Everyone has flaws and says dumb things. Now, is it smart to say dumb things when running multi-billion dollar companies when you have such a huge audience? Anyone with even an ounce of intelligence will tell you the answer is 'hell no'!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Off topic galore
- Thread starter Mengy
- Start date
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Exactly, and up until recently Elon was aware of that most of the time. The change in recent years is obvious to most.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
I'll concede that on occasion Elon will go off on a tangent that he shouldn't have. But, I temper my judgement on Elon against the fact that he is very, very busy and that what he tweets may not have been based upon a thorough background check, rather, it was a spur of the moment brief stream of consciousness that very likely occured while sitting on the pot contemplating the hundred important decisions he'll be making the next hour.
This innocent behavior of his is what makes him more human in my view. Who doesn't do those sorts of gaffs every now and then?
Should we use these brief lapses as an opportunity to impugn the person, or, should we be ready to forgive while weighing any perceived slight against the towering stack of positives represented by the greater body of work they have achieved?
I take issue with people who somehow expect more than human behavior from people like Elon. (despite the fact that he routinely demonstrates greater than the norminal capacity) I'd rather see him reveal himself as human than become another one of those people who only make carefully crafted statements designed to sway a particular demographic in order to bolster themselves toward personal power or gain.
Sincerity comes with warts. Elon is likely to show them now and then. This is what makes him a better person than those who are careful not to reveal who they really are, doesn't it?
What if this personal bias toward making the occasional mistake is exactly what shaped him into creating the successes he has achieved. Would anyone want to change that?
I don't think so.
As far as I can tell those who make the most mistakes are also the most successful. They learn from them and keep trying, rather than be discouraged.
Last edited:
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Very busy people don't spend as much time posting on Twitter as Elon does, and he spends that much time on the "pot" he should see a doctor. I'm sure he considers that as part of his "work" but retweeting catturd doesn't really count. His "gaffs" are much more than occasional, it's almost daily at this point.
2daMoon
Mostly Harmless
So, you are implying that Elon sits on the
"almost daily at this point."You also suggest that he should see a doctor about this high frequency of, er, visits to the
?From where I sit (pun intended) anyone whose frequency of visits to the
is markedly fewer than "almost once a day" may want to consider medical intervention. 
You always find the most unique ways for trying to get your point across... Keep trying.
Some say, "practice makes perfect"(however, keep in mind that repetition alone may only lend support to Einstein's definition of insanity)
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
You always find the most unique ways of trying to miss the point... I know you'll keep trying.You always find the most unique ways for trying to get your point across... Keep trying.
Wait... this space program?As a liquid, yes, full stop - a clearly disqualifying expense!!! But the article goes on to discuss compression of the gaseous form, which could be useful. Still lossy due to energy required? Quite. Still leaky due to H2 being the tiniest possible molecule? Yes. But in theory those are engineering challenges that could be solved in certain places and for certain cases.
BTW, no, I am not putting any money into hydrogen as a fuel at any point in the near future. Just wanted to point out the rest of the article that focuses on gaseous H2.
This could ring a bell for our rocket fuel aficionado, @Gigapress - does that article showing "gaseous H2 almost for free" help any of your cost assumptions about renewable rocket fuel? You know, for the SpaceX Model S?
(Edit: not to throw shade at what you're exploring... it just kinda reminded me of this.)
Last edited:
What happens if we put hydrogen in a Gigapress?
Off topic
While google is a money printer, it is only for now. I personally am kind of fed up with google search, their bread and butter. When I switched from alta vista or whatever I was using to google 20 years ago, you could find exact matches for what you where looking for. Pick a sentence from an academic paper , bam , first hit. Last night I tried finding out the average length of time it takes for a medication to work, and could not. The first 60 or so hits were from companies and bloggers that obviously pay to be at top, giving me facts about things, but not exactly what i was looking for.
Maybe I am crazy, but google is ripe for disruption. Yes they have multiple avenues of revenue, but easily see a mass exodus of users then advertisers if they continue down the road they are on.
Last edited:
petit_bateau
Active Member
I'm having the exact same problem.it is so awful to watch tech going backwards because of money. So where to migrate to ?
This! Yes!
I have been thinking the same for a couple of years now. Google Search has become USELESS. There is a reason why they dropped their 'Don't be evil' motto.
And either I am truly old, or tech cycles are simply faster than ever. Google obliterated search competition with the best product by far. It seems to me like it just happened. Yet now it is bloated and stupid and very ripe for disruption. It is insulting how bad it has become. Watching it happen really makes me wonder how fast the same could happen to Tesla in the future.
BrownOuttaSpec
Active Member
Gigapress
Trying to be less wrong
The problem with the waste heat from nuclear, hydro and other thermal power plants is that the heat is concentrated in ecologically critical areas including rivers, river deltas and estuaries.Before we throw a shade on hydroelectric power generation, let's do a bit of fact checking first.
Earth's energy balance is determined by radiation received from the sun (over a wide spectrum of frequencies) and dissipation through radiation, with the infrared component being the one of concern. Any differences between incoming and outgoing energy is absorbed by all mass on the planet (or provided by Earth's mass in case of a negative balance). The high specific heat capacity of water lets the oceans act as a giant buffer - but the same is true for any surface water. Without the oceans, the same amount of heat added to the planet would cause a greater rise in temperatures.
Earth's atmosphere inhibits the outflow of energy, which is a good thing in general. Without any greenhouse gases, Earth would be a rather chilly place to be. The rapid rise in greenhouse gas levels over the last two centuries has tilted the scale too much and that's why many of us feel the urgency to drastically reduce the output of greenhouse gases and ultimately even actively reduce the level of CO2 in the atmosphere.
TLDR;
- Every kWh of electricity produced without releasing more CO2 helps fighting climate change
- It makes no difference to the total energy balance if the sun heats a lake by 1° or the same amount of air by 4°.
I don't consider nuclear to be a viable alternative to solar, wind and water but the amount of waste heat is not a valid argument. 240W/m^2 or solar energy reach Earth's surface. A nuclear power plant of 2.4 GW electrical output generates 4.8 GW of waste heat, which is about as much as 20 km^2 of Earth's surface receives as input. A square of about 4.5 km in length / width.
The main issue with nuclear is the generated waste that radiates for several thousands of years.
Gigapress
Trying to be less wrong
Not a lot but it does warm the water up. The bigger problem with hydro is how it affects river flow and sediment buildup
Gigapress
Trying to be less wrong
It causes other strange thermal issues with the water too. Here’s one study I found on the topic.
Thanks for that link. Just as I had suspected, the bottom of the Reservoir is shielded from the temperature variations of the air. So in the downstream flow, water tends to be colder in summer and a bit warmer in the winter compared to a naturally flowing river. This affects the species in the river and other ecological impacts more than on the overall climate change.
A friend of mine once landed a plane upside down (on it's roof) at the San Carlos airport. His kids are now hot-shot air force pilots so maybe his feat was talent?
Similar threads
