Elon Musk: Officially a fraud and piece of shit. Official or unofficial war criminal?

[Captain Ron 13133]

22 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

nah. zombies are good for a week at best. if you can hold out for a week, you're good.

Scratch off all the Tesla fanbois then.

[NoName 17203]

How To Build a Car That Kills People: Cybertruck Edition

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2023/12/02/how-to-build-a-car-that-kills-people-cybertruck-edition
 

Quote

 

Let's start with safety, particularly for vulnerable road users. To its credit, like all Teslas, the Cybertruck will come equipped with an automatic pedestrian detection system. Unfortunately, pretty much everything else about the vehicle seems to be maximized for pedestrian extinction if that technology fails or makes a dangerous judgment call, which Teslas often do.

Colossal height? Check. In promotional photographs, the hood of the Cybertruck sits squarely at the level of the thoracic organs of a 6-foot Musk, and the marketing copy promises an "Adaptive Air Suspension" system which will lift the car a stunning 17.4 inches.

Deadly hood design? Check. The cyber truck comes equipped with a blunt, flat front end that's essentially guaranteed to toss a walker or a cyclist under the car's wheels rather than on top of the hood, where they statically sustain less serious injuries. Putting a steel battering ram on the front of a truck is doubly unnecessary because there isn't even an engine under the hood. And that's to say nothing of the rest of the car's steel "exoskeleton," which the company brags can can withstand a blow from a sledgehammer and has edges so sharp that European automotive authorities have questioned where it will actually be street-legal.

Even the windshield — or, as Tesla calls it, the "shatter-resistant armor glass" — is thick enough to "make the cabin as quiet as outer space," all the better not to hear a pedestrian screaming for the driver to please look up from the "massive 18.5 inch" touchscreen bolted to the dashboard. Tesla describes the Cybertruck as a "theater on wheels"; researchers describe these infotainment devices as "dangerously distracting."

 

 

text:

Spoiler

After years of delays, multiple price hikes, and exactly one infamous steel ball mishap, Tesla finally handed over the keys to the very first Cybertruck on Thursday.

For a car that barely exists yet — the $60,000 base model won't be available until 2025, and the company only has a "goal" of producing 250,000 of the $80,000 and $99,000 versions before that — Streetsblog readers probably already know a fair amount about Elon Musk's long-awaited apocalypse-bunker-on-wheels. Since its 2019 unveiling, social media has been saturated in images of the vehicle, which has been variously compared to a roided-out Blade Runner jalopy and an industrial refrigerator, and tech journalists have been questioning whether it will turn out to be a "bad joke or a big mistake."

Still, as it achieves its final Pokemon evolution, it's worth pausing to consider just how thoroughly the Cybertruck has come to represent some of the worst problems of American transportation culture, even as it purports to address many of them. Or, as Engadget's Nathan Ingraham eloquently put it: "Musk has basically built a vehicle that, for a steep price, enables the worst impulses of US drivers and gives them the 'freedom' to do whatever they want."

Let's start with safety, particularly for vulnerable road users. To its credit, like all Teslas, the Cybertruck will come equipped with an automatic pedestrian detection system. Unfortunately, pretty much everything else about the vehicle seems to be maximized for pedestrian extinction if that technology fails or makes a dangerous judgment call, which Teslas often do.

Colossal height? Check. In promotional photographs, the hood of the Cybertruck sits squarely at the level of the thoracic organs of a 6-foot Musk, and the marketing copy promises an "Adaptive Air Suspension" system which will lift the car a stunning 17.4 inches.

Deadly hood design? Check. The cyber truck comes equipped with a blunt, flat front end that's essentially guaranteed to toss a walker or a cyclist under the car's wheels rather than on top of the hood, where they statically sustain less serious injuries. Putting a steel battering ram on the front of a truck is doubly unnecessary because there isn't even an engine under the hood. And that's to say nothing of the rest of the car's steel "exoskeleton," which the company brags can can withstand a blow from a sledgehammer and has edges so sharp that European automotive authorities have questioned where it will actually be street-legal.

Even the windshield — or, as Tesla calls it, the "shatter-resistant armor glass" — is thick enough to "make the cabin as quiet as outer space," all the better not to hear a pedestrian screaming for the driver to please look up from the "massive 18.5 inch" touchscreen bolted to the dashboard. Tesla describes the Cybertruck as a "theater on wheels"; researchers describe these infotainment devices as "dangerously distracting."

CNBC's @lorakolodny reports that Cybertruck's "Cyberbeast" model will go from 0 to 60 in 2.6 sec.

That's faster than most sports cars (ex: 2023 McLaren 720S is 2.8 sec).

No car -- let alone a truck -- should be accelerating that fast on public roads.https://t.co/Th0aTwj9G4 pic.twitter.com/dmk7kw29m4

— David Zipper (@DavidZipper) November 30, 2023

The guts of the Cybertruck tick off a few more boxes on the how-to-design-a-car-that-kills-everyone-outside-it checklist. The company claims it can go from zero to 60 miles per hour in 2.6 seconds, which, if true, would mean it has a faster acceleration than most NASCAR and Formula 1 vehicles, with none of the accompanying engine roar to warn anyone that it's coming. The headlight, meanwhile, is one single bar of light, which some experts are already worried will blind oncoming drivers.

And while Tesla fans are disappointed that the Cybertruck doesn't have a battery big enough to drive beyond 340 miles — Elon Musk had promised a 500-mile range back in 2019 — all that lithium ion and stainless steel is still enough to tip the scales at a staggering 6,843 pounds.

If you're willing to sacrifice a whole lot of your trunk space, an additional range extender battery will get you to "470+" miles. The company doesn't say how much that extender will cost — but considering that heavier vehicles are deadlier in collisions, other road users will probably pay the price.

You think that has power? Meet the real deal. 670,000 lbs with max tractive torque over 26,000 lb-ft. Fully⚡️, moves 1200 people, lasts 40 yrs and helps save the 🌎. #transit https://t.co/fNFBxDCJBT pic.twitter.com/EtWZM6LTyM

— Randy Clarke (@wmataGM) December 1, 2023

Perhaps the most disturbing thing about the Cybertruck, though, isn't the toddler-vaporizing "frunk," or the obnoxious ads of the car driving through unspoiled streams. It might not even be its astonishingly inefficient use of precious battery materials, or the way that battery distorts drivers' perception of how beneficial to society their cars really are. (Please do not get me started on the thing's "BioWeapons Defense Mode," an in-cabin HEPA filter that's more likely to shield occupants from, say, tire particles from multi-ton EVs, rather than supervillains gassing city streets.)

Perhaps what's most upsetting about the Cybertruck is what the vehicle suggests about how billionaires like Musk imagine the future of our world — and how willing many Americans are buy into that violent dystopia.

Or, as Paris Marx put it in his book "Road to Nowhere: What Silicon Valley Gets Wrong About the Future of Transportation":

For the times when they are beyond the walls of their gated communities and need to drive (or be driven) outside of their exclusive tunnel systems, the Cybertruck will provide protection from the unruly mob that is the general public. With inequality in the United States having risen to higher levels than any time since the Great Depression and the accelerating effects of climate change creating the potential for hundreds of millions of climate refugees, the wealthy are making additional preparations for the moment when the public finally turns against them—hence the walls, tunnels, and armored vehicles.

 

In 2020, Elon Musk announced that he aimed to turn Tesla into "a leader in apocalypse technology." Perhaps a better ambition would be to take a hard look at who's cheerleading the apocalypse in the first place.

e: adding in more info from Jalopnik

 

Quote

 

Reuters spoke with half a dozen safety professors and officials who have viewed the Cybertruck’s crash tests conducted by Tesla. Those videos were streamed during Tesla’s November 30 Cybertruck delivery event. From Reuters:

“The big problem there is if they really make the skin of the vehicle very stiff by using thick stainless steel, then when people hit their heads on it, it’s going to cause more damage to them,” said Adrian Lund, the former president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), whose vehicle crash tests are an industry standard.

Tesla touted the structures of the truck that absorb impact during the crash. Tesla CEO Elon Musk said in a social media post on Tuesday that he was “highly confident” Cybertruck will be safer than other trucks for occupants and pedestrians.

[...]

The vehicle designed with flat planes and long, linear edges is visually distinct. It is the first car with a stainless-steel exterior since the launch of the DeLorean car which was featured in the 1985 movie “Back to the Future.” The material has even broken the stamping machine that forms the panels, Musk said, touting the vehicle’s toughness.

During the launch event at the factory in Austin, Texas, Tesla said cold-rolled, stainless body panels are designed to absorb impact during a crash.

The front and rear structures have energy-absorbing ribs that help dissipate energy, and during a side impact the skin of the door carried a majority of the crash load, it said.

 

+

 

Quote

 

David Friedman, the former acting head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, described the effect for the loser of the crash: “If you’re in a crash with another vehicle that has a crumple zone and your car is more stiff, then their cars are going to crush and yours is resistant,” he said.

Julia Griswold, director of the University of California, Berkeley’s Safe Transportation Research Center, said she was “alarmed” by the crash test videos Tesla posted. She said the heavy weight of the trucks and their high acceleration “raise red flags for non-occupants.”

[...]

U.S. regulators rely on vehicle makers to self-test and certify their adherence to safety standards. Musk said in a recent interview with auto consultant Sandy Munro that the Cybertruck had passed regulatory review.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2023 by NoName

[NoName 17203]

MKBHD Releases Cybertruck 2nd Impressions Video – “All the Numbers Except 0 to 60 Mph are Worst Than They Promised, 1st Time That’s True for Tesla”

https://www.torquenews.com/11826/mkbhd-releases-cybertruck-2nd-impressions-video-all-numbers-except-0-60-mph-are-worst-they/amp

the article includes showing just how dumb and full of shit Musk and TSLA is

Quote

We’ve also learned that, following an industry-first change to 48-volt low-voltage architecture, Tesla has sent CEOs of all major auto OEMs a how-to guide titled “How to design a 48-volt vehicle.”

of course those cunts think it's reasonable to put out a "how to" guide when they have released like 5 cars and are going to make only 250k of them over the next 13 months. i'm sure there won't be any issues or problems or anything else with them lol

here is the relevant Marques comments:
 

Quote

 

MKBHD begins his Cybertruck second take stating “All the numbers except 0 to 60 mph are worse than they promised. This is the first time that’s true for a Tesla. I feel like they are always usually able to deliver what they promised, it’s just really late. This time, straight up, all the numbers are worse.”

MKBHD then runs down the numbers saying “They originally promised 500 mile range on the highest end truck. The highest-end truck has 340 miles of range. They originally promised a 14,000lbs towing capacity, it has an 11,000lbs towing capacity. They promised $69,900 for the tri-motor, it is $100,000, and the truck is 5% smaller in dimension than the original truck”

 

few more quotes from waveform:

• “The quality isn’t great; it’s not horrible. It’s a Tesla”
• “A piece fell off before we started testing it”

 

Edited December 8, 2023 by NoName

[NoName 17203]

i know i am blowing this thread up, but i really am shocked every time i see the interior and back seat. look how tall you have to be or sit in order to see out the rear door windows!

also if you are curious what that dumb purple thing is below the red line i added above, here is a bigger screenshot

Spoiler

 

[Captain Ron 13133]

1 hour ago, NoName said:

How To Build a Car That Kills People: Cybertruck Edition

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2023/12/02/how-to-build-a-car-that-kills-people-cybertruck-edition
 

 

text:

  Reveal hidden contents

After years of delays, multiple price hikes, and exactly one infamous steel ball mishap, Tesla finally handed over the keys to the very first Cybertruck on Thursday.

For a car that barely exists yet — the $60,000 base model won't be available until 2025, and the company only has a "goal" of producing 250,000 of the $80,000 and $99,000 versions before that — Streetsblog readers probably already know a fair amount about Elon Musk's long-awaited apocalypse-bunker-on-wheels. Since its 2019 unveiling, social media has been saturated in images of the vehicle, which has been variously compared to a roided-out Blade Runner jalopy and an industrial refrigerator, and tech journalists have been questioning whether it will turn out to be a "bad joke or a big mistake."

Still, as it achieves its final Pokemon evolution, it's worth pausing to consider just how thoroughly the Cybertruck has come to represent some of the worst problems of American transportation culture, even as it purports to address many of them. Or, as Engadget's Nathan Ingraham eloquently put it: "Musk has basically built a vehicle that, for a steep price, enables the worst impulses of US drivers and gives them the 'freedom' to do whatever they want."

Let's start with safety, particularly for vulnerable road users. To its credit, like all Teslas, the Cybertruck will come equipped with an automatic pedestrian detection system. Unfortunately, pretty much everything else about the vehicle seems to be maximized for pedestrian extinction if that technology fails or makes a dangerous judgment call, which Teslas often do.

Colossal height? Check. In promotional photographs, the hood of the Cybertruck sits squarely at the level of the thoracic organs of a 6-foot Musk, and the marketing copy promises an "Adaptive Air Suspension" system which will lift the car a stunning 17.4 inches.

Deadly hood design? Check. The cyber truck comes equipped with a blunt, flat front end that's essentially guaranteed to toss a walker or a cyclist under the car's wheels rather than on top of the hood, where they statically sustain less serious injuries. Putting a steel battering ram on the front of a truck is doubly unnecessary because there isn't even an engine under the hood. And that's to say nothing of the rest of the car's steel "exoskeleton," which the company brags can can withstand a blow from a sledgehammer and has edges so sharp that European automotive authorities have questioned where it will actually be street-legal.

Even the windshield — or, as Tesla calls it, the "shatter-resistant armor glass" — is thick enough to "make the cabin as quiet as outer space," all the better not to hear a pedestrian screaming for the driver to please look up from the "massive 18.5 inch" touchscreen bolted to the dashboard. Tesla describes the Cybertruck as a "theater on wheels"; researchers describe these infotainment devices as "dangerously distracting."

CNBC's @lorakolodny reports that Cybertruck's "Cyberbeast" model will go from 0 to 60 in 2.6 sec.

That's faster than most sports cars (ex: 2023 McLaren 720S is 2.8 sec).

No car -- let alone a truck -- should be accelerating that fast on public roads.https://t.co/Th0aTwj9G4 pic.twitter.com/dmk7kw29m4

— David Zipper (@DavidZipper) November 30, 2023

The guts of the Cybertruck tick off a few more boxes on the how-to-design-a-car-that-kills-everyone-outside-it checklist. The company claims it can go from zero to 60 miles per hour in 2.6 seconds, which, if true, would mean it has a faster acceleration than most NASCAR and Formula 1 vehicles, with none of the accompanying engine roar to warn anyone that it's coming. The headlight, meanwhile, is one single bar of light, which some experts are already worried will blind oncoming drivers.

And while Tesla fans are disappointed that the Cybertruck doesn't have a battery big enough to drive beyond 340 miles — Elon Musk had promised a 500-mile range back in 2019 — all that lithium ion and stainless steel is still enough to tip the scales at a staggering 6,843 pounds.

If you're willing to sacrifice a whole lot of your trunk space, an additional range extender battery will get you to "470+" miles. The company doesn't say how much that extender will cost — but considering that heavier vehicles are deadlier in collisions, other road users will probably pay the price.

You think that has power? Meet the real deal. 670,000 lbs with max tractive torque over 26,000 lb-ft. Fully⚡️, moves 1200 people, lasts 40 yrs and helps save the 🌎. #transit https://t.co/fNFBxDCJBT pic.twitter.com/EtWZM6LTyM

— Randy Clarke (@wmataGM) December 1, 2023

Perhaps the most disturbing thing about the Cybertruck, though, isn't the toddler-vaporizing "frunk," or the obnoxious ads of the car driving through unspoiled streams. It might not even be its astonishingly inefficient use of precious battery materials, or the way that battery distorts drivers' perception of how beneficial to society their cars really are. (Please do not get me started on the thing's "BioWeapons Defense Mode," an in-cabin HEPA filter that's more likely to shield occupants from, say, tire particles from multi-ton EVs, rather than supervillains gassing city streets.)

Perhaps what's most upsetting about the Cybertruck is what the vehicle suggests about how billionaires like Musk imagine the future of our world — and how willing many Americans are buy into that violent dystopia.

Or, as Paris Marx put it in his book "Road to Nowhere: What Silicon Valley Gets Wrong About the Future of Transportation":

For the times when they are beyond the walls of their gated communities and need to drive (or be driven) outside of their exclusive tunnel systems, the Cybertruck will provide protection from the unruly mob that is the general public. With inequality in the United States having risen to higher levels than any time since the Great Depression and the accelerating effects of climate change creating the potential for hundreds of millions of climate refugees, the wealthy are making additional preparations for the moment when the public finally turns against them—hence the walls, tunnels, and armored vehicles.

 

In 2020, Elon Musk announced that he aimed to turn Tesla into "a leader in apocalypse technology." Perhaps a better ambition would be to take a hard look at who's cheerleading the apocalypse in the first place.

 

As someone that lives in a very walkable city and actually thinks fewer cars (gas or electric) is the correct transit answer, I find this truck to be a dumpster fire on wheels. And this blog post outlines it in spades.

[Francisco 2.0 32623]

But I was told he was the world's wealthiest man, so he can afford anything.

https://jalopnik.com/worlds-richest-man-elon-musk-is-fighting-to-avoid-child-1851082868

 

Quote

Elon Musk is using ex-girlfriend Grimes’ tweets to prove to custody courts that she primarily lived in Texas despite her claims that she lived in California. This distinction is important, because Texas has a cap on maximum child support payments where California has no maximum cap.

No cap, this billionaire with a “B” is fighting to minimize child support payments to the mother of three of his children, and is thus fighting for his kids to have less access to his grossly abundant financial resources, dependent on the outcome of the custody battle.

 

Quote

Musk and Grimes were dating on-and-off from 2018 until earlier this year, and musical artist Grimes, whose legal name is Claire Boucher, is the mother of three of Musk’s 10 children. Musk made the first move when he filed a lawsuit in Texas against Grimes on September 7 and initiated the custody battle, claiming he wanted to establish a parent-child relationship with his kids after Grimes moved to California with their two youngest children. According to Business Insider, Grimes then filed a lawsuit against Musk in California where she requested physical custody of their children and included an order to prevent either parent from moving the children out of California. Business Insider reports,

 

Quote

In previous filings, Musk has accused Grimes of moving to California in order to avoid Texas courts. The Tesla CEO has good reason to want the case to play out in Texas, which caps monthly child-support payments at just $2,760 per month for three children. He would likely face much heftier child support payments in California, which has no cap.

 

Spoiler

This is shaping up to be quite a messy custody battle, as the two celebrity parents are often traveling around the globe, causing confusion when determining the family’s legal state of residence. To determine which court has jurisdiction over the case, judges normally look to where the children lived the longest over the past six months, and if that is inconclusive then judges usually lean toward the state where the children have roots via primary care doctors and school attendance. As Business Insider states,

In an amended petition filed Monday, the X owner said Grimes posted on the site on multiple occasions saying that she lives in Texas. Musk cites seven posts from social media that Grimes wrote between February 2021 and October 2023 in the court document.

The “tweets reflected her continued residence,” Musk’s filing reads. He alleges Grimes and the kids lived with him in a shared Texas home as recently as July of 2023.

In her California suit, however, Grimes claimed she moved with the children to California on December 31, 2022. But Musk said her posts on X indicate otherwise.

Grimes’ tweets are becoming incriminating, as they seem to indicate that she was living in Texas for longer than she claimed while under oath in California. Musk claims her tweets reflected her continued residence in Texas, and a California family law attorney said the tweets in question are extremely damaging to her credibility.

Though it seems that Grimes took the two one-year-olds with her to live in California against Musk’s wishes, Musk has kept their eldest son with him in Texas against Grimes’ wishes. This is shaping up to be a case of more money more problems, but given that the future of three children are dependent on the outcome of the case and Musk’s herculean wealth continues to grow each day, I wish the two adults would reach an amicable agreement and focus on the wellbeing of their kids instead of focusing on petty games.

 

Edited December 8, 2023 by Francisco 2.0

[Brisketexan 107048]

But I was told he was the world's wealthiest man, so he can afford anything.
https://jalopnik.com/worlds-richest-man-elon-musk-is-fighting-to-avoid-child-1851082868
 

Elon Musk is using ex-girlfriend Grimes’ tweets to prove to custody courts that she primarily lived in Texas despite her claims that she lived in California. This distinction is important, because Texas has a cap on maximum child support payments where California has no maximum cap.
No cap, this billionaire with a “B” is fighting to minimize child support payments to the mother of three of his children, and is thus fighting for his kids to have less access to his grossly abundant financial resources, dependent on the outcome of the custody battle.

 

Musk and Grimes were dating on-and-off from 2018 until earlier this year, and musical artist Grimes, whose legal name is Claire Boucher, is the mother of three of Musk’s 10 children. Musk made the first move when he filed a lawsuit in Texas against Grimes on September 7 and initiated the custody battle, claiming he wanted to establish a parent-child relationship with his kids after Grimes moved to California with their two youngest children. According to Business Insider, Grimes then filed a lawsuit against Musk in California where she requested physical custody of their children and included an order to prevent either parent from moving the children out of California. Business Insider reports,

 

In previous filings, Musk has accused Grimes of moving to California in order to avoid Texas courts. The Tesla CEO has good reason to want the case to play out in Texas, which caps monthly child-support payments at just $2,760 per month for three children. He would likely face much heftier child support payments in California, which has no cap.

 
Spoiler

This is shaping up to be quite a messy custody battle, as the two celebrity parents are often traveling around the globe, causing confusion when determining the family’s legal state of residence. To determine which court has jurisdiction over the case, judges normally look to where the children lived the longest over the past six months, and if that is inconclusive then judges usually lean toward the state where the children have roots via primary care doctors and school attendance. As Business Insider states,
In an amended petition filed Monday, the X owner said Grimes posted on the site on multiple occasions saying that she lives in Texas. Musk cites seven posts from social media that Grimes wrote between February 2021 and October 2023 in the court document.
The “tweets reflected her continued residence,” Musk’s filing reads. He alleges Grimes and the kids lived with him in a shared Texas home as recently as July of 2023.
In her California suit, however, Grimes claimed she moved with the children to California on December 31, 2022. But Musk said her posts on X indicate otherwise.
Grimes’ tweets are becoming incriminating, as they seem to indicate that she was living in Texas for longer than she claimed while under oath in California. Musk claims her tweets reflected her continued residence in Texas, and a California family law attorney said the tweets in question are extremely damaging to her credibility.
Though it seems that Grimes took the two one-year-olds with her to live in California against Musk’s wishes, Musk has kept their eldest son with him in Texas against Grimes’ wishes. This is shaping up to be a case of more money more problems, but given that the future of three children are dependent on the outcome of the case and Musk’s herculean wealth continues to grow each day, I wish the two adults would reach an amicable agreement and focus on the wellbeing of their kids instead of focusing on petty games.

 

Elon stans: “poor people and minorities have too many kids and don’t take care of them!”
Also Elon stans: “see what a geenyus business man Elon is! Paying child support is for stupid libtards!”
Stupidest fucking timeline.

[aggie08 21854]

Imagine how gigantic a piece of shit you'd have to be to be worth 11 digits and use your high-priced lawyers against your ex wife to reduce your child support payments.

[Celery Man 21109]

[hornian 5299]

22 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

I mean, that's funny and all, but I could get Grimes considerably more than $2,760/mo in child support, even in Texas. Especially here in Travis County. Judges have discretion to, and will, go over the guidelines if you prove the case correctly. And there's a lot of high earners in Travis County who pay more than guideline support because of that. 

 

 

[chainsaw 10313]

6 minutes ago, hornian said:

I mean, that's funny and all, but I could get Grimes considerably more than $2,760/mo in child support, even in Texas. Especially here in Travis County. Judges have discretion to, and will, go over the guidelines if you prove the case correctly. And there's a lot of high earners in Travis County who pay more than guideline support because of that. 

 

 

I think there's a hard cap though.

[High Plains Drifter 11195]

44 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

 

somebody on twitter tweet that to that fucker.

 

 

[Celery Man 21109]

Yeah I’m certain there’s a mountain of complexity around child support in general and particularly as a mega billionaire, but spending $44bn to get posrep from Andy Ngo makes him deserving of that criticism in perpetuity.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Celery Man

[hornian 5299]

41 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I think there's a hard cap though.

Cool. I’ll tell my clients that I’ve gotten court orders over the guideline max that they should thank their lucky stars the other attorney and judge didn’t know that. 

[chainsaw 10313]

23 minutes ago, hornian said:

Cool. I’ll tell my clients that I’ve gotten court orders over the guideline max that they should thank their lucky stars the other attorney and judge didn’t know that. 

Is there not? I thought it was common knowledge. Im sure there are exceptions but this is Texas and I bet the exceptions are narrow and hard to prove.

[hornian 5299]

2 hours ago, chainsaw said:

Is there not? I thought it was common knowledge. Im sure there are exceptions but this is Texas and I bet the exceptions are narrow and hard to prove.

It's a guideline, not a cap, and you can go above the guideline if you meet the requirements. Here's the law in question:

Quote

Sec. 154.123. ADDITIONAL FACTORS FOR COURT TO CONSIDER. (a) The court may order periodic child support payments in an amount other than that established by the guidelines if the evidence rebuts the presumption that application of the guidelines is in the best interest of the child and justifies a variance from the guidelines.

(b) In determining whether application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate under the circumstances, the court shall consider evidence of all relevant factors, including:

(1) the age and needs of the child;

(2) the ability of the parents to contribute to the support of the child;

(3) any financial resources available for the support of the child;

(4) the amount of time of possession of and access to a child;

(5) the amount of the obligee's net resources, including the earning potential of the obligee if the actual income of the obligee is significantly less than what the obligee could earn because the obligee is intentionally unemployed or underemployed and including an increase or decrease in the income of the obligee or income that may be attributed to the property and assets of the obligee;

(6) child care expenses incurred by either party in order to maintain gainful employment;

(7) whether either party has the managing conservatorship or actual physical custody of another child;

(8) the amount of alimony or spousal maintenance actually and currently being paid or received by a party;

(9) the expenses for a son or daughter for education beyond secondary school;

(10) whether the obligor or obligee has an automobile, housing, or other benefits furnished by his or her employer, another person, or a business entity;

(11) the amount of other deductions from the wage or salary income and from other compensation for personal services of the parties;

(12) provision for health care insurance and payment of uninsured medical expenses;

(13) special or extraordinary educational, health care, or other expenses of the parties or of the child;

(14) the cost of travel in order to exercise possession of and access to a child;

(15) positive or negative cash flow from any real and personal property and assets, including a business and investments;

(16) debts or debt service assumed by either party; and

(17) any other reason consistent with the best interest of the child, taking into consideration the circumstances of the parents.

 

The last exception is big enough to drive a Cybertuck through. 

[BearMace 2258]

25 minutes ago, hornian said:

It's a guideline, not a cap, and you can go above the guideline if you meet the requirements. Here's the law in question:

The last exception is big enough to drive a Cybertuck through. 

So, like, kinda midsize mom suv sorta loophole?

[chainsaw 10313]

27 minutes ago, hornian said:

It's a guideline, not a cap, and you can go above the guideline if you meet the requirements. Here's the law in question:

The last exception is big enough to drive a Cybertuck through. 

Thank you.

I think you and I were talking about different things.

I was talking about "maximum amount of net resources" which in that code appears in a different section. I always heard the guidelines only apply to the income below the cap. Like a tax bracket almost

[atomheartbevo 90692]

still hilarious that world’s richest man, who bitches that people aren’t having enough kids, is in a dispute over child support when his $17 billion social media platform is doing so well.  

[hornian 5299]

9 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Thank you.

I think you and I were talking about different things.

I was talking about "maximum amount of net resources" which in that code appears in a different section. I always heard the guidelines only apply to the income below the cap. Like a tax bracket almost

We aren't talking about different things. That is a reason to go about the guideline maximum for net resources. You'd still apply the percentage to whatever the net resources are above the cap. So in this case, instead of $9,200 a month, you could say his net resources are 

and then apply the percentage to that amount of net resources. 

As long as the amount of child support is below 50% of his net resources (whatever the court determines them to be), and as long as the court finds going past the guidelines is in the child's best interest, you can blow the "guideline max" child support out of the water.

But what do I know, I just do this for a living. I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night. 

Edited December 8, 2023 by hornian

[chainsaw 10313]

1 minute ago, hornian said:

We aren't talking about different things. That is a reason to go about the guideline maximum for net resources. You'd still apply the percentage to whatever the net resources are above the cap. So in this case, instead of $9,200 a month, you could say his net resources are 

and then apply the percentage to that amount of net resources. 

 

But what do I know, I just do this for a living. I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night. 

So there's no cap? Thats all I was asking. I get the cap can be busted and for Elon I hope it is, but isn't that a whole other ballgame?

[Celery Man 21109]

[hornian 5299]

15 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

So there's no cap? Thats all I was asking. I get the cap can be busted and for Elon I hope it is, but isn't that a whole other ballgame?

It’s a “cap” for most people, because they aren’t going to spend the money to rebut the presumption that the guidelines are in a child’s best interest. It’s usually not worth paying someone tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees to fight it when you won’t get that much back in extra support. 

[Thetexashammer 1062]

[chainsaw 10313]

I hope Elon gets the full Joe Rogan's buddy in California treatment by the courts out there.

[safe sex 12044]

[atomheartbevo 90692]

10 hours ago, Celery Man said:

Yeah I’m certain there’s a mountain of complexity around child support in general and particularly as a mega billionaire, 

The last part is the key part - the dollar amounts are meaningless - this is all about him winning, which means defeating Grimes. 

 

[Homercles 10206]

On 12/3/2023 at 4:31 AM, NoName said:

 

[HenryJames 67477]

9 hours ago, safe sex said:

Hope it at least says the n word!

[Captain Ron 13133]

Still glad to see he doesn’t care what people think

 

[Guest]

 

[Celery Man 21109]

1 hour ago, slorch said:

 

lol highly off topic but I’ve worked backwards from seeing his stuff shared to learning about the podcast where he got his start and now I’m in a place where i have to switch from “Cum Town” to Cocomelon when I pull into daycare parking lot

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

lol highly off topic but I’ve worked backwards from seeing his stuff shared to learning about the podcast where he got his start and now I’m in a place where i have to switch from “Cum Town” to Cocomelon when I pull into daycare parking lot

The first one I saw was his bit about Lamar Jackson and I was dying. He's a Baltimore guy and has a sports alter-ego called Ronnie Recaps. This dude is basically Surly on stage.  He doesn't grind the axe politically, but calls shit like he sees it.  Here's Austin related and a little shot at Elon.

 

[Chooky 13342]

1 hour ago, slorch said:

The first one I saw was his bit about Lamar Jackson and I was dying. He's a Baltimore guy and has a sports alter-ego called Ronnie Recaps. This dude is basically Surly on stage.  He doesn't grind the axe politically, but calls shit like he sees it.  Here's Austin related and a little shot at Elon.

 

His old co host, Nick Mullen, is also hilarious. Their steven Segal reviews were gold.

[chainsaw 10313]

Stavros's body count is high, which is impressive considering his build.

Edited December 9, 2023 by chainsaw

[atomheartbevo 90692]

Elmo wants to let Alex Jones back on twitter (probably for the clicks and ads for gold coins and male supplements), but he doesn't have the spine to openly do it himself, so he's leaving it up to the voting bots.

70% out of 1.7 million have so far voted for Jones to come back, with 3 hours to go.

 

[Captain Ron 13133]

12 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Elmo wants to let Alex Jones back on twitter (probably for the clicks and ads for gold coins and male supplements), but he doesn't have the spine to openly do it himself, so he's leaving it up to the voting bots.

70% out of 1.7 million have so far voted for Jones to come back, with 3 hours to go.

 

Thats pathetic. Have some balls and do it yourself.

I watched half the Jones video, lots of lol.

 That said, 

[Underdog 29242]

Look forward to Jones mocking one of Elmo’s dead kid should it happen. 

[Captain Ron 13133]

Washington Post: Tesla Autopilot is deadly

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/12/10/tesla-autopilot-crash/

Quote

But the 2019 crash reveals a problem deeper than driver inattention. It occurred on a rural road where Tesla’s Autopilot technology was not designed to be used. Dash-cam footage captured by the Tesla and obtained exclusively by The Post shows the car blowing through a stop sign, a blinking light and five yellow signs warning that the road ends and drivers must turn left or right.

Because using the GPS to disable it where it shouldn’t be used would be hard. 

[atomheartbevo 90692]

1 hour ago, Captain Ron said:

Thats pathetic. Have some balls and do it yourself.

I watched half the Jones video, lots of lol.

He bitched about advertisers leaving, so giving Alex Jones a major platform is the perfect solution.   

[Captain Ron 13133]

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

He bitched about advertisers leaving, so giving Alex Jones a major platform is the perfect solution.   

Friday on Pivot, Scott Galloway said that this is all calculated by Musk at this point.  Pushing out advertisers is a way for him to have a platform  he can say and do anything with no guardrails. It’s during the interview with Loui Paskalis  

 

 

[Neonmoon 38130]

Or he could of just bought 4chan for 30 dollars and saved 44 billion dollars if he wanted a platform like that 

[Goredho 17663]

On 12/9/2023 at 6:41 AM, Captain Ron said:

Still glad to see he doesn’t care what people think

 

[Captain Ron 13133]

37 minutes ago, Goredho said:

https://defector.com/elon-musk-is-grimly-determined-to-let-you-know-he-is-funny

[tomahawk dunk 377]

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-problems-twitter-x-tesla-gamble-luck-run-out-2023-12

 

[Chopper 17454]

3 hours ago, tomahawk dunk said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-problems-twitter-x-tesla-gamble-luck-run-out-2023-12

bringing over some...
 

Quote

Nowadays, some analysts, like Vicki Bryan, the CEO of the research firm Bond Angle, suspect that Twitter is spending much more than it's able to generate or borrow.

"With the company still burning cash and $1.3-1.5 billion in annual interest due over the past year, I had expected Twitter to live on borrowed time," Bryan wrote in a note to clients. She said that even if Twitter tapped the loans available to it at the beginning of the year, the company may be almost out of options. "The year is over, so Twitter's cash may be nearly if not already dried up—along with Elon Musk's options," Bryan wrote.

Because of the way that Musk operates, the social-media company's troubles pose a threat to his whole business empire. Despite being the second-wealthiest person in the world, Musk is curiously cash poor. He doesn't take a salary from Tesla, and while he owns about 20% of the EV maker, public documents filed in March show that about 63% of those shares are "pledged as collateral to secure certain personal indebtedness." You know, like the private jets.

This is why using Tesla stock to source cash all the time gets hairy. If Tesla shares fall below a certain level, the banks can call in those personal loans — leaving Musk on the hook. And the quickest way for Tesla's stock to drop off a cliff is for investors to get wind of a big Musk sale. And of course, he needs to make sure that he still holds on to all the Tesla stock he's pledged as collateral to the banks. Unfortunately, though, the easiest way for Musk to fill the gaping hole in Twitter's balance sheet is to sell Tesla shares. You see how this could be a problem.

Sometimes, when he's really hard up, Musk borrows money from SpaceX — a private company that lost a combined $1.5 billion in 2021 and 2022. He borrowed $1 billion from the company when he bought Twitter and paid the loan back within a month — but he had to sell $4 billion worth of Tesla shares to do it. Using his wealth and power, Musk has built himself a separate reality where there are no real consequences for the risks he takes, but keeping the lights on at Twitter — sorry, X — is testing its limits more and more by the day.

 

The article is very dire. Goes on the discuss what current interest rates mean for Twitter's debt payments, and what plunging demand for Tesla may mean for Muskkk's ability to plunder Tesla.

I recently read that the Cybertruck is the only Tesla project that's entirely Musk's. Each of the other models were inherited when he forced his way into the CEO spot. If true, he's been incompetent much longer than many may have suspected. Apparently, per the article @tomahawk dunklinked, Tesla was essentially saved by China in 2019.

Edited December 10, 2023 by Chopper
per

[Ted Lange 16448]

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-vows-to-make-xai-chatbot-grok-politically-neutral-2023-12

[bolverk 30385]

https://www.threads.net/@axios/post/C0rNCOJrEJB

 

[NoName 17203]

Totally normal things  with totally normal people

 

[NoName 17203]