gibolt

The argument was specifically a lack of evidence for a sweeping ban vs a targeted one. While the law can not be used as precedent, the evidence from nearly a century of business in the state with the highest GDP is a good starting point.

California banned non-competes years ago. There should be plenty of evidence available to use as a counter argument to this one judge's opinion.

Edit: In 1941, so it's been a while

Difficult doesn't mean impossible. Trillions and trillions of chances for mutations to happen may lead to resistance over some period of time.

Hopefully not, but evolution is a powerful beast.

That is generally how utilities work. More demand == more money, which leads to more power plants / wind / solar to power it.

Renewables are the cheapest to add by far, so should be the majority of new generation capacity.

Matlab is fairly easy to work with (initially) and is great when learning a new concept, instead of learning that plus arbitrary syntax of the tool.

It isn't particularly fast though, and the simplicity quickly becomes an obstacle when solving a real problem.

Agreed. Being able to see more than 1.5 tasks on a page would be an improvement.

It would also be nice to have some indicator (at the top) that all tasks for the day have been completed.

It is standard for web elements. Very easy to set border radius

It isn't that hard to imagine strips of LEDs on tons of their structures. Completely agree that they'd likely have used them if they could

Batteries can mimic inertia better than physical spinning objects.

An operator in Australia has seen massive success and profits over the past few years using batteries to out-compete other grid stabilization. IIRC, they have already made enough to pay off the upfront costs. Even better, Australian government was super against the change, but now most places are positive on them because of the obvious success.

So, most other new cars are as well?

OpenPilot works well in limited scenarios, but even the founder George Hotz openly admits Tesla is significantly ahead and has the right approach.

Basic Autopilot that is free on every model is advanced cruise control + lane keeping.

FSDS (Full Self Driving, Supervised [for now]) can handle the vast majority of driving scenarios, from A -> B. I currently intervene once per 10 drives, usually due to a routing issue (never safety critical). It is rapidly improving, and will drop the human requirement once it surpasses most drivers.

"Ghost" Windows is a thing of the past, and most modern installations in China are legit. Bing is also an approved search engine, even if not used by a majority of people. I'm sure their revenue is significantly higher than a decade ago.

As much as I agree, teachers aren't really paid well, don't regularly get any training to improve their teaching, and don't have time at the end of the day to make efforts to improve the next day.

Even the best teachers won't be engaging to some of their students.

This assumes things are static. There are millions of programmers now, but certainly weren't 100 years ago.

The tools to investigate this will get cheaper and easier, driving more people into the field hoping for the next big win, a big payout, or just to make an impact.

Anyone can make a small circuit design have have a fab print it for you. The same could happen here, all you need to do is provide the sequence

There are probably a decent number that also continue well into a pregnancy, without realizing they are.

It is not fully reusable. But partial reentry is reentry, something no other rocket had been able to do.

Hopefully the takeaway is something straightforward, like thicker shielding in one area and not a big redesign of the flaps

Here is a reminder that the only other rocket that can survive re-entry is Falcon 9.

Now we have the 2nd!

A bad CEO can look great on paper and in the stock price. The product however will likely not keep pace, charging more for a product providing less value.

Long term value, employee satisfaction, and customer satisfaction are all intertwined. New management is more likely than not to harm at least one of those 3 .

Most people who have worked close to him generally note that he has intimate knowledge up and down the entire product side (at minimum) of the company. This can lead to micro-management, but leads to far better results than most companies could ever hope to achieve.

Communication and agreement are what add cost and misdirection to development. When a tiny set of people with one clear goal pull the strings, it is much more efficient to reach the north star product.

The problem is that you have little control into when one of those people infiltrate the board. Most HOAs start with no issue. It is only after someone new joins that the rule enforcement becomes insane or the big pot of money vanishes.

This only strengthens my point. Given all that spending, they still are seemingly nowhere close to a Starship competitor.

The cost to develop in the first place may be too high, except for maybe nation states.

Falcon 9 funded Starship. Now there is little funding for a competitor, ignoring the fact that Starship will sink that even closer to 0 with such low launch costs.

The brains are the issue, not the power source. If you operators can't see what is happening/control it, or the onboard autonomous mode glitches, you're gonna have a bad day.

Imagine the increase in demand without the efficiency improvements. Improving everything that pulls power significantly decreases the growth curve, meaning more time to increase available capacity.

NASA does the most ambitious thing modern, bureaucratic NASA can do with the funding, considering that each previously approved project is 4x over budget and 5-10 years late, eating into the feasibility of new projects.

Old NASA could do 5-10x as much, with the same amount of inflation-adjusted money and people. The motivation was to fail+learn and achieve a shared goal. SpaceX is the closest analog today, with a long term mission and the drive to make it happen.

Most of a city is ugly. It doesn't mean we ban alleys, dumpsters, worn paint, trashy vehicles/houses, and most commercial buildings.

We accept all of these and yet a beautiful, slow rotating turbine in some farmer's remote land or the middle of the ocean is unacceptable...

Solar panels are highly recyclable after their extremely long life. Certainly no worse than oil, even if left alone (which won't happen, sincethey contain valuable materials).

Turbine blades are mostly fiberglass, which is about as neutral of a material as you can get. They are buried in a landfill (worstcase) after producing tremendous amounts of energy. New designs are lasting longer and being made recyclable, since so many people have this sticking point (even though no fuel oil is recyclable)

The easy argument for this is that switching everything to electric and then powering it with oil, would require significantly less oil (maybe 50-60%) that the status quo.

We should switch, even if we don't convert to renewables. (Which we absolutely should)

Transmission lines absolutely do make noise. Plenty of smaller scale power line elements can also hum.

For anyone complaining about offshore wind (which is way the hell off in the distance) it may be worth considering that the alternative is those houses and beaches on the shore cease to exist in the future if we don't build the turbines.