I had a peek and it looks like it's the youtube lounge API. Basically this is casting with some bonus features. If you are playing on a Screen (a tv or console) then Remotes (usually your phone) can automatically notice it and automatically show what is playing, let you use controls, add stuff to the playlist etc.
This program registers a remote and automatically skips forward when a sponsorblock segment is present.
It blocks sponsored content using SponsorBlock[0], which uses crowdsourced data to detect segments in video's and skips them (basically fast forwards over the content).
Automotive software is a regulated space, there's no way the idea of these APIs is developers tinkering with their Tesla for fun (it allows remote execution!) but rather large businesses integrating their apps with Tesla, like Microsoft or OpenAI or something.
Someone could start a business to enable such tinkering. However, that doesn’t seem like a profitable business to be in at all. Potential downsides seem huge, and potential upside seems tiny.
There's some FOSS called TeslaMate that piggy backs on credentials you can steal from your Tesla app. It monitors and records all manner of statistics for whatever purpose you choose. It can also integrate with Home Assistant and all of the wonderful things it can do. The Tesla app shows a tiny amount of information in comparison and none of it is actionable by automations I write.
Process node transitions are a risk for every manufacturer. Is there any reason to think TSMC would have unrecoverable trouble with a new process node, while Intel sails through?
Separately, is there any reason Intel would not (under its fab model) accept Nvidia's business in such a scenario? Coopetition like this is not unknown (ex: Samsung making chips for Apple).
The quote didn't say Falcon Heavy wasn't heavy lift, which was my point. It said Falcon Heavy was just something on the drawing board, versus SLS which was real. Except then Falcon Heavy ended up flying years before SLS eventually did.
