xai-musk-addresses-wa...

xAI is a failed company, as is X. Their merger into SpaceX is basically a scam. Elon Musk justified this by saying he is going to send xAI servers into space using SpaceX. This is an unproven idea, not ready for investing.

What I was trying to point out is xAI has a lot of data center capacity and is making bank renting it to other companies.

Sure, but renting out data center capacity is not that lucrative. You get 15% markup that's all.

It is low-margin business, does not explain their 1.8T valuation.

Twitter isn't failing. It makes a little bit some quarters and loses a little bit other quarters.

Yep. People want to believe this, because it means the world will generally become more peaceful as it becomes more integrated. But the numbers just don't hold up -- the closest trading partners are just as willing to go to war as anyone else.

What if you're on the receiving end and don't get a choice?

I don't wanna say but some people decide to do the unthinkable and that's how boulevards are filled with statues. You always have a choice, they just all suck.

There were quite some that refused due to principles and beliefs, but I guess not enough, and when there are not enough the first sacrificed for nothing.

Some places for other evil ideas that didn't reach global size, it means enough people stood up and they won.

Whats the formula? I guess nobody knows.

Yes, that was already the first scenario presented. I was presenting a different one to help you understand how someone could reach the opposite conclusion.

Getting from here to there is going to be tough, but I agree 100%. Not only should email be E2EE, but it should include a certificate scheme such that you know the person purporting to be the sender is actually the sender.

PGP had the right idea, but the system is too hard for the average person.

With "system" I refer to building a web (or multiple!) of trust, based on parameters that you decide upon.

Given that the cryptography would necessarily be asymmetric verifying the sender on a TOFU basis seems like a trivial addition (just sign something). I doubt you can do better than TOFU though unless you tie it to an external ID system (corporate or government or etc issued hardware tokens or similar).

In the sense that all things end, sure. But for the forseeable future the dollar will be the world's reserve currency because 1) the US economy is still the biggest, and furthermore we have a big trade deficit and 2) the dollar is still the least worst currency out there.

I would definitely take that job no matter how little it paid or how unpleasant it was. For awhile, just so I could put it on my resume.

I bring my own modem/router and access point and pay my ISP $35/month for 1Gb up/down. Why would I pay $10 forever when I can bring my own equipment that is much better and fully controlled by me?

There are a couple reasons. What I found when I owned my own modem was whenever there was a problem I first had to convince them the problem was on their end, since they could always shrug and say "it's probably your modem". They can connect to their own equipment and immediately identify the problem.

The other reason is you might not have the money when you sign up. For a lot of people it's easier to come up with $10 than (in Starlink's case) $500.

My ISP gives me the equipment for free and the same bandwidth at a lower price than my prior ISP.

Drone target recognition?

Seems pointless to do this without also doing something about phone number spoofing.

It's not about controlling them, it's about controlling you and me