What evidence do you have that this wasn’t due to solar radiation?

In practice such an event is rare, and I would expect there to be enough shielding to avoid it from interfering with the electronics. The fact that there is no hard evidence is why it's hard to argue against this clickbait claim, since technically they could be right.

The cosmic radiation that reaches Earth's surface consists mainly of particles that cannot be stopped by thin shields (e.g. muons or other particles with very high energies), otherwise they would not have passed through the atmosphere.

So shielding is not a solution that can be applied in a vehicle. You need something like an underground bunker to be sure that no cosmic radiation can penetrate it.

The only reason that makes rare the events caused by cosmic radiation is that if those particles can pass through shields that means that in most cases they will also pass through the electronic devices without being absorbed and causing malfunction.

Yeah 10yr long contracts aren’t the norm. Typically 3-5 years if it’s not on annual basis

They are for large infrastructure projects, especially at large organisations.

It takes companies 3-5 years for migration of these products, all of which are not CapEx funded and so get minimal resourcing without prioritisation by leadership.

Also, for anything with a 3-5 year implementation period, a longer contract aligns incentives.

The vendor isn't incentivized to fuck you over on renewal pricing as soon as the implementation is complete.

And because of the size of the contract, the customer has more leverage at renewal time.

What’s the problem with that? People are free to use their leisure time how they see fit.

They were likely pushing back on the original comment, such that it isn't solely:

> ...those who decide about how your time is being used...

which stops individuals from:

> [spending] more time thinking, writing, playing piano, and taking walks — with other people.

Which it seems you would agree with. I don't see where they asserted whether this was a problem to address.

I think it’s bold to assume that car manufacturers are happy importing X,000 cars a year. Their ultimate objective is to sell as many cars as humanly possible. A “release valve” for the automotive lobby is just a way for them to infiltrate a region so they can entrench themselves into citizens psyche by using manipulative marketing tactics, building a coalition from within. I am from the US and I don’t think Europe should allow the import of any large non commercial vehicles

But this isn’t what is happening.

Look at the numbers. What would you expect if Individual Vehicle Approvals represented an actual bridgehead for manufacturers? You’d expect noticeable growth over the past decades. But it is still a rounding error.

If this were a strategy to make Europe soften regulation, it hasn’t worked. Rather, the opposite is true. The ratcheting of regulation is actually so stringent manufacturers have to worry about cars sitting unsold for too long. Right now there are a lot of unsold cars in Europe that come 2026 will be unsellable. Because they won’t meet requirements. And these are cars that meet 2025 regulations. Not pickups from the US that have to be approved individually.

Yeah, I don't think the "release valve" is the correct metaphor. This is more like a crack around a door frame that you can get a lever into in order to eventually pry it open.

This cracked me up haha

Well I'm a dumbass! LOL! In my defense , I've never seen those cars in real life before. I saw all the Flock cameras everywhere and just assumed they were something the police were using.

Thanks for pointing this out. I'll go ahead and give myself 10 minutes in the corner of shame.

They’re saying that Oracle has issued a lot of debt (like $60Bn) to fund their AI/datacenter commitments. Where as other companies, like MSFT, are using the cash in their balance sheet, and startups are using the cash they’ve gotten from investors

You should checkout the short stories by JG Ballard. He does a great job with the medium

Will do ! Thank you.

Future investors can negotiate liquidation preference and participation terms that will give them a bigger part of the pot than their % ownership during a “liquidation event” I.e. basically any outcome other than an IPO will trigger those rights

But aren't the terms of a SAFE that you'll get the same terms as the best terms (MFN) offered to investors in the next round, up to a cap?

Seems like you get just as diluted by future rounds as the professional VCs that will make up the next round, if you get the same terms?

FWIW I don't think angel investments make any financial sense but see them as a minor chance of upside and a significant way to help and connect with people.

Sure. But "liquidation events" are not the events that give you the wins. The point of angel is to get in while the company is cheap. Dilution is part of the math.

They have a very creative investment structure but they do own a stake in OpenAI. It’s just sounds more like a commercial agreement the way it was laid out, which primarily has to do with OAIs organizational structure

If the deal is still based around capped revenue, I wouldn't call it an ownership stake.

As far as I know, they have not disclosed it. If you have more information about something concrete regarding ownership, I'd love to hear it. Maybe I haven't understood everything that was stated.

In the end, whatever Microsoft has is probably less valuable than a sizable ownership chunk that most people seem to assume.

I imagine a lot of people are investing in Microsoft as a proxy to OpenAI. Those people are set to be disappointed.

This is a funny sentence bc I consider the WSJ to be a financial news source in general

It's from the financial side of a financially focused paper.