deepnotderp

Weather isn’t just temperature.

Bogotá has perfect temperature but is cloudier than Seattle.

The flip side of that is that many of the newer formulations are slight tweaks, but doctors will generally prescribe the drug that the latest pharma sales rep to visit was selling (yes really).

They also tend to not want to change the way they’ve always done things and prescribe a cheaper formulation.

Lens glare tracked by radar.

That's a new one.

There are also issues like hydrogen embrittlement, tiny cracks, etc.

These are all solvable, but it's just expensive and hard.

I believe this is technically a few orders of magnitude colder than space, but I like your thinking.

As we understand this technique and learn to control it better we might be able to use it at higher temperatures- Space levels.

Exciting times!

If a system can reliably spoof the entire sensor arsenal of a carrier fleet remotely and without being detected then the U.S. has bigger problems than aliens.

Well, the fuel is only like 20% of the cost of nuclear power, with the majority being capex, so there’s really little reason to build even more expensive reactors with more regulatory issues to save on opex which isn’t even significant.

1. Breeder reactors can be used to massively increase effective fuel efficiency.

2. Uranium can be extracted from seawater (virtually limitless) at an estimated cost of 2 cents/kWh

3. Renewables have even more stringent metals and rare earths requirements

O-ring theory

Local road builders perhaps

Utility scale solar has a MASSIVE cost advantage.

Also, the vast majority of houses can’t sustain their energy use off of rooftop solar alone.

They can and have. ASML is blocked from selling EUV machines to China.

If you're interested in an investment standpoint check out Asianometry on youtube

1. I used to eat less calories and exercise less and was fat. Also for elite athletes TEE experiments have been fine.

2. Studies in nutrition science are a dime a dozen. Like in psychology, you should apply common sense to interpret the results. In this case, the implication is that the Hunter gatherer lifestyle is a chronically tired lifestyle for human bodies.

True, but the effect is not as big as you would think, see eg: https://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/metabolismcon...

The conclusion is almost certainly wrong:

1. From a simple sniff test, if this were true, then athletes wouldn't need a lot of calories. This obviously isn't true, eg Phelps eats 8-11K calories a day. I personally eat around 3.5K calories a day. If exercise didn't impact caloric burn I assure you I'd be a lot fatter...

2. The only plausible mechanisms for why exercise wouldn't result in more overall caloric burn is that less energy is expended in non exercising states, eg the body is trying to conserve energy and either reduces metabolism or reduces fidgeting, walking, etc. This often happens to people trying extreme calorie loss diets.

The implication of this is that somehow the sedentary lifestyle of your average couch potato is the "normal" lifestyle for a body, and the lifestyle of a hunter gatherer is "overactive", and their bodies are chronically tired and trying to reduce their metabolisms. That... seems quite unlikely.

3. Finally, this blog post dives into some methodological issues: https://darrendahly.github.io/post/2012-08-31-hunter-gathere...

EDIT: Increased metabolism due to muscle mass is not as big an effect as you’d think: https://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/metabolismcon...

Tokyo had a massive real estate bubble driven by speculation. It’s also seen weak population growth in the recent past, so it’s unclear whether it can be generalized.

1. Those who own houses as an investment have an incentive to block new housing construction. So ending RE as an investment helps accelerate laxer zoning laws.

2. There’s a limit to how much housing can be built in an area, but no limit to the leveraged purchasing power of an investor.

If you look at high density property markets around the world such as several Asian cities and NYC, I think it’s clear that more construction alone can’t stop price increases due to speculation.

Samsung’s N3 is less dense than Intel’s N7

The Remarkable tablet

This article is wrong on key points.

1. Larger ships are more efficient due to physics. There isn’t some conspiracy. [1]

2. Just a few years ago the shipping industry was struggling so much that there were calls to scrap ships. [2] The article implies that there’s some oligopoly with opulent profits, which is wrong.

[1] Large cargo ships actually broke some von karman efficiency records.

[2] https://www.economist.com/business/2016/09/10/profits-overbo...

Isn’t that just because the U.S. has more pre existing conditions (obesity, diabetes, etc)?

Bird migrations use v-formations to reduce induced drag not parasitic drag, eg https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/birds-tha...

Can you elaborate more? That sounds quite interesting!

The integrated circuit was invented in the U.S., and the semiconductor industry was pioneered in the U.S.

Op said that the U.S. pioneers and develops technology, giving a first mover advantage. Yes, eventually other countries catch up and start innovating on their own, but the point that the U.S. is generally the pioneer stands.

Sweden does however, have a very high wealth Gini coefficient.

> “medical and scientific advice”

Curfew, masks while standing up and not when sitting down, cloth masks which data shows do nothing (from Bangladeshi RCT), etc.

Also, imho AI fundamentally changes how machines of war are made. Currently, a machine must be made expensive and sophisticated since a human is inside it, and if it's already expensive, may as well add some more expense to make it a bit better, and a bit more, etc.

By contrast, with AI, the question becomes a matter of performance per dollar. If I can swarm an enemy with hundreds of cheap fighter jets, then it's okay for me to lose half of them.

This is existential to the US imho, since the US generally always has the best equipment period, but at a very high cost.

Here is an interesting practical way to turn Sparse linear regression solvers into Sparse PCA that’s not quite like reduction: https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.10106

In 1996 America’s top 6 companies included: IBM, Ford, GM and Exxon.

But sure, “not technology”. No “tech” in silly things like automobiles, energy and computer hardware.