aoeu345

It does not produce immediate benefits, but perhaps a problem that is 100 years in the making might take a global solution on a 100 year time scale.

Hi, I don't see anything in your list about carbon sequestration. Can you point me to any companies investing in advanced robotics to assist in silicate mineral crushing & spreading, as it's the only sensible, achievable sequestration technique? Thanks.

For readers interested in carbon sequestration, please check out the following paper: "Enhanced chemical weathering as a geoengineering strategy to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxid e, supply nutrients, and mitigate ocean acidification"[1]

[1]: http://www.greensand.nl/content/user/1/files/rog20004.pdf

If something like this existed, with the source code on Github with a detailed contributing.md document, I would spend time on it. We have great tools available to do this and it is a worthy cause.

If you're going to talk up preservation of the atmosphere while downplaying the enormous technological progress and bold, financially uncertain moves that SpaceX is making, you need to give your head a shake. The atmosphere has already been killed. And the methane that's being unlocked because of it's desecration will kill you, and it will kill me. We killed ourselves with the same type of ignorance towards new, uncertain technology that you have displayed in this comment chain. We took existing, working, and bad technology (ICE vehicles) and paraded it around to the world, and it worked, because we could show people how to use them to make money. We had an MVP with gasoline powered vehicles. People ate it up. Yet electric cars, the correct technology choice, get no mindshare with the serfs because they're heavier, slower, and can't exactly carry a dump truck full of aggregate rock up inclines for 24 hours a day.

You need to stop with the sour grapes, the tall poppy syndrome, and you need to start supporting the people who are actually doing shit. And you need to do it before the window of opportunity to use our technology to save ourselves closes. Keep in mind that me writing this comment to you is an enormous waste of my time, and I really thought it through, so please absorb the meaning in my words and stop having these pissing matches on the internet over things you completely misunderstand.

I see your point. Have you thought about how such a militia would communicate, if they were working together? They would have to come up with new communication channels, seeing as how the government has it's hands in all telecommunications today. I think that would prove a great barrier, and perhaps it's insurmountable.

It's the seemingly fruitless effort that builds up our familiarity with a problem via intense focus on each small detail. With the clear, detailed problem built up, Poincare could look at it from a distance and see the solution.

It would be an overstatement to say that it's way beyond our technological ability to get to Mars. That's just a long trip in a rocket away. Making it habitable is also within our ability - Live in the lava tubes, or radiation-protected inflatable shelters. To live on another planet is to take a collection of solved problems and engineer the solutions into existence.

To be fair, in this case it is apples to apples. The average car consumer does not weigh in the electric component with so much weight to overlook poor interior quality. Tesla's cars must be on the same level if they are to win the public's heart.

We need more charging stations

That is a solved problem

  Electricity is expensive

If you had a 100km*100km grid of easily maintained solar panels already manufactured and in operation, electricity is generated _without expense or by-products_

  Batteries and electric power have bad by products:

  1. heat generation

  2. by-products of manufacturing

  3. electricity generation by-products

Complete nonsense. We have 8 billion people driving cars that are decimating our air quality and have already drove the carbon cycle so many standard deviations from the mean levels in pre-industrial society that I am doomed to live on a scorched, dead earth. The negative effects of battery creation and usage are infinitesimal in comparison.

I am 22 years old. Because of society's slow uptake of carbon-neutral power generation and consumption, I will live through every consequence of past generation's short-sighted power decisions. The clathrate gun will happen before I am middle-aged. Your comment, complaining about things that are solved problems, is quite detached from the reality of Earth.

"What if it's late," "What if someone dies", "It has to go perfectly or else." Mate there's no reason to slow down or criticize science and engineering for being late, having a death, or riding the razor's edge. Just get shit done. That's all that matters, this kind of internet fear-mongering is absolutely detrimental, even if there are huge risks involved in the process. We're not going to mess up the planet, but nay-sayers will absolutely slow us down.

First off, speed matters to the young and environmentally conscious EV market. Range has maxed at 800km on a single charge, there is no

> debate

to be had.

GM and any other electric carmaker will be buying their batteries, powertrains, or both from Tesla after they flop with their own native lineups.

Incumbent automakers are cash cows, not startups. Tesla will spend all of it's money on the Gigafactory. GM will destroy new product lines that threaten it's current profits.

Remember, incumbent auto makers are not fast moving or innovative at all. They are all cash cows. Although they can predict that a move to EVs will keep them alive long-term, such a move will always be done with a small fraction of GM's resources and labour in the coming decades, and Tesla with Elon's burning desire to destroy them are probably going to win.

Remember, GM can't sell these two products on the same lot: One which is a cash cow, and one which only exists to combat some distant threat of GM becoming obsolete.

Also you're forgetting that Tesla cars are just better in every sense. Better brand, faster, longer range, novelty...

He is saying that we the people must hold them to those standards. We should not sit idly and say "We hold you to these standards" while not actively ensuring that the standards are being followed.

If you have a good enough product it shouldn't really matter, right? Just ban the trolls, answer questions where you can, but mainly work on the product. No one should be sifting through questions - They should be taking the most commonly asked ones, answering them, and swiftly banning those who seem unhelpful and rude. There's no way that type of moderation would kill your community unless your product just sucked enough that it didn't grow on it's own.

This is good advice. Don't be afraid to wield the ban hammer.

For what it's worth, I used to live with a guy who used the Magic Lantern firmware add-on for certain Canon cameras, which was very powerful free software that had a community forum. He would tell me about how he'd shit talk the devs for not including some feature or when something wasn't working. It's pretty terrible.

Your argument is bad for two reasons. One, being 'up to the task' is subjective. Two, nobody but Peter Thiel knows why he got the citizenship. My argument is good because I argue 'If you invest in tech, you help the economy, and that is good' which has no assumptions or opinions in it.

While Tesla finances and maintains road tunnels for Tesla owners to drive in.

I see where you're coming from. But I won't weigh someone's politics when determining if they are a good American or not. Politics are too complex to interpret good and bad, but giving money to tech ventures is decidedly good for our economy.

I think you're crazy. We are in dire need of more people willing to give money to tech ventures that will help North America's GDP growth. Let's not try and interpret the political stuff - Losing a venture capitalist like Thiel is a direct hit to our ability to innovate. Hell, the guy is giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to ambitious, smart High School students. That's not something to overlook.

Please fix your link at the top to http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/AC/Foxconn-considers-7bn-US-...

Your link goes to page 2, this link goes to page 1.

But the human brain is mostly dedicated to socializing and interpreting social signals. If you don't even stretch out those parts of your brain, you're not even satisfying intrinsic human needs.

It's easy to say that you're happier alone. It's much more difficult to admit to yourself that you have social anxiety that keeps you from making relationships. A human that does the first will decay over time. A human that does the second can be anything he/she wants to be.

There is enormous supporting evidence that quantity and quality of relationships are directly correlated to happiness

  Most of these guys are not really genuises

You have one anecdote to support your sour grapes claim that America's current best innovators are all frauds. Support the men and women who are building our future, your children depend on them.

If you have four large files open in Vim tabs, it can be quite slow.

If you print out a large text file or script output with cat or less, it can be slow as well. This is on a 1.8ghz i5 machine running Linux.

I can already notice the speed of Alacritty. We'll see how it performs in the next few months for me.

Just installed on Linux Mint. The installation was quick and painless from the instructions, and it is noticeably faster than my previous MATE terminal. We'll see if I notice a lack of scrollback.

Thanks!

I really can't make sense of this post. Perhaps you should re-read it and try to type it out in a more fluid manner.

I wouldn't be so sure. I got hit with RSI this August. I became proficient with Dvorak by October. I looked into Colemak and Workman and might have switched to Norman if there were more info to convince me.

>Google's car actually does this, on real roads, today.

It should be obvious that Tesla is going to win this race. Tesla already does fully autonomous driving, they released that video in November. And they build real, production cars. "Real artists ship", as Steve Jobs said.

If you a manufacturing ace, would you join the company with a long list of failed projects and no actual production cars, or would you join the company that is building 500,000 of the most advanced autos right now?

If I was a hardware expert, would I join Google who shies at giving a fraction of it's cash to hard tech, or Tesla who buys german automation companies?

Or plain old software. Tesla has magnitudes more data and can update neural networks to hundreds of thousands of cars at a whim. Soon millions.

This repels me for a few reasons:

- Instead of talking about their car's capabilities on the front page, they include a pathos about drunk driving. I feel embarrassed how Google doesn't have more things to say about the car.

- It looks really unattractive, I could hardly call it cute.

- It's not in production, it's in testing.

These companies are sitting on mountains of cash! And they still fail to do things effectively! Apple and Google are just sitting on their fat cashflows while the world is getting very scary very fast. I'm tired of these "technology" companies doing complete fails of R&D projects, too damn shy to leave their advertising revenues. We need leaders with real courage.