Will you be able to make them (whom) take some liability when something goes wrong? All the hype so far has been about what AI "can" do well. Yet, no one is going ahead to pick it up for a real application where their own bottom line depends on it. That will be the key question on what happens in next X years. AI can…

It was also $86 on 20-mar-2020. Was it the same people who got it to hit $197 after that? 

It will be interesting to see how section 230 is interpreted for AI based search. It's one thing to say we just looked at existing links and presented matches, and quite another to say we are interpreting the links and publishing our own content

True. Imagine this one was classified and no one would be talking about it. Simpler times

He could not have. The $1bn payout was for external factors causing the deal to fail. It wasn't applicable to changing your mind

So he starts the experiment by polluting the one control variable he should not have touch. Trying to learn how people will react by announcing to them that we are watching closely

Yes, the CEO is ultimately responsible for all executive decisions and their outcomes. That is pricsely what the 3 letters make him. Whether he takes responsibility by trying to remedy the problems or make things worse is up to him and his competence, but the buck eventually goes up to him and stop there. Let me know…

You know, you can always update Wikipedia with a better source. If you have one. That will probably be helpful in some way

Only FBI would have the fallacy of thinking that they can have a door that their enemies cannot find. That's backdoor 101

And why would entities that are not monetizing it continue to provide the service? Who pays for it? Internet tax? 

Return on what grounds? Not sure if they have mentioned the basis for this

More interesting would be when a parallel parody account starts doing a free for all poll on exact same topic and gets banned for a yet to be written policy rule. More popcorn

I don't remember anything positive he said in a while that actually happened. This is obviously from the very small list of positive things he has said

“things that only could be decoded by me”

“Core Scientific holds an estimated $1 billion to $10 billion in liabilities with anywhere from 1,000 to 5,000 creditors. The miner’s assets total anywhere from $1 billion to $10 billion”

Blame the person who created this Streisand effect. Musk wanted attention, and he is getting it

“it's a private company" argument was mostly cited when people cried that their free speech rights are being trampled on. No one is saying that here. It's a private company, and they can ban, fine. The point here is about the cause of ban. Posting public information about musk vs inciting violence and hatred, sure you…

With Elon on the mix, I think we cannot choose more than one without contradicting ourselves

And what makes you think that the federal government will do exactly the things you list out once you have allowed them to do as they please? It might just be the opposite with no rights left to challenge that. Then what? 

So all the wierd nerds telling us that Musk is the genius who makes rockets were apparently wrong. Someone else does it and it doesn’t matter if must is even around.