Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dolphinscorpion's commentslogin

As long as they promised. Their word is golden

Grok is chosen because Musk spent $250+ million to elect Trump and is expected to underwrite the 2026 elections. Also, a lot of Trumps and their friends are invested in SpaceX. So they give them money too, but use OpenAI or Claude. I have a feeling that the military likes Claude more

Didn’t they choose Anthropic first and then all of this happened so they were forced to go with Grok?

Not adding up


We must conclude that they’re wary of Grok. Maybe it’s the incentive for bias and sabotage.

Their stock would crash to $10 without the hype machine

Après moi, le déluge.

It will be zero if they keep doing the same shit

Ultimately, I believe there will need to be something catastrophic to oust musk/change leadership. And by that point, its questionable if anything worthwhile will be left to salvage.

My current bet is that optimus will fail spectacularly and Tesla gets left far behind as Rivian's R2 replaces it.

One thing I will note: I know folks that work at TSLA. Musk is more of a distraction. If he goes and if competent leadership is brought in, there's still enough people and momentum to make something happen...


this is literally one of 1-3 companies who have a decent strategy in the age of AI. the rest is pretending changes will not affect them. even this judgement: the guy decided to pick the phone while driving car not capable of red light detection. It could be any other car with similar auto steer capabilities. Right now same car with OTA updates would keep him alive. Sure, they are doing something wrong.

Did mecha-Hitler tell you that?

Will it actually? Has the market sent any signal that they won’t tolerate Musk?

You’re a lot more optimistic about this than I am.


Iran is f-ed!


A bug here and a bug there...


  100 nasty bugs in the code
  100 bugs in the code
  Take one down
  Patch it around
  -127 nasty bugs in the code


Make the pie higher, a US President once said. I will leave it at that


Why would Netflix cost less to run when YT is mostly user generated content? Am I missing something? Both have to stream it


Netflix has a far smaller catalogue and can cache content in exchanges very close to the user, see [1]. Also YouTube pays their creators.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Connect


Google has its Global Cache: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Global_Cache

One might imagine that the cache-ability is lower than Netflix, I can't comment on this, but GGC is very significant.


Netflix is a production studio with an app, Youtube is a hosting service.

500 hours of video getting uploaded a min plus processing costs (including AI) for no upfront $$s. Far simpler CDN optimization


Fewer unique video hours, YouTube pays residuals, vastly smaller library to personalize


Marketing probably, unless thew CEO pulls out his credit card


I don't really understand why he'd say he'd cover the costs personally... like, Vercel can just write it off, what's the significance of him paying for it?


Personal brand building? Wanting Vercel to stay out of politics? A vague attempt at diffusing the focus on Vercel pricing?

Really hard to tell.


Assuming that he wants to keep Vercel out of politics is a somewhat wild take considering what he’s posted in the past.


In many cases, it's not a downturn, just a return to reasonable valuations. Other sectors should follow


Greatest investment of his life, probably. A couple of billion and immense leverage with Trump. (they were many investors)


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: