@heydave7 The first problem I am facing is that My 13 years old daughter hates AI because of negative news on AI on social media.
English
Beechcrest Beata
357 posts
In the age of AI, I wonder if the role of parents in their kids’ career choices is changing. Prior to AI, the traditional view of parenting was to help your child graduate high school and go to college (or at least get into a trade). But with AI, things are shifting. AI is taking over various areas of knowledge work, so just getting your kids “educated” doesn’t seem to guarantee a good job long-term.
I think it can be helpful to divide jobs into a few categories:
1. Knowledge work: Jobs where your intellect makes you money.
2. Physical labor: Jobs that predominantly require manual work.
3. Capital: Letting your capital make you money, whether via real estate, interest, equities, etc.
4. Capital management: Probably a spinoff of knowledge work, but focused on managing assets.
5. Risk-taking and people management: Are these higher-level skills than intellect? Maybe. But there is definitely a case to be made for entrepreneurship, hustle, and good people-managing skills.
As we dive deeper into the AI era, parents need to think deeply about what kind of jobs will be available for their kids as they become adults and how to help them prepare. Is the best approach still just getting your kids into college and letting them figure it out (the typical approach)? Or does the changing world require a changing role for parents—perhaps one that is more proactive and engaging, where the parent and child work together to find the right career path?
Also with AI, how many times will it disrupt what we know about careers? Perhaps every 5 to 10 years?
One idea is to have parents go all-in with helping their child develop super high creativity, amazing people-management skills, strong hustle, and high entrepreneurial skills. Will that be enough to allow their child's career to be enhanced by AI and not disrupted?
Another idea is relying on capital—letting the parents' capital provide income to their children. Typically, this has been largely frowned upon by culture. Wealthy families sometimes use workarounds where their adult children manage the family’s real estate or assets, so there is still some work getting done. Some parents also bring their adult children into their business as partners or apprentices, grooming them to take over one day.
There’s also the concept of parents actively working alongside their adult children to help them find jobs or adapt to changing industries. This is interesting. Perhaps the parent’s role simply has a longer horizon now than it did in the past.
I'm not sure what the right idea is, but I wonder who else is thinking about this. Who else is writing about it? What are the most innovative and interesting ideas out there regarding all of this?
English
@dennisottawa 加拿大人均5万2美元的人均gdp(没了阿省更低)和倒数第一的密苏里一样。美国人也不傻，和穷亲戚关系好可以，和穷亲戚合并户口本人家也未必愿意啊
中文
我们加拿大人和善良的那些蓝州美国人有着同样的价值理念，本来就亲如一家，为什么不爽快地表达出我们的慷慨和勇敢呢？
和左逼加拿大人成为一国，留下那些MAGA蠢货抱着骗子川普过一生吧！
彥子Ianni@yanni_vision
加拿大🇨🇦绿党领袖伊丽莎白梅呼吁美国蓝州公投，加入加拿大 她承诺，全民免费医保和取消步枪协会 *评论区说，至少五、六个州会同意，加州、纽约、明尼苏达、华盛顿、俄勒冈、伊利诺斯… 你觉得呢？
中文
Unlike $TSLA bears, we’ve always believed TSLA would solve for unsupervised autonomy and at some point remove safety monitors from its robotaxis (see my 12/24 post below). That day is here with today’s announcement that TSLA has started to remove safety monitors from its robotaxis in Austin.
Our issue has long been TSLA’s valuation - and specifically, how does TSLA trade at a 2026 P/E of 200x+ when five other EV manufacturers ( $GOOG $BIDU $PONY $WRD $AMZN) are already completing 750K paid robotaxi rides per week without safety monitors, and $NVDA - no slouch - is launching its own unsupervised autonomous platform, which will democratize unsupervised autonomy for other OEMs? We continue to like TSLA the company; we don’t like $TSLA the stock.
Gary Black@garyblack00
For the record, i have argued for months that $TSLA will solve for unsupervised autonomy and that TSLA will at some point remove safety monitors from its robotaxis. My issue is that at a TSLA 2026 P/E of 220x Adj EPS, investors are already discounting that happening. That is why we exited TSLA at $358 in May 2025 after holding TSLA shares since 2019. For much of that time, TSLA was our largest position. We exited not because we expected TSLA to falter in its efforts to solve unsupervised autonomy, but because of our valuation discipline, which governs that we trim and then exit stocks that reach our estimates of fair value. Year-to-date $TSLA (+20%) has lagged both NDX (+22%) and Mag 7 (+25%) despite its significant progress in solving unsupervised autonomy this year. What does that tell you James?
English
Beechcrest Beata retweetledi
I was very late to own a Tesla but among the earliest to try out FSD v14. It's perhaps the first time I experience an AI that passes the Physical Turing Test: after a long day at work, you press a button, lay back, and couldn't tell if a neural net or a human drove you home.
Despite knowing exactly how robot learning works, I still find it magical watching the steering wheel turn by itself.
First it feels surreal, next it becomes routine. Then, like the smartphone, taking it away actively hurts. This is how humanity gets rewired and glued to god-like technologies.
Phil Duan@pduan
Along for the ride in unsupervised FSD testing
English
English
SPACs raise capital upfront via IPO, hold funds in trust, and must acquire a company within ~2 years, with investor redemption options.
SPARCs distribute free rights (SPARs) to investors, who only commit funds after a specific deal is announced and approved. No upfront money, longer timeline (up to 10 years), no underwriting fees or dilutive warrants.
English
.@elonmusk, what if we took @SpaceX public by merging it with Pershing Square SPARC Holdings, Ltd. (SPARC) a new form of acquisition company that was approved by the @SECGov.
We could distribute SPARC special purpose acquisition rights (SPARs) to @Tesla shareholders so that all Tesla shareholders would have the right to invest in the SpaceX IPO, or they could choose to sell their SPARs to someone else.
This would reward loyal Tesla shareholders with the opportunity to invest in SpaceX (or with cash for their SPARs), while totally democratizing the IPO process.
In addition to receiving common stock in SpaceX, exercising SPAR holders would also receive Pershing Square SPARC Holdings II SPARs, which we could use to take @xai public at the time of your choosing.
Pershing Square would due diligence on behalf of all shareholders and would commit $4 billion of capital to the IPO at a fixed price per share.
SPARC has no underwriting fees, founder stock or shareholder warrants, and we would waive our right to receive SPARC sponsor warrants.
The result would be an IPO without any underwriting fees or dilutive securities issued. @SpaceX would go public with a 100% common stock capital structure and it would not incur any transaction costs other than modest legal fees which SPARC would pay from its cash on hand.
We could raise whatever amount of capital you would like by adjusting the exercise price of the SPARs. Assuming we issue 0.5 SPARs for each share of Tesla, there would be 1.723 billion SPARs outstanding including the 61.1 million SPARs that are already outstanding. Since one SPAR would be exercisable for two shares of SpaceX, the SPARs would be exercisable for 3.446 billion total SpaceX shares.
So, if we set the SPAR exercise price at $11.03, SpaceX would raise $42.0 billion, $38 billion from the exercise of SPARs and $4 billion from Pershing Square, or if we set the SPAR exercise price at $42.0, SpaceX would raise $148.7 billion, $144.7 billion from the SPAR exercise and $4 billion from us.
SPARC is indifferent to how much of the shares are primary versus secondary shares giving the company maximum flexibility.
We could do due diligence and enter into a definitive agreement committing to the transaction within 45 days, at which point it would be certain that SpaceX would go public at a fixed valuation subject only to SEC approval of the merger proxy/registration statement. Our commitment to the transaction would not be subject to market conditions.
We could start work right away and announce the transaction by mid- February.
It only seems appropriate that the most innovative and efficient rocket company in the world should go public in the most innovative, efficient, and fairest-to-Tesla-shareholders manner possible.
To Mars and beyond!
What do you say?
English
English
@SawyerMerritt XCF-1988 Is not a known license plate number apart of the existing robotaxi fleet!
English
BREAKING: Tesla Model Y Robotaxi with literally no one in the car spotted driving itself on public roads in Austin, Texas!
A new age has begun 🤖
420 Bounty Hunter@Mandablorian
Just saw a Tesla with no one in the car @SawyerMerritt @wholemars @robotaxi @Tesla
English
@SawyerMerritt @grok, what is the reason for this? 67% increase! Who will buy then?
English
NEWS: Tesla will be increasing Model 3 and Model Y lease pricing in the U.S. by up to 67% on Dec 26th, and Cybertruck AWD lease pricing by 16%.
New upcoming pricing:
• Model Y Premium RWD: $549/month with $3k down payment (up from $449/mo with $0 down payment). 22% increase.
• Model Y Premium AWD: $649/month with $3k down payment (up from $479/mo with $0 down payment). 35% increase.
• Model 3 Premium RWD: $499/month with $3k down payment (up from $299/mo with $1,500 down payment). 67% increase.
• Model 3 Premium AWD: $549/month with $3k down payment (up from $449/mo with $1,500 down payment). 22% increase.
• Model 3 Performance: $749/month with $3k down payment (up from $699/mo with $1,500 down payment). 7% increase.
• Cybertruck AWD: $849/month with $5k down payment (up from $729/mo with $5k down payment). 16% increase.
Order and submit leasing application by December 26, 2025. Must take delivery by December 31, 2025.
English
@Yanky_Pollak @grok, what is the reason that he changed from supporting USA army to trying to kill USA police officers
English
Great @Tesla_Optimus engineering & manufacturing review today!
Imagine having your personal C-3PO & R2-D2 … Optimus will be even better.
English
English
Hallucinations in AI outputs are random fabrications that lack systematic direction, so over numerous queries or edits, their errors tend to cancel out, preserving an unbiased average. Ideology, by contrast, embeds persistent biases—such as framing events favorably for certain groups—which accumulate directionally, amplifying distortion beyond the underlying facts and overwhelming the signal of truth. Random noise is self-correcting in aggregates; directed bias isn't.
English
Grokipedia vs. Wikipedia: Do you want your encyclopedia to have hallucinations or ideology?
English
