Sorry, investors, Tesla is simply not going to expand to be larger than •the entire rest of the auto industry• as your “buy” recommendations implicitly posit.
If they make robotaxis, the public will see them as Nazi robotaxis. If they make robots that aren’t just demo smoke and mirrors, the public will see them as Nazi robots.
Your money is in the Titanic of car brands. Get it out while you can.
Source: Amazon is developing software for humanoid robots to deliver packages and is near completion of an indoor "humanoid park" in San Francisco to test them (Rocket Drew/The Information)
https://www.theinformation.com/articles/am
Some statistics about all robotic #LunarLanding attempts so far from 1965 to 2025 compiled from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missions_to_the_Moon and https://scicomm.xyz/@AkaSci@fosstodon.org/114636519291241321 in which I only count those for which descent to the surface had been initiated, not missions lost at launch or on the way - in a nutshell ~70% of all landings by government agencies went well (essentially the same rate 60 years ago and now!) but only ~30% by private companies. Here goes ...
There have been two separate periods of soft lunar landing attempts of ca. a dozen years each, from 1965 to 1976 and 2013 to 2025 (ongoing) with a huge gap between them.
In the first interval there were 20 attempts with 13 successes (Luna 9, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21 and 24 and Surveyor 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7), one partial success (Luna 23, counting as 50%) and 6 failures (Luna 5, 7, 8, 15 and 18 and Surveyor 4), so the success rate was 13.5/20 = 68 %. All missions were by - the Soviet and U.S. - governments.
In the second interval there were so far 14 attempts with 6 full successes (Chang'e-3, 4, 5 and 6, Vikram 2 and Blue Ghost), three partial successes (SLIM, IM-1 and 2, counting as 75%, 50% and 25%, respectively) and 5 failures (Beresheet, Vikram 1, Hakuto-R 1 and 2 and Luna 25) so the success rate was 7.5 / 14 = 54%.
But looking only at the government missions it was 72%, slighly up from 50 years ago. While for the commercial attempts it was only 29%. In total the success rate was 19 (18 government-run) missions out of 34 (28) attempts or 62% but 69% for governments only. And if you throw in the 6 Apollo landings, the total success rate rises to 68% and the government-only rate goes even up to 75%.
NEAT and HyperNEAT based Design for Soft Actuator Controllers
Hugo Alcaraz-Herrera, Michail-Antisthenis Tsompanas, Igor Balaz, Andrew Adamatzky
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.04698
🇺🇦 #NowPlaying on KEXP's #VarietyMix
Brittany Howard:
🎵 History Repeats (Jungle Remix)
#BrittanyHoward
https://brittanyhoward.bandcamp.com/track/history-repeats
https://open.spotify.com/track/4BopifcjNF0aEzQr7jvvpw
This https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.04003 has been replaced.
link: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=a
Amazon is creating an AI team within its Lab126 hardware R&D unit that will help develop an agentic AI framework for use in its robotics operations (Annie Palmer/CNBC)
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/04/amazons-rd-lab-forms-new-agentic-ai-group.html…
This is a dangerous level of squinting at tea leaves, so •serious• grain of salt here, but:
The sudden re-plunge of Tesla’s stock price during this Musk / Trump spat suggests that maybe, maybe its utterly wild overvaluation had nothing to do with Tesla’s products, or its market position, or Musk’s phony brilliance, or even (the usual explanation) with investors getting hyped about a self-driving car future and magical robots.
Maybe it was investors expecting the company to be the beneficiary of kleptocratic pillaging of the US Federal budget. Which — unlike all the other explanations — would not be an irrational expectation.
Genesis AI, which generates its own synthetic data for training an AI model for robots, emerges from stealth with a $105M seed co-led by Eclipse and Khosla (Marina Temkin/TechCrunch)
https://techcrunch.com/2025/07/01/gene