Tesla's problem would seem to be the opposite: they switched to hard tooling before the assembly bugs were worked out. Now they've got an efficient production line making cars that need substantial post-prod work.
They seemed to be carrying about 20 bomblets apiece. Each bomblet seemed to be a small charge + ball-bearings + contact detonation at around 6" above ground. So, in total, a primitive & cheap anti-personnel and unarmored target system.
Numbers like 220 actual versus 1600 predicted on a new automobile production line implies they having to rework a lot of defects by hand. Some rework is expected, but this implies that hugely capital-intensive line is running at a fraction of its capacity. That's also expected at first, in fact that why most manufacturers start with soft-tooling until they work the bugs out, then buy the most expensive hard-tools. News reports say Tesla went with hard tooling up-front, and that makes this a hellish expensive production line to be running at 15% or less.
Yeah, it's pretty insane. Our Thanksgiving dinner of technologists, financiers, accountants, and lawyers figured he has a 1%-2% chance of success without giant government subsidies. We also estimated it wasn't a good idea to short the stock: there's too much idiot money out there.
He keeps missing his own production targets, he has big negative cashflow, his tooling plan for mass market cars is bizarre to the point of crazy.
He should just call his next car the "DeLorean, Mark II." It's cool, fast, uses high technology, and defies the laws of physics.
You browse at -1, you get to ignore the moderation you don't seem to like. All comments are still treated equally in terms of you getting to see them. That's net neutrality.
If Slashdot starts charging money to transmit left-leaning comments, or reduces the bandwidth given to right-wing comments, that's non-neutral.
Really, it is not strange to be pro-net neutrality in a world where carriers are both bandwidth providers and content producers.
The math on explosives in the video is actually about right. 3g of shaped HE would easily drive a self-formed metal jet through skull and 5 inches of brain matter. Just Google for videos of "tiny shaped charge" and be afraid.
Total agree. In the old days, priests would fuck altar boys in the ass and no one would report it.Today, it's fashionable to complain about it rather than working with the person in a position of power, or in certain cases, around them.
Nah, he's just saddled with a bunch of unviable physical businesses that need huge capital. He can't raise it cheaply in the bond markets, so he needs to talk up the "revolutionary" side of things to keep the equity side going. Maybe he can do another "merger" to move capital between his startups (Tesla and batteries sort of looked like it could make sense, but roofing tiles, rockets, tunnels, hyperloop, etc, are boutique.) He needs hype to raise equity in the core businesses because their financials look grim.
It's a game changer! Promising to devote $200M/yr is like $4/year for each student. I admit it's not new money, and they are spending more than that already on STEM, but still, it's a great pro-science initiative. I'm sure Betsy DeVos will spend it wisely on consultants and charter school initiatives. Liberals will be shocked at how amazing the results will be.
There has been tons of opinions asserting that the brains of females and males are not different in any respect and that there is no reason a female can't be a brilliant scientist or engineer.
So, where's everybody?
One possibility is that the women noticed that CS/engineering is pretty biased against women, even if just implicitly (orchestras noticed that when you do blind auditions women score much better; women do better in acceptance of open source code submissions when gender is not known.) High-skill women switched to equivalent high-paying jobs (medicine and law,) where there is less implicit bias because of more objective measures of competence (e.g. MCATs, LSATs, the bar exam.)
But is "reasoning" anything more than a combination pattern matching, search and logical deduction?
Obviously it is. As we learned from several Slashdot posters, "reasoning" is an ineffable quality possessed by male software engineers working at Google.
As a simple example, try how much vacuum a toy balloon will take compared with pressure.
That doesn't even make sense.
It doesn't make sense to you because you don't understand physics and/or math. Positive internal pressure makes shapes want to become more round - like the toy balloon you are confused about. So high pressure hoses, etc, work. Positive external pressure makes round things flatten: the physics works against you, amplifying any departure from roundness. So vacuum hoses need structural reinforcement (i.e. being thick or having internal bracing.)
Actually, the MTA subway does run on a fixed schedule. Nobody cares, though, because a 1 minute wait during peak hours and 5 minutes or so during off-peak means we just show up and wait (well, in Manhattan, anyway.)
The problem is that Tesla needs to transition from a niche player to a production automaker, meanwhile they are trying to finance themselves like a software company. Cars don't scale like software:
One serious design flaw that starts surfacing three years from now could kill them (and they're already betting the farm here - they think their tooling is production ready and are budgeting accordingly, normal automakers would still be using lower cost, beta quality machinery while they work the kinks out.)
They haven't turned a profit to date, and best technology in the world won't make a $35K car 5x cheaper to produce.
Scaling up requires a capital investment that is basically linear with the scaling factor. 500K Model 3s is going to need a ton of capital, and that capital is betting on one model.
Tesla seems like all of Musk's current plans: a cool technology solution to one part of the 10 parts that have to come together to build a viable company; negative cashflow; rosy predictions. Maybe he wins, but his plan doesn't seem to align with reality.
You missed the point of Sun Tzu you referenced and moved the goal post.
When you talk about cohesive fighting force you are talking about combat effectiveness i.e. the lethality of the military..
The only one moving goalposts is you: nice try telling me I said "cohesive fighting force" and thus meant "lethality of the military." Actually, you are just picking up the ball and moving it to where you would like it to be.
Your facts are wrong, your logic is broken, and you probably should reread your Sun Tzu.
Everything the military does is in service to killing the enemy.
"The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide the military forces needed to deter war and to protect the security of our country. The department's headquarters is at the Pentagon."
Luckily, our DOD's understanding of their own role is a bit more sophisticated than that of a first grader.
That's why my answer had two parts and I said the first part was a start. Sorry, there wasn't a free, complete, online analysis that exactly provided everything a homophobic chickenhawk civilian might ask for.
If you want a complete analysis of the effectiveness of armies with high equality versus those with non-mission aligned structures, that's the domain of military history. Reading about the French army before and after the revolution would be a good place to start, or try the Vietnam, or try the Israelis.
The military doesn't need to be at the forefront of social change. There is nothing wrong with the military lagging, and by doing so in minimizes internal disruption. Heck, greater society is still fighting bathroom policy, the military has other stuff to occupy its time.
It may not need to be at the forefront of social change, but it needs to be at the forefront of equality: it's not a coincidence that "moral" and "morale" are basically the same word. Sun Tzu lists "moral law" as one of his five constants of war: align your army with your stated aims and you have a cohesive fighting force that will do their utmost; add a bunch of random rules that have no effect on the mission, and you have a less effective, more cynical, less motivated force.
don't tell the government to go fuck themselves. I hate their subservience
I think they did: "[we, Facebook] appreciate the important work law enforcement does, and we understand the need to carry out investigations. That's why we already have a protocol in place to respond to any requests we can." That's lawyer talk for "you look butt-hurt and stupid. Please fuck off."
The liberals were the fascists in the Nazi party (Nazi meaning new socialist), they supported the fascists in Communist regimes around the world who for the last 70 years have murdered hundreds of millions of innocents, and the liberals are the fascists today, who cannot tolerate any other viewpoints or questioning of their theories (socialism/communism/atheisim/progressiveism/multiculturalism/diversity/evolution/AGW/...) and the list goes on..
Word salad of people who don't live in your trailer park kills 200,000,000+ people since 1947? I somehow missed that.
Slashdot Mirror
Tesla's problem would seem to be the opposite: they switched to hard tooling before the assembly bugs were worked out. Now they've got an efficient production line making cars that need substantial post-prod work.
They seemed to be carrying about 20 bomblets apiece. Each bomblet seemed to be a small charge + ball-bearings + contact detonation at around 6" above ground. So, in total, a primitive & cheap anti-personnel and unarmored target system.
Numbers like 220 actual versus 1600 predicted on a new automobile production line implies they having to rework a lot of defects by hand. Some rework is expected, but this implies that hugely capital-intensive line is running at a fraction of its capacity. That's also expected at first, in fact that why most manufacturers start with soft-tooling until they work the bugs out, then buy the most expensive hard-tools. News reports say Tesla went with hard tooling up-front, and that makes this a hellish expensive production line to be running at 15% or less.
Yeah, it's pretty insane. Our Thanksgiving dinner of technologists, financiers, accountants, and lawyers figured he has a 1%-2% chance of success without giant government subsidies. We also estimated it wasn't a good idea to short the stock: there's too much idiot money out there.
He keeps missing his own production targets, he has big negative cashflow, his tooling plan for mass market cars is bizarre to the point of crazy.
He should just call his next car the "DeLorean, Mark II." It's cool, fast, uses high technology, and defies the laws of physics.
Net neutrality has nothing to do with moderation.
You browse at -1, you get to ignore the moderation you don't seem to like. All comments are still treated equally in terms of you getting to see them. That's net neutrality.
If Slashdot starts charging money to transmit left-leaning comments, or reduces the bandwidth given to right-wing comments, that's non-neutral.
Really, it is not strange to be pro-net neutrality in a world where carriers are both bandwidth providers and content producers.
The math on explosives in the video is actually about right. 3g of shaped HE would easily drive a self-formed metal jet through skull and 5 inches of brain matter. Just Google for videos of "tiny shaped charge" and be afraid.
Total agree. In the old days, priests would fuck altar boys in the ass and no one would report it.Today, it's fashionable to complain about it rather than working with the person in a position of power, or in certain cases, around them.
You sound like an RNN trained quickly on a small dataset of popular science articles.
True. All the acceleration and braking and potholes in the air make it hard to design planes that even last 10 years.
Nah, he's just saddled with a bunch of unviable physical businesses that need huge capital. He can't raise it cheaply in the bond markets, so he needs to talk up the "revolutionary" side of things to keep the equity side going. Maybe he can do another "merger" to move capital between his startups (Tesla and batteries sort of looked like it could make sense, but roofing tiles, rockets, tunnels, hyperloop, etc, are boutique.) He needs hype to raise equity in the core businesses because their financials look grim.
This will not end well.
It's a game changer! Promising to devote $200M/yr is like $4/year for each student. I admit it's not new money, and they are spending more than that already on STEM, but still, it's a great pro-science initiative. I'm sure Betsy DeVos will spend it wisely on consultants and charter school initiatives. Liberals will be shocked at how amazing the results will be.
Well, Bing is only used to search for porn videos. Given "black people ruin porn", Bing made a noble effort to cater to my needs.
There has been tons of opinions asserting that the brains of females and males are not different in any respect and that there is no reason a female can't be a brilliant scientist or engineer.
So, where's everybody?
One possibility is that the women noticed that CS/engineering is pretty biased against women, even if just implicitly (orchestras noticed that when you do blind auditions women score much better; women do better in acceptance of open source code submissions when gender is not known.) High-skill women switched to equivalent high-paying jobs (medicine and law,) where there is less implicit bias because of more objective measures of competence (e.g. MCATs, LSATs, the bar exam.)
But is "reasoning" anything more than a combination pattern matching, search and logical deduction?
Obviously it is. As we learned from several Slashdot posters, "reasoning" is an ineffable quality possessed by male software engineers working at Google.
It doesn't make sense to you because you don't understand physics and/or math. Positive internal pressure makes shapes want to become more round - like the toy balloon you are confused about. So high pressure hoses, etc, work. Positive external pressure makes round things flatten: the physics works against you, amplifying any departure from roundness. So vacuum hoses need structural reinforcement (i.e. being thick or having internal bracing.)
Wish I had mod points - you are explaining reality well.
Actually, the MTA subway does run on a fixed schedule. Nobody cares, though, because a 1 minute wait during peak hours and 5 minutes or so during off-peak means we just show up and wait (well, in Manhattan, anyway.)
The problem is that Tesla needs to transition from a niche player to a production automaker, meanwhile they are trying to finance themselves like a software company. Cars don't scale like software:
One serious design flaw that starts surfacing three years from now could kill them (and they're already betting the farm here - they think their tooling is production ready and are budgeting accordingly, normal automakers would still be using lower cost, beta quality machinery while they work the kinks out.)
They haven't turned a profit to date, and best technology in the world won't make a $35K car 5x cheaper to produce.
Scaling up requires a capital investment that is basically linear with the scaling factor. 500K Model 3s is going to need a ton of capital, and that capital is betting on one model.
Tesla seems like all of Musk's current plans: a cool technology solution to one part of the 10 parts that have to come together to build a viable company; negative cashflow; rosy predictions. Maybe he wins, but his plan doesn't seem to align with reality.
You missed the point of Sun Tzu you referenced and moved the goal post.
When you talk about cohesive fighting force you are talking about combat effectiveness i.e. the lethality of the military..
The only one moving goalposts is you: nice try telling me I said "cohesive fighting force" and thus meant "lethality of the military." Actually, you are just picking up the ball and moving it to where you would like it to be.
Your facts are wrong, your logic is broken, and you probably should reread your Sun Tzu.
Everything the military does is in service to killing the enemy.
"The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide the military forces needed to deter war and to protect the security of our country. The department's headquarters is at the Pentagon."
Luckily, our DOD's understanding of their own role is a bit more sophisticated than that of a first grader.
That's why my answer had two parts and I said the first part was a start. Sorry, there wasn't a free, complete, online analysis that exactly provided everything a homophobic chickenhawk civilian might ask for.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/resea... would be a good start.
If you want a complete analysis of the effectiveness of armies with high equality versus those with non-mission aligned structures, that's the domain of military history. Reading about the French army before and after the revolution would be a good place to start, or try the Vietnam, or try the Israelis.
The military doesn't need to be at the forefront of social change. There is nothing wrong with the military lagging, and by doing so in minimizes internal disruption. Heck, greater society is still fighting bathroom policy, the military has other stuff to occupy its time.
It may not need to be at the forefront of social change, but it needs to be at the forefront of equality: it's not a coincidence that "moral" and "morale" are basically the same word. Sun Tzu lists "moral law" as one of his five constants of war: align your army with your stated aims and you have a cohesive fighting force that will do their utmost; add a bunch of random rules that have no effect on the mission, and you have a less effective, more cynical, less motivated force.
don't tell the government to go fuck themselves.
I hate their subservience
I think they did: "[we, Facebook] appreciate the important work law enforcement does, and we understand the need to carry out investigations. That's why we already have a protocol in place to respond to any requests we can." That's lawyer talk for "you look butt-hurt and stupid. Please fuck off."
The liberals were the fascists in the Nazi party (Nazi meaning new socialist), they supported the fascists in Communist regimes around the world who for the last 70 years have murdered hundreds of millions of innocents, and the liberals are the fascists today, who cannot tolerate any other viewpoints or questioning of their theories (socialism/communism/atheisim/progressiveism/multiculturalism/diversity/evolution/AGW/...) and the list goes on. .
Word salad of people who don't live in your trailer park kills 200,000,000+ people since 1947? I somehow missed that.