jjallen

No offense to them, but in general, investment grade companies should have a stable future and not have easily-switchable, competing products that cost a fraction as much to use come out regularly. This is almost laughable that I have to say this.

I want to add that this isn't people stealing from other normal people. This is dictators stealing from normal people. So there are losses in both directions: normal people losing their money and dictators gaining money to do nefarious things to normal people.

It would be better if it was dictators stealing from dictators or normal people stealing from normal people, but it's not that at all.

As a former crypto proponent, after ~17 years I think we have to have a real discussion about the value crypto does or doesn't bring to the world.

Sure, it let's some people keep their savings safe from dictatorial countries. But it also fuels other dictators that are doing pretty nasty stuff to their own people. And crypto is facilitating that.

Makes me want to own the stock now that they are more diversified. I will never understand why they didn't want to own all of Waymo but did for pretty much everything else.

On one hand I'm like AI is the future these companies likely have an advantage and will 10x over the next decade.

On the other hand I'm like anyone, especially China can distill a much smaller model that will run for free locally in a couple of years.

Wow. This is insane news. To think you suddenly can get by with up to 25% fewer people is truly a sign of what is to come. They probably assume much fewer will accept, but still. They probably think 10-20% will actually accept. But they're confident that they can make due with suddenly quite a bit fewer people.

They should try to recreate the origins of life there while they're at it.

My opinion (which is about filming in general, not the glasses) which seems to contradict others' but:

So if someone acts up and starts screaming it's suddenly ok to film, or even when people are committing crimes on board it's not ok? Who's to say when this is happening or not?

If filming is banned there will be less evidence for when this does happen, and people could get away with more crimes (although admittedly the bar is higher on a plane and the flight staff's testimony will carry lots of weight).

I think planes are public places (because 200 people are crammed into a tiny tube of metal) and your expectation of privacy should be diminished there. There are too many potential things that could happen on a plane. People are too close and vulnerable while on a plane. We cannot run or protect ourselves as well.

And as far as flight attendants, unfortunately they are at least partially responsible for both the safety and wellbeing of those on board. That is literally their job.

Banning filming of them will reduce their sense of urgency and responsibility, just like it would of cops if we were not allowed to film them.

There are just too many things that need to go right and also that could go wrong on a flight.

Just recently someone took a photo of an ostensible pedophile while on board conversing on a website for pedophiles and now the world knows. If all photography or filming was banned then this wouldn't have happened.

Is this just a summary of the parent post? Seems like you just repeated what they said.

Isn't their return policy duration 2 weeks? How is that one of the best return policies in the industry? Nearly every other retailer allows 30 days...

I meant in case something happened to Warrent back then, not recently, in case that wasn't clear

You would want someone who is intimately familiar with the culture to be involved for a long time in case something happened to Warren.

There's a big difference between keeping all of your ownership and giving it to the son and paying a huge salary and making him non-executive chairman while giving away most of your wealth.

He was chairman and CEO for a long time. Since he has only been a chairman for not that long I don't think it's fair to say that he's been a very active chairman for a long time.

He's there to maintain the very unique culture of the company. I think it's sort of like if they have his son there he of all people should know Buffett's/Berkshire's culture and be able to best maintain it. He's got a few years to figure out a successor. But yeah this is mostly about the unique culture they have.