jessriedel

> The material comes in the form of a thin layer, just 1 micrometer (1μm) thick – about one hundredth the thickness of human hair – positioned between the cathode layer and the current collector (an aluminum foil that acts as the electron pathway). When the battery’s temperature rises beyond the normal range, between 90°C and 130°C, the material reacts to the heat, altering its molecular structure and effectively suppressing the flow of current, LG Chem said.

> The material is decribed as highly responsive to temperature, with its electrical resistance increasing by 5,000 ohms (Ω) for every 1°C rise in temperature. The material’s maximum resistance is over 1,000 times higher than at normal temperatures, and it also features reversibility, meaning the resistance decreases and returns to its original state, allowing the current to flow normally again once the temperature drops.

To the best of my searching, a typical lithium ion battery has roughly 20-30 cathode-and-current-conductor layers. So naively this would add less than 50 microns to the battery thickness.

Also, the open-access article is here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-52766-9

That's importantly different, unless the existence and authenticity of the scrolls is public and only the contents are secret (which is not what I understood the commenter to be suggesting).

Wouldn’t the value be a lot higher if it wasn’t secret? Or is it the risk confiscation/opprobrium?

The number of undergrad and graduate students in the US is vastly larger than the number of startups.

Yea I sorta figured YC was more like Harvard in that the brand and selectivity are super important. Isn’t this eating the seed corn?

legister is claiming this essentially threatens the existence of Stanford in something like it’s current form. Whether that’s true can certainly be debated, but it seems glib to say “if Stanford has to be crushed or radically transformed, so be it; nothing is more important than government-style admission procedures”. I think one needs to actually argue that it won’t be that damaging.

Gotcha. Yea, my impression is that they always have a pretty deep backlog of maintenance tasks that can be done any time there is downtime or extra hands. That might also be true for science, e.g., repeat some experiment with different settings/conditions. (Certainly, in case of unexpected problems/delays they already have a triage plan for which experiments are performed and which are sacrificed.)

> every few years there are articles of pubs shutting down and it being a crisis. Happened as long as I’ve lived.

This is very consistent with there being a steady decline. (Likewise, some mock the perennial complaint that "people don't work as hard as they use to", but in fact hours worked per week has been steadily falling for 150 years.)

> You don’t have to go far precisely because your local craft beer haunt, gastropub, sports bar and boozer all serve different clientele.

I don't know what this is supposed to mean. If a country's is dominated by a certain establishment type I like, and then that type loses lots of market share to different types, I am worse off.

Yea NASA does not do a great job explaining what science is happening on the ISS You could maybe start here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Crew_Flight_Test#ISS_st...

> On 10 June, with all their initial Starliner testing completed, the CFT crew started working on general ISS maintenance and research activities. They started their day by measuring their temperature, blood pressure, pulse, and respiratory rate. Later, Wilmore worked on the maintenance of a computer connected to the Microgravity Science Glovebox, while Williams installed hardware to support a space fire investigation. On 11 June, the astronauts spent their time on biomedical activities, with Wilmore organizing the inventory of the Human Research Facility, and Williams working on procedures to collect microbe samples and sequence their genes. On 12 June, Wilmore checked cargo in the Harmony module and worked on maintenance of the station's bathroom, while Williams continued her gene sequencing work from the day before.[65]

> On 17 June, Williams worked on maintenance tasks and prepared the Advanced Plant Habitat for future experiments, and on 18 June she continued working on the gene sequencing study from the prior week. Meanwhile, Wilmore spent the two days working on a study of the behavior of flowing liquids in space.[69][70]

> NASA said that since their arrival on 6 June, Wilmore and Williams have been tasked with completing half of all hands-on research time conducted aboard the ISS, giving their crewmates more time to prepare for the departure of Northrop Grumman's Cygnus NG-20 spacecraft.[71]

(As you probably know, it's a bit misleading to say that Astronauts are doing science on the ISS. For the most part they are brilliant, expensive, and highly trained lab technicians who prep and repair equipment and then hit the "go" button for experiments that were designed by, and will be analyzed by, scientists on Earth.)

Sure there are of course plenty of great places. They weren’t like purged or something. But now you have to go searchings, like in the US

This can’t be defined away. Most of the members of the set ({pubs} U {sports pubs}) have screens in London.

Tangential: As an American, one of the things I liked most about London pubs when I first started visiting in the ‘00s was the lack of screens, which were hard to escape in American bars. Unfortunately this was only temporary, as the majority of the London pubs I’ve seen on recent visits are covered with screens like home.

As a scientist, I agree, although for not quite the reason you gave. Scientists are given tremendous freedom and resources by society (public dollars, but also private dollars like at my industry research lab). I think scientists have a corresponding higher duty for honesty.

Jobs at top institutions are worth much more than their nominal salary, as evidenced by how much those people could be making in the private sector. (They are compensated mostly in freedom and intellectual stimulation.) Unambiguously faking data, which is the sort of thing a bad actor might do to get a top job, should be considered at least as bad a moral transgression as stealing hundreds of thousands or perhaps a few million dollars.

(What is the downside? I have never once heard a researcher express feeling threatened or wary of being falsely/unjustly accused of fraud.)

I think you have misread my comment.

It requires deployment either way. The largest ships we have that go to the moon are no larger than those going to orbit.

That you are getting a kickback does not mean they aren’t extracting monopoly rent. The rents, and your kickback, is in fact supported by slightly higher prices, which for you will roughly cancel out, but which are paid in full by people not using credit cards.

One can certainly argue that this system is net positive due, e.g., to greater credit availability for people who need it, chargeback discipline, etc. It’s a very complicated system that impacts a bunch of stuff. But it being merely a ~3% surcharge (on most retail transactions nationwide!) does not deflect the monopoly charge.

It’s easier to deploy in the weightless environment of orbit than on the moon with gravity. Consistent with this, the largest off-Earth structure ever built (the ISS) is in orbit, not on a heavenly body.

In real life this can happen, but I think only by flinging out stars on escape trajectories. That’s the thing explicitly prevented by the reflecting sphere in the model discussed in the post.

Basically, the issue is that you can’t end up in a stable equilibrium of binaries (and binaries of binaries) in a bounded phase space because the dynamics are time-reversible. The only way you get coarse-grained irreversible behavior is with an unbounded phase space where there are no recurrences.

Right, it wasn't criticism, but the point I added (that I think was not explicit in the article) is this: black holes provide a lower bound on the potential energy, not just an indication that the model is breaking down.

Is this right?:

* Although you can make the enveloping sphere as large as you want, the (anti-)equilibration process requires a sphere of some finite radius because if you wait long enough a few stars eventually get launched at escape velocity, and if these actually escaped they would effectively cool the remaining stars.

* Therefore, the characteristic time scale for this process (i.e., the timescale on which the average kinetic energy rises substantially) gets longer and longer as the sphere gets larger.

* In order for the pressure and average speed of the stars to keep rising, the gravitational potential needs to keep falling, so at least some stars need to get and stay very close. In real life, these turn into black holes, which cuts off the process by limiting the amount of gravitational potential energy that can be unlocked in any given volume with a given mass.

“Completely due to” was meant in the sense of “fully reliant on” not “solely reliant on”. Tarrifs are not the only tool used, and US companies would simply not be allowed to fail, period.

> Traditional US car manufacturers are absolutely incompetent and will not survive competition with Chinese manufacturers unless they clean house on everything software related.

Legacy American car companies have been fully non-competitive with foreign brands for decades. Their continued existence is completely due to tariffs, and it’s not close. I see no reason to think congress would suddenly allow them to be threatened by Chinese companies.

But the point of the argument was that Hezbollah would immediately never trust their electronic devices going forward until they could secure their supply chain. The argument didn’t depend on the semantics between same and distinct attacks.

One can argue that there is some temporary remaining vulnerability for Hezbollah members who either didn’t hear about the first attack or had some insanely urgent need to communicate (and this vulnerability wouldn’t exist once they secure the supply chain). But I think the much simpler story is that these attacks aren’t possible only once; supply chain security is a continuum, and people will continue to balance risk of repeat attacks against the costs of security.

That there is fundamental trade-off between two features does not mean the only viable choices are to maximize one feature. In fact, it is usually the opposite.

It is, but in both cases it's not a good reason by itself to reduce investment in supply (roads or GPUs).

The deaths themselves are costly to the org, both because of insurance and because it's terrible for morale.

In the theory that sounds plausible to me but (1) I've never actually experienced such a break (so "vastly inferior" can't be right) and (2) USB-C has clearly won, so it's water under the bridge.

Yes, the US is no stranger to government influence on the prices of ag products, but my impression is that Canada is a couple notches above, especially the highly populous Ontario. Any comparison of the two needs to take that into account.

Based on a brief look by my layman eyes, it does not seem like Canadian grocery chains are vastly more concentrated relative to the US. It's hard to compare because so many of the chains are owned by the same few brands, but this chart is helpful:

https://www.howtocook.recipes/the-largest-grocery-stores-and...

I'd look at the top ten and then ignore Walgreens and CVS. I think you've got 8 conglomerates serving the vast majority of the 330M Americans. (Unclear to me whether Target should be included; I don't know how much of the sales listed there are actual groceries.) The OP article suggest 5 conglomerates serve the large majority of the 38M Canadians.

I have half a dozen in my bag already :)

I'm excited that the cost of iPhone 15's will continue to fall so I can soon eliminate lightning cables from my life. Please everyone, go out and upgrade from 15 to 16! :)