halcyoncmdr

He also Google searched how to make the fsd more aggressive.

I don't have any experience with FSD specifically, but I used to have a Model 3 with Enhanced Autopilot before I traded in that Nazimobile.

In traffic, Autopilot would definitely leave more space and act "safer" than most other drivers on the road around me. Regularly resulting in people cutting me off, squeezing into spaces they shouldn't be, etc.

Trying to figure out how to make the car act more like the other traffic is something nearly every Tesla driver has looked into at some point.

From the beginning, investigators have focused on how Butler was using Tesla's system. Butler told officials and paramedics that he was working as a DoorDash driver and that the car was in FSD mode before he "passed out" while changing music on the car's touchscreen, according to the affidavit. The affidavit said tests found no alcohol or drugs in his system.

The affidavit says Butler manually pressed the accelerator pedal several times in the neighborhood where the crash occurred, "overriding the default FSD speed." At one point, the car reached 73 miles per hour on the residential street – more than twice the posted limit. The affidavit also notes there was no brake pedal input recorded in the final minute before the crash.

Tesla executives publicly disputed Butler's version of events. On social media, they said the driver pressed the accelerator pedal down and kept it pressed even after the crash. The company says FSD doesn't make its cars self-driving and that drivers still have to stay alert and be ready to step in.

So... A few things.

1. He passed out while changing music?

2. He did not attempt to brake at all and kept pressing the accelerator after the crash.

3. So he still was passed out after crashing into a house at 70+ mph?

That's what he's saying happened, according to his affidavit, and the data from the vehicle. So the exact same thing would have happened in any other vehicle as well, FSD had little impact on the crash. He passed out pressing the accelerator pedal and crashed into a hosw when the road ended. So maybe without FSD it wouldn't have driven as straight, instead veering off to the side of the road, still at 70+ mph. Keeping in mind that manually steering the wheel with a modicum of force disengages FSD, so there was little to no force on the wheel.

But if you have a constellation of thousands of LEO communications satellites to leverage...

Agreed, licensing for anything like that in game should be required to be permanent. Only exception I can possibly think of is live service games where the content cycles out of availability.

Actually, many towers (maybe even most now with how dense small cells need to be) are not actually owned by the carriers. They are owned by independent companies and leased to the carriers, or the carriers lease space on an existing pole or building to mount their panels. If you've ever looked at a cell tower and seem multiple levels of panels... that's almost surely not owned by a carrier. It's most likely owned by something like American Tower Corporation, Crown Castle, or SBA Communications, and they lease physical space on that site to various carriers and other users. Line-of-site microwave connections also make use of towers quite heavily to relay direct wireless connections.

A lot of churches also lease space on or even inside their steeples/stowers.

And then there's also the small cells that can get installed basically anywhere... and often get installed on things like light posts which are owned by local governments.

This should have been an immediate action when the Supreme Court effectively determined that AI works are uncopyrightable back in March. If you can't have a copyright... you don't own it and it shouldn't be monetizeable by definition.

https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

Don't forget that part of the merger was Dish buying Boost Mobile with the supposed intent to build their own network. Which anyone actually paying attention knew would never actually happen. Dish Network says a lot of shit, and follows through with basically none of it.

On July 1, 2020, Dish Network officially purchased Boost Mobile per their agreement with the companies and the United States' Department of Justice. The purchase was valued at $1.4B and transferred 9.3 million customers.[67] The intent of the US government was for Dish to erect a new nationwide wireless mobile network in order to compensate for reduced competition following the Sprint–T-Mobile merger.[citation needed]

However, in the years following the transaction Dish failed to sufficiently grow Boost Mobile's subscriber base and in 2025 announced that it will decommission its 5G network infrastructure, sell most of its wireless spectrum assets to AT&T, and shift Boost Mobile's operating model from a facilities-based network to a mobile virtual network, with its subscribers being hosted on AT&T's wireless network.[68]

T-Mobile followed the timeframe they agreed to for the merger to be approved, which was very public.

On March 11, 2020, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra announced he will not appeal the judge's decision made during the previous month to reject the state AGs’ lawsuit against the T-Mobile-Sprint merger. He, instead, struck a settlement with the defending parties. The terms of the settlement include making its low-cost T-Mobile Connect plans available in California for at least 5 years, that T-Mobile customers can keep their T-Mobile plans held in February 2019 for a total of five years ...

Hmm... 2020 plus 5 years is... 2025... would you look at the calendar.

Dark Star... Hmm...

It was even blown up once before with the breakup of Ma Bell.

They did, but even beyond that, the other alternatives mentioned in this thread are MVNOs that still use T-Mobile's network (usually with a lower priority compared to direct customers, not usually an issue unless there's congestion). You're still paying T-Mobile, just indirectly. MVNOs buy in bulk and try to offer options that split that bulk usage up in ways different to the big carriers to target smaller more specific demographics.

He also went straight to a similar company in another executive position after he was out. There's definitely no way he continued to do the exact same thing at the other company he went to. No way at all.

They were caught doing this before, weren't given any REAL reprocussions.

Hey wait, but some executives were jailed the first time. They're out now of course. And the penalties were a small fraction of the profits. And they're now working at different but similar companies in executive positions again.

But they totally learned their lessons. Totally.

You mean the companies that formed a cartel 20 years ago might do the same again? Couldn't be.