I don't use Claude Code, but I do use Claude. I paid $200 for a year and I almost never run out of resources. What am I missing?
06.03.2026 16:40
👍 2
🔁 0
💬 1
📌 0
I don't use Claude Code, but I do use Claude. I paid $200 for a year and I almost never run out of resources. What am I missing?
The Trump administration took your money illegally.
They won’t give it back.
Good speech. Most US press got bamboozled by Bill Barr's scheme. Trump's collusion with Russia was always real, continues to be. www.youtube.com/live/ylvTFvJ...
This is, in a word, disgusting.
Markwayne Mullin is going to be just as bad. This is why the entire doom loop needs to stop all together and you only get that by removing the entire regime.
Fun fact: the Tesla data center is at HP's old complex on Page Mill Road which is itself an EPA Superfund site, right across the street from the literal Toxic Law Firm that serves half the Valley's startups.
www.aarongreenspan.com/writing/2013...
C’mon, people. Look at your Kremlin style guide. The phrase is “special military operation.” Not all of you are getting this right.
Secretary Markwayne
Not an attorney, sure, but in my experience, the average LLM now surpasses the capabilities of 99% of attorneys.
Very much looking forward to the legal industry grappling with its obsolescence.
Very much not looking forward to it getting cases wrong and throwing people in jail for no reason.
Of course, since he's a narcissistic sociopath, you can always count on Elon telling you how difficult it is to be Elon. He works so hard. He is so tired. Such long hours.
That's why he set up a gaming workstation in the White House's OEOB on the taxpayer's dime. Because he was working so hard.
Twelfth, I'm no expert, but he seemed pretty sober today. No outbursts, only one uncontrollably villainous laugh. I wonder if his lawyers forced him to ditch the drugs for a few days before. If so, that must have been hard for him.
...admitted that his attorneys withheld incriminating evidence. I half-expected a laugh track because that's about how seriously people take telling the truth in court.
Eleventh, Elon admitted that he didn't stop texting about the Twitter deal and then the Plaintiff's attorneys pointed out that 16 days of texts were missing from discovery production, and then everyone just shrugged and Elon made up a dumb excuse for that happening, as though he hadn't just...
Tenth, Omar Qazi made an appearance in the trial exhibits (as @WholeMarsBlog) but, of course, as per usual, no one mentioned anything about the fact that this random guy is somehow Musk's PR department.
You mean "client-attorney privilege," which is when the [usually rich] client tells the attorneys exactly how to lie and shriek "First Amendment!" at the same time and the attorneys dutifully obey.
Ninth, this all happened today, and I guess Breyer issued this order later on suggesting he will likely tell the jury to strike/disregard Musk's testimony about what his lawyers supposedly told him: www.plainsite.org/courts/calif... bsky.app/profile/did:...
Eighth, there was an e-mail exhibit that hasn’t earned nearly enough attention where Barclays told, and by told I mean used an emoji as a hint in writing, Elon to write more crazy tweets in order to move TWTR’s stock price.
Jail.
lol
If Breyer somehow grants limited discovery on these “advice” e-mails since Elon raised/invented them then the man will deserve a medal.
Seventh, there was an amusing moment when Breyer said verbatim to the army of Quinn Emanuel attorneys before him, “I’ll do whatever you want,” then took a beat, realized that sounded super bad, and fortunately clarified.
I think he’s done fine as a judge here but that had the potential to “kaboom”!
I think this is actually a pretty good summary of the American justice system:
Bill ‘n’ Kill
(Disagree? Bet you’re not Black!)
everyone knows that periodically I feel the need to rail against "it's all priced in" but honest to g-d, ok, theoretically markets are forward-looking and efficient in aggregate over time but there are 3,200 ships waiting to clear the Strait of Hormuz, nobody knows who's running Iran right now ...
Yes I did find that odd but no more odd than the entire trial which is just a charade involving 50 clueless lawyers who just nod and happily bill while Elon lies and then goes home to kill more people.
He explicitly said he did not intend to waive “client-attorney privilege” after testifying that his lawyers told him McCormick was “biased” and he would therefore lose. Plaintiff’s counsel clarified with him that there was no source of “bias” but her rulings against him.
Was there in court when he said this. Breyer raised it after excusing the jury and hinted he might want briefing or oral argument on whatever the hell just happened. No one questioned Musk on it or suggested he might be lying, at least not yet.
Sixth, going back to lawyers sucking, there was no narrative to explain why their specific questions were being asked. Sure there's opening arguments, but you can keep the questions engaging and remind the jury what this is about. Today was just constant, "let's look at Exhibit 197" with no context.
Fifth, every other answer out of Elon's mouth was "I don't recall," which he can kind of legitimately say because the PSLRA is so #*&!@ed that in the rare event that your case ever gets heard at all, it takes 4-5 years minimum before there's a trial. Do you recall exactly what you did 4-5 years ago?
The notion that this whole insanely expensive charade is anything approaching justice is a farce, especially because the PSLRA is so completely broken. As I've said before, PSLRA reform needs to be up there with overturning Citizens United.
Fourth, what a waste of taxpayer dollars. Because of the way the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure work, as a business executive, you can basically just lie your face off in court at your trial and no one cares. Contradict yourself, contradict what's well-known...everyone just nods and takes notes.
Also for example: Elon kept insisting that Twitter's figures were fake. But he couldn't quite find the words "statistically significant" because he has the intellect of a fifth-grader. Obvious questions: SIR, ARE YOU A STATISTICIAN? WHAT SAMPLE SIZE ARE YOU ARGUING WAS REQUIRED?
No one asked.
