jackmott42

if you brake too aggressively then you will use brake pads as well as regen, and that wastes energy.

Also, its still better to arrange to not need to brake at all, than to regen, since regen is not 100% efficient.

Right, and you can land on the moon with basic newtonian mechanics. The are millions of devils in the details but for a person to decide how big a rocket to build and whether it could land vertically after a payload of X that needs a delta-V of Y, its easy napkin math to prove feasibility.

Executing it is then one of the hardest things people can do but SpaceX had all the best people at the time.

Hasn't Gwen's main role at SpaceX been sales? Is she also the main force behind spaceX executing at engineering?

sane person here, I would only take Elon's claim that something would work seriously if it relied mostly on newtonian mechanics to verify.

which model S being good, falcon 9 working etc, that is all it takes. basic physics napkin math.

anything with nuance (self driving) or human emotions in play (twitter), and he is the same as any boomer uncle complaining about kids these days

Tesla can convert me at any second by firing Elon.

Imagine you are selling widgets that cost you $40 to make, and you have figured out that the price of widgets where you make the most money is $50. Any higher and you sell too few widgets to make more money. And less and you don't sell enough extra widgets to make up for the lower margins.

One day you found a supplier that is cheaper and reduces your cost to $30. Do you change your price?

So don't get the Platinum model. I'm surrounded by oil rig workers and they all have $90k trucks

I've noticed its a common thing wherein:

1. People imagine without any evidence, but only a plausible story, that X is good for Y (say for instance, vitamin C for colds, because vitamin C is involved in the immune system)

2. Study after study is done finding no benefit, but each study you quote, someone finds some nit pick about it "well maybe the dosage wasn't high enough" or "maybe they did/didn't take it with calcium" and then continue to believe there must be some way to derive benefit

Because we have a lot off history of researching this topic, wherein the benefits of mental practice usually appears to be very specific and not general.

No, we want to change the long commute situation and change the way roads and cars are so that bikes are not a terrifying option.

I was very happy to see the SLS succeed on its first launch, they did a great job. But it is also a boondoggle of a project costing us billions and taking over a decade to reconfigure space shuttle components. The space shuttle was also an amazing accomplishment but also stupid, costing more than twice as much to get cargo to orbit than a normal rocket would have, while being more dangerous too.

Starship meanwhile costs you nothing, and the "Fix" for the launchpad isn't a bandaid, it was planned before the old pad failed because they knew the old pad was failed, and if it works, it will be an order of magnitude cheaper than SLS.

Might not work though! Good thing it doesn't cost taxpayers anything.

The rocket engines we had in 1950 are as good as we have today. You can add a little carbon fiber to the ship to make it lighter but 95% of the mass is fuel anyway, so you don't win much.

Rockets going to space is a basic physics problem with no post 1950 innovations that give you huge wins. Hence why re-usability to bring costs down is what everyone is focusing on, it is about all you can do. Maybe raptor will prove to be a wee bit better than the best engines of the 1950s but only a bit.

I would guess it means trying to use AI to come up with an overfit grand unifying theory of physics.

Yeah, now this reads like a list of people to avoid in any future tech ventures.

Parent claimed only one gets funding, but that is wrong. Industry, capitalist companies work on the other stuff all the time. Parent is likely wrong about researchers not getting funding for that other stuff also, parent likely had trouble getting funding himself due to bad attitude and blames it on other factors.

yes, they use this new tech called glass.

Consumer panels on homes have hail protection since forever.

The other reply got it right, but I would add that the higher the temperature the faster the pack degrades, even when it is just sitting there.

>not because enough people actually want them for them to be financially viable.

But there are enough people, they are packed.

Tesla superchargers have no screens OR buttons. Everyone wins. Just plug in and go pee.

Another benefit is batteries degrade with age worse than they do with use. So high mileage applications are perfect, way less stuff wears out with mileage than a gasoline/diesel truck. A delivery van can put enough miles on to wear the chassis out before the battery pack degrades too much from age.

could potentially supercharge them over lunch breaks if needed. fleets could also battery swap with less complication than normal end user cars.

they also have to be WAY easier to drive. they just scoot out of there rather than having to shift 9 times to get up to speed.

yes, or approximately so. many can also have the generator drive the wheels.

yes

Yes, .NET is faster. Though even AAA games often use slow scripting languages for game logic. Many games, the game logic just isn't a big CPU hog so it doesn't matter.

There are official bindings to C#, the official docs have C# examples in them, and it can use the latest and greatest .NET versions, not just mono.

Nobody is going to give up their F150 and Corvette if they don't believe there is anything wrong with burning fossil fuels.

The fact that you are not convinced is why you need to keep hearing about it. Once people are convinced and taking reasonable steps to mitigate, we can quit harping on it.

For instance the sea level is expected to rise much more than an inch in the next century. It is projected to rise 10 inches in the next 30 years.

Because it is a disaster of our own creation which we can mitigate if we take it seriously. If people start taking it seriously maybe we can quite talking about it.

"you are not reasoning you are just neurons firing in a big network" "its not reasoning its just flipping bits" "its cant be alive its just nand gates"