The vast majority of the debris is from China and Russia irresponsibly disposing of waste and testing weapons but I see no mention of them in the article. The only cause is a thinly veiled reference to SpaceX. Controlled satellites in LEO, whether you like it or not, are not orbital debris. It's a classic hit piece.
It’s like fishing. We have laws for that not because one person with a pole and a line can catch a handful of fish. It’s because that eventually evolved into a machine with many lines and nets harvesting too many fish. They’re both “fishing” but once you reach a scale beyond what one person can reasonably do the intent and effect becomes completely different.
In the push for AGI do companies feel a recursive learning future is soon achievable and therefore getting to the first cycle of that is worth the cost of any legal issues that may arise?
Lots of comments about what a shield would need to look like to protect against this. That’s not the way to think about this in the very near future. The space station and nearly everything in space up until now, is designed with very small mass and tolerances because it’s so expensive to get there in the first place.
As the cost of mass to orbit lowers by orders of magnitude in, likely, the next decade, we can begin seeing spacecraft that are far more durable, redundant and agile. They will have ample propellant to move out of the way and they will have life support systems and failure modes designed to withstand and allow for the repair of small impacts.
Exactly this. What if we can now produce 100x video content and anyone can do it? YouTube didn’t kill TV shows just because anyone could make a video or stream live.
Is "engine" appropriate to use here? It seems to just be the combustion chamber, similar to the article last week about the rocket test in India. It's cool research, but I don't know that the engine process matters much when you compare this to what SpaceX is doing with their engines and reducing the complexity of the moving parts, not just the static ones.
Is that still an issue? I know it happened in the past, but I don't believe it's the case anymore. The flip side is a dealer might have better parts availability, but often at a 2-3x mark up. I think it's a growing pain for Tesla than a profit strategy for dealers.
I don't want to come off a loving Tesla too much, they're not perfect, but this is another big area where they are transforming the status quo. So much of the FUD being thrown at them is by this lobby, they still can't sell cars direct to consumer in Texas! Car dealers, especially used cars, in the US are one of the most hated consumer experiences. Pricing is unclear, consumers are talked into buying things they don't want or need, to the point that most women I know won't buy a car without a man joining them. Additionally, they're resistant to EVs because it is eating into their service margin. I saw a brand new Porsche dealer going up recently with only two Level 2 charges. Probably a 10M project, and they have only a token level of concern for planning for future infrastructure. They're out of touch, short sighted, businesses with little alignment to the corporate manufacturing brand.
What about learning more about something you already own and use? It would give you an opportunity to have a more hands on, real world experience and if it does break you can fix it?
This is really neat, but would like to know more about the engine. The image seems to show a very simple design, without turbo pumps that are a mainstay in any other "rocket" engine.
This could get me to switch from Apple. I do not need my computer affixed permanently to a display. Let me have one computer/storage/network device in my pocket and buy screens separately to use depending on context.
Just because these capabilities exist doesn’t mean they exist broadly. They may have a few apps in their network that had a reason for the user to provide microphone access and then they exploit it for this. But it’s likely relatively obscure apps that aren’t well scrutinized. They might be able to target hundreds of users with it, and play up the “modern” approach and then do some lookalike thing to pad the audience into something that appears more effective to the customer.
This. And battery chemistries are advancing rapidly to utilize more readily available minerals. For cars, yes, you need advanced stuff that is small and powerful. But for home and grid use, batteries can afford to be big and heavy.
Have you used it? I find that when you use it as designed and pay attention it is much safer and easier to drive. Especially in road trips I arrive fresher than I would if I were manually driving the entire time. Certainly there are dangers but there are already huge benefits.
Under the current rules, yeah, but the rules and how we think about this need to change too. For example in my state the process for selling energy back to the grid from a residential account is extremely limited and had a capped number of users.
Batteries aren’t resilient enough today but they have grown leaps and bounds over the last few years. New chemistries and ways of controlling them are making all kind of new possibilities.
As much as I don’t like some of the rules in CA the requirement for solar on new builds is brilliant. The hardware has become so cheap and rolling the labor and design into the initial construction means a short pay back period.