I refer to it as the Musk approach. Set a goal to accomplish something amazing in a very short time frame, expecting to miss out on the time frame, and being ok with accomplishing only 80% of the total goal. It’s ambitious, and it can motivate your workforce when used right.

Yes, without regulation there would be deathtraps (well more deathtraps. It’s hard to think of a vehicle more dangerous than a sportbike). What isn’t true is that without regulations we would not have safe cars. We would, and the safest cars would be about as safe as they are now (possibly a little more, since…

On the one hand, I don’t think Volvos goal of zero deaths in their vehicle is a realistic one. On the other hand, they are giving it a valiant effort, and that’s a good thing.

I assume you mean that without regulations, safe vehicles would not exist, which is total crap.

Normally I’d agree with you, but in this case the agenda appears to be “let’s not allow people to cheat on emission tests” which seems rather reasonable.

I think they made their over all point (Diesel gate has a real life cost) but I find the math suspect. Lets start with

Why is meritocracy a dirty word?

Young people are (mostly) idiots. When we are the idiots, we’re immune to noticing our idiocy, and feel that we are invincible. When we become parents, we notice the idiocy of our children. Suddenly having a doodad that can somewhat protect them from the consequences of their idiocy starts looking like a really good…

I’m guessing you don’t have children.

A while back I bought my ex a 90's volvo. Fine car, but every so often (rather often) she could not get it out of park. Start the engine, but the transmission would be stuck. No one could move the shifter. Then I would get in, turn off the ignition, start it again, and the transmission would work just fine.

It rather depends on what you mean by “such a system”. A fully autonomous, drive you anywhere without human interaction system would seem to be very beneficial.

How about “it’s awful, make it better”

I’m not trying to make this anti solar, just questioning the applications. Your panels have well under half the weight of theirs per kw, and are likely to stay in the same spot for their 25+ year life span. Their mounting is likely optimized for power delivery. They largely do not need to be defended from enemy…

You may be right, but think about how little power we are talking about here. It would take 2 of these cells to run a decent desktop. If you can’t power the entire base with these units, you’ll have to bring in a real generator. Chances are, that will have enough spare capacity to make these units pointless.

I’m all for reducing supply tails, but in this case, I don’t think that really works. Each one of those cells produce a mere 300W of power for maybe 12 hrs a day.

Except it’s not quite watts. High dissipation in your body can cause a great deal of damage, but of greater concern is the ability to interfere with the heart. That does not require a great deal of power, but the relatively low current has to pass thru the heart.

It is overcomplicated, but only mostly pointlessly so. Switching to a smaller screen allows the driver to see slightly more track.

God I hate the “it’s not voltage, it’s the amperage that will kill you”. It’s almost completely wrong, or rather, it’s very easy to misunderstand. Grab a hold that of a pair of conductors that have 1v between them but with a source that capable of 1,000 amps and you wont even notice it. Grab a hold of 2 conductors…

Depends on the medium. 500psi of water in a vessel failure is very unremarkable.

What I never liked about the “steer into the skid” advice is that it always seemed unclear to me just what it meant. If your rear tires loose traction, your car will turn, so that it is not pointed in the direction it is traveling. You need to keep the front wheels pointed in the direction the car is traveling, not in…