panick21_

I don't really understand why this is famous. Or other his houses. Traditional British Country houses look better. As do other classic archtectures for country side houses.

or some RAM.

Look at Mr. Billionaire right here.

SpaceX is not just any old company. Its a trillion $ company at the heart of one of the most contentious topic in the modern world, AI. And its not just relevant for Elon, its also about the general outlook for the economy and AI. Most people retirements are in index funds that Musk tried to manipulate, so the stock value coming down before any S&P inclusion is important for many on a personal level.

Also, the reality is, Elon made himself a massive public figure deliberately, he very publicly embraced one side of the culture war and make his opinion on every public constantly. He literally one of the most important people because he literally bought one of the largest media platforms and made sure it fully embraced right wing points of view.

You are complaining why Elon is in public debate and people are so interested. That's because politics is a public argument between different parties, and Elon has used all his influence to support one side of that. And that is the result.

And not just in the US, Elon tried to insert himself into politics of other nations, such as Britain or Germany as well. Making most of the western world angry.

Why are you surprised that he gets treated like a politician when he acting like a politician?

You can't be the CEO of total independent technocratic companies and at the same time be a public ultra-right wing facist supporter who endlessly engages in a public culture war. Specially if those companies are directly linked to him view voting shares that give him ultimate power.

I was a fan of early Elon. He had many problems but he was overall good.

Then he turned full ultra right wing nationalist who engaged in science denial. Supported a president that is unquestionably racists and unquestionably fascists. And he made this clear by doing some Nazi salutes on top of that.

Then he used that influence to sell a completely false idiotic story that cuts to discretionary spending could 'fix' the budget deficit, like a complete idiot who had never watched 2 youtube videos about the US budget. Then used to slash and burn many beneficial programs while having no impact on the deficit what so ever.

He was supposed to be science and engineering progress driven, but then allied himself with ultra-right wing anti-scientific fascists who try to dismantle the whole education system in favor of at best best creationism or more likely nothing at all.

Not sure why its hard to understand. The only people who don't understand are ultra-right wing facists who don't understand why other people don't want to support ultra-right wing facists.

Does that explanation help?

Still far to high. I love SpaceX as in 'space', they were a great company, doing things nobody else could. Now its a dumb AI company that hands over cash to micron, nvidia and friends who literally print money, while financing that with delusional promises.

Many people can soon sell their SpaceX stock, I don't think the S&P will safe them later.

At the same time, we shouldn't let that goal cause massive numbers of unnecessary deaths because we're avoiding the thing that can save lives along the way.

The argument here is that political capital and time should be invest to change people mind about self driving cars.

My argument is that political capital and time should be invested in changing people mind about the fundamental approach to land use and transportation.

is that true/source?

There is a whole field of study on every aspect of this. Basically the medical community, the city planning community, the ecological community and the transport planners (outside of the US) all generally reach the same conclusions.

Bike lands, road diets, and bus lanes, bus priority are very cheap. Basically free. They are mostly political reallocation's of space. The politics are the hardest part, not the cost.

Rezoning is essentially free, or actually produces huge amounts of value. Its very, very well document what the problem with US land use patterns and transportation systems are.

See Strong Towns or Urban3 analysis for example.

Many of the choice that cause a lot of death, like stroads, are also economically idiotic.

The cost of a single subway line can cost multiple billions of dollars per mile, a high-speed rail line in a single state can cost hundreds of billions of dollars, etc. - and there are a lot of miles in the US, a lot of states, etc.

The US operates on such a low level, there is so much you can do before even getting to those things. Like we are talking minimal competence of running bus lanes in a modern way, or having basic signaling priority.

The cost large infrastructure is a bigger topic, but that's not mostly what I am talking about. Those things are such a insignificant part of US transportation currently it barley worth talking about.

And the other big difference is about who pays for it - even if billions of dollars are being invested in solving self-driving and electric cars, it's a lot of private money doing that, whereas building public transportation is mostly taxpayer funds.

You are ignoring the larger structure, the road network and the electricity network are deeply political and public. And even beyond that, electric cars have seen political support. But of course the whole reason why so much public investment flows into these things is because the infrastructure is design in a way where there is a gigantic market for cars that you can sell into. The market is downstream of higher level choice in terms of infrastructure and land use. The under taxing and over support of parking alone accounts for many, many billions in subsidies.

But on some level, in the end it comes down to what your society ends up spending totally on transportation and how efficient that is. The investors investing in these things need to make their money back. And the US is generally not very efficient, its just rich enough to care less. If you look at total 'consumption' that looks ok, but then you realize its just a expensive pickup truck that you end up sitting in traffic jams doesn't really improve your live that much.

If you look at how effectively poor people generally get around, the results are not that great. Car dependency cause tons of problems and cost on society and is worst for the poorest.

So I guess I just care less about who provides capital compared to what the outcomes are. The idea that public capital investment is bad and private investment is a universal good that can never be questioned is just not how I think about it.

in order to wait for public transportation to be solved.

My argument is much wider then just 'public transport'. Its about how all land use and transportation infrastructure is organized.

And per the OP article, it's more like 94% reduction already with the existing self-driving technology, and it keeps getting better.

Some of that can be questioned but its not my focus. Even if it was 100% reduction, its to narrow of an argument.

Can you show me that research?

Also, nothing new in C is just not happening, there is massive amounts of things that will not switch for decades.

Why not just switch to a slightly different compiler and core, and then you make all your old code safe without verifying it. And your new code in whatever language is also safe.

Also it helps with debugging. Also it helps you enforce security constraints on higher level.

CHERI also gives you features you can build more on-top off.

The silicon area and the performance hit are pretty minor, if it 'just' works for most code and most open source code just works, many people will want to use it.

Yes most bugs are new code, but plenty of bugs aren't and with CHERI I can be much more confident in running all that stuff. Specially older code that isn't as well used and tested as say Linux kernel.

I'm not saying end consumer, I mean companies who have to insure safety and reliability. That is also behind adoption of things like Rust and many other trends.

CHERI gives you that and more. But its still very new and radical, and a lot of work needs to happen all over the place to make it practical.

Once you have micro-controllers and software it makes sense in lots of niches, and then it can expand.

For example, Google OpenTitan project. There is no reason not to use Cheri if the open source core supports it.

Yes you want to raise the floor, but the US is doing a famously bad job at that.

I generally agree that if it was true that the inequality would lead to consistent floor raising it would be fine, but it doesn't.

We should stop Tolerating Human Carnage. But the solution is not self driving cars.

The actual way to solve the 'Carnage' is to adopt well proven well studied infrastructure changes. After 40+ years of idiotic car brain policies, some nations have started to push back and actually started to treat road safety more like aviation safety. Constant review and feedback into the profession and infrastructure updates. Vision Zero is approachable even without self driving cars. But even that is looking at the problem in the wrong way.

True improvement comes from modal shift to public transport, along with increasing use in walking and biking. Those mods are saver and healthier by any possible measure, no matter how amazing these self driving machines will be in the future.

This is not only good for less people dying in traffic, its also good for many, many, many other reasons. General population fitness, general health and so on. The list of effects of good urbanism and anti car policy is basically endless.

Cars are the problem, and self driving cars are a solution to part of that problem, and electric cars are a solution to part of that problem. But cars are still overall the actual problem biggest problem. Instead of investing countless billions in these two sub problems, for far, far less money you could do a huge amount to change the actual structure of how transportation works.

Not Just Bikes has a good video on the problem with self driving cars, even if the technology worked as advertised. Its not how we want the future to look like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=040ejWnFkj0

Putting each human into an individual multi-ton pod is stupid, unnecessary and dangerous even if you plaster unlimited amounts of technology on each pod.

We know how to create massively better societies in every way, its not dispute in people who research these things. Self driving cars can be a tiny part of that, but mostly in rural and suburban regions. In cities they are not needed.

This hyper focus on human car crashes is to narrow and misses a much bigger discussion, but this is a discussion the car industry and the individualistically driven AI people don't want to have.

The manufactures will do what costumers demand and if they demand safty then cheri will make a lot of sense to many costumers.

And you cant rewritte 50 years of C in Rust. And even in Rust you can still run into various issues.

Yes but many trips don't have real-time constrains or only with local transit. If I go to city X and I need to go somewhere usually in X there are trains every 30min or trams to get me to my hotel.

But granted if you have a connection with two ICE depending on each other, this gets more problematic. Believe me I had that multiple times, and I was late but usually the next train is also late so it works out.

You can't plan super time constrained, but mostly for me it has been fine if you go in with that expectation.

Again, not defending this overall, in Switzerland I plan my journey I expect it to be on point, but I just dropped that expectation in Germany. And that fine for many situations, you just have to know that's what it is.

Actually no. German trains are often late, true, but outside of that its actually very nice. There are a lots of lines and lots of collections. The only time its a bad idea is if you have a real time constraints.

Freeways are not 3 dimensional and they don't have an automatic cleanup that cleans up things within a pretty short time. Also area we are talking about is fucking gigantic. Also accidents are going to be very rare as sats deorbit themselves end of live and even if they break and can't move anymore, other sats that can still move can evade them.

You can also depend on a lot of libraries that have potentially high quality rather then writing a lot yourself. The defense against compromised dependency can't be 'Ill write everything myself and do it with the same quality as the ecosystem'.

The cost of fuel is not the problem. We have unlimited uranium and thorium, and there is no reason a fusion should be cheaper. Sure its more dense then fission but fission is absurdly dense already and the economics don't improve that much.

The idea that it makes sense to use moon based He3 compared to using thorium that is already mined in waste quantities is absurd. Thorium is free energy already and the machine that turns it into energy is simpler the any fusion reactor we can come up with.

But here is the thing, optical fiber factories in space are unproven and launch cost is only one of the difficulties with it. You need to launch it, and recover it, and then feed it into post processing all for the lower cost then doing it on earth. And even if you capture that market, how big is it?

For pharma, its not universally true. There are few things that can be done better in space, but by far not everything. Research in space makes more sense then actual production. Again even the best case is hard to see how its going to justify the valuation.

And I bet there are hundreds of other examples.

Hundreds of other even more half baked examples. You need to account for launch cost, space constraints, space environment, landing and recovery. We have been doing this for 40 years and the medicine and fiber are things that have been talked about for 30 years at least.

You clearly don't know the market. China is no competition just on geopolitical terms. And I am very aware of the competition and have followed each competitor basically since its founding. It will take many years before competitors will be fully read and even then their launch rates will be tiny in comparison. And by then SpaceX will have moved on.

But of course this is all dwarfed by AI stuff financially so its basically irrelevant. SpaceX could stop all launch sales tomorrow with zero impact on its financials.

They should look at Prantle Wing (also applies to propellers) to get more efficiency out of the design.

He really understands how to manipulate the situation and has founds various and fun ways to deny genocide. He is a human piece of fucking shit, who denied genocide more then once. Anybody that still hold him up as some kind of 'truth teller' has not done the proper research or is also a genocide denier.

Its deeply offensive to call 'Count Binface' a joke, he a more serious and more electable candidate and a better candidate for PM then Farage. Please keep your right wing extremest views to yourself, Farage is the joke candidate.

US culture also starts earlier but the reality is a majority of what makes up US culture only showed up in the region much later. As well as expansion into Spanish and other areas that were absorbed.

I actually disagree with you. If you look at the centuries before 1870 there clearly was a recognition of a common culture, this isn't really controversial.

People often laugh about the Holy Roman Empire (mostly people who have not studied it) but it did actually serve as a distinct legal and cultural tradition for much the area that is now Germany (and more).

The language are different but not that different, with some effort you could understand each other. Many Germans from different parts fought together in mercenary bands or for Holy Roman Empire armies.

During the Revolution in the 1850 they tried to establish a unified Germany, so clearly the idea had wide recognition by then. You don't have movement like that spring up out of nowhere. After the Napoleonic war, German Confederation was a very recognized and understood fact.

Sure if was not fully 'unified' but neither is French or Spanish culture.

- Peter H. Wilson, The Holy Roman Empire: A Thousand Years of Europe’s History

- Helmut Walser Smith, Germany: A Nation in Its Time

Totally agree. Living in Berlin as Swiss person is crazy. You have shops open for so long. Late trains. Crazy partys and so on. Complete chaos with garbage and things like that.

I don't mind closed on Sunday but I wish we had a bit more stores open until a bit later. My parents were in health care so for me people working late or nights was always normal.

Germany is a much newer country.

Solar doesn't need a lot maintenance and certainty not every 2 weeks in summer.

Until you realize that polan is super stick and is really had to remove. I had a table outside and just 'blow away' dust didn't work at all. You need to actually clean with friction, water and cleaner.

Since the 90s our energy policy has been idiotic. Basically just politicians saying 'lets do nothing we can always buy cheap power form Germany or France'. All we had to do is build a single new nuclear power plant and we would have been fine.

But no, instead we have this grifting rail solar nonsense.

I suggest you adjust your search results based on population. If I search for 'Luzern' it suggests 'Eschenbach'.

Claiming that its 'especially Starlink' is just not true. I heard lots of discussion about Musk but very little about Starlink. Starlink mostly gets discussed in terms of space policy and people who care about that.

That said people are somewhat right that in most of Western and Central Europe there isn't a huge need for Starlink, it will be quite niche. But I have not heard any 'vitrol' against Starlink.