Similar to the many other cases of Tesla driverless failing to see motorcycles and killing riders, this one just ran over a scooter like it was designed to kill.

Around 2:54 a.m., CHP officers responded to a call of a crash involving a motorist and a pedestrian just south of Taylor Street. The pedestrian, a 23-year-old from San Jose, was actually riding a Lime brand scooter, authorities said; he was northbound on the freeway before he was hit by a 2021 Tesla, which was also traveling north.

The scooter rider was pronounced dead at the scene.

This 24 year old Tesla owner, likely asleep at 3 a.m. on a highway while driving at high speed from behind over a scooter, has so far not been charged with vehicular homicide.

Related, a driver in Los Angeles has been criminally charged for the same crash as this one, running over a motorcycle from behind… before a Tesla FSD ignored flares, reflective signs and flashing lights to crash into a Police car at the scene.

In other words, suspected DUI now should be seen as equivalent to suspected FSD because Tesla is fraud — robot design as blind and deadly as seriously impaired drivers.

At the time of the crash… driving at more than 100 mph toward a red light without slowing down, prosecutors said.

That sounds exactly like the Tesla robot design to me, since it’s become notorious for ignoring red lights and running over and into people.

Some shocking news from car manufacturers about an immediate need to stop putting chrome on things.

Hexavalent chromium, or “chromium 6,” the form of the element chromium involved in the plating process, is an aggressive cancer-causing agent, according to government regulators in the United States and Europe.

“Hexavalent chromium is a carcinogen that is the second most potent toxic air contaminant identified by the state,” the California Air Resources Board said in a statement provided to CNN. “It is 500 times more toxic than diesel exhaust and has no known safe level of exposure.”

No known safe level.

It’s interesting to see Jeep top the list of cancerous brands. Reminds me I once had to replace a solid chrome bumper on my Jeep. That was decades ago and I thought the choice of material odd even back then.

A car without chrome actually sounds to me long overdue, like a car without brass. Can’t move fast enough to get away from that awful past.

Likewise, I always removed chrome from my motorcycles or covered it up, since polishing the mirror before or after a ride seemed to be the antithesis of freedom.

We have yet more news that Microsoft recently shedding its ethics team to go “full evil” was part of a older and much larger problem from the top.

Former employee says software giant dismissed his warnings about a critical flaw because it feared losing government business. Russian hackers later used the weakness to breach the National Nuclear Security Administration, among others.

In a twist that sounds increasingly common in American tech companies driven by Wall Street, significant known security gaps were intentionally ignored during campaigns to expand potential harm to more victims and then blame them.

Harris’ account, told here for the first time and supported by interviews with former colleagues and associates as well as social media posts, upends the prevailing public understanding of the SolarWinds hack.

From the moment the hack surfaced, Microsoft insisted it was blameless. Microsoft President Brad Smith assured Congress in 2021 that “there was no vulnerability in any Microsoft product or service that was exploited” in SolarWinds.

He also said customers could have done more to protect themselves.

Harris said they were never given the chance.

Blaming customers aged like a fine milk.

You may recall when people discussed the OpenAI board in terms of Helen Toner and Tasha McCauley, who became ex-members as Sam Altman was ushered back in a flurry of propaganda by Microsoft.

When we were recruited to the board of OpenAI—Tasha in 2018 and Helen in 2021—we were cautiously optimistic that the company’s innovative approach to self-governance could offer a blueprint for responsible AI development. But based on our experience, we believe that self-governance cannot reliably withstand the pressure of profit incentives.

Helen Toner, of a certain Security Studies program at Georgetown University, was perhaps recruited as a voice of reason in terms of helping manage In-Q-Tel interests. Pushed out by Microsoft’s “full evil” team, she was not exactly working on security in terms of safe operations for a wobbly back-stabbing startup culture, if you know what I mean.

Now OpenAI is pivoting quite awkwardly with a new announcement in an entirely different direction towards “enterprise” operations overseen by an ex-director of the NSA.

OpenAI on Thursday announced its newest board member: Paul M. Nakasone, a retired U.S. Army general and former director of the National Security Agency. Nakasone was the longest-serving leader of the U.S. Cyber Command and chief of the Central Security Service.

“Mr. Nakasone’s insights will also contribute to OpenAI’s efforts to better understand how AI can be used to strengthen cybersecurity by quickly detecting and responding to cybersecurity threats,” OpenAI said in a blog post.

The company said Nakasone will also join OpenAI’s recently created Safety and Security Committee. The committee is spending 90 days evaluating the company’s processes and safeguards before making recommendations to the board and, eventually, updating the public, OpenAI said.

Notably Nakasone joins as the only person on the board with national level information security expertise and experience related to massive operations. Arguably these have been sorely missing from the OpenAI board, given its attempts to both terrify everyone with instability yet want to appear indispensible to American stability interests.

Looking on the bright side, perhaps Nakasone’s appointment will open his eyes and help him articulate privately to the Pentagon why Palantir’s ongoing nonsense should be driven hard out of town. As much as I find OpenAI to be poorly run, opaque and repeatedly stumbling over its questionable intentions (all attributes of Palantir), it still seems fundamentally better than the immoral things an historically ignorant Peter Thiel has done.

Who can forget Palantir paying U.S. Congressmen to viciously attack the U.S. Army in order to shamelessly force the government into buying Palantir products? Even more to the point, Palantir sued in court to force the Army into buying proprietary products from them designed to lock-in customers.

Then again OpenAI could be an even worse version of Stanford-laced Thielism.