I've got a work iPhone here and it pisses me off every time I try to do anything with it. I'm sure once I learn the Apple way of doing things it will make some kind of sense but I've used practically everything over the years and this is some baffling bullshit.

Pumped hydro storage is certainly a thing, but it requires a viable site etc etc.

Batteries and inverters are good enough now that battery storage is commercially viable, and it's only going to become moreso from both ends.

That's a funny way to spell eliminated.

House the homeless and they can cook on electric. It would be cheaper than what we are doing now, especially what with all the empty homes and office buildings. In fact not filling those empty homes is actually destroying value since unoccupied homes degrade even if not broken into and stripped for copper.

You would have to be an idiot to use nuclear for that when you can get more capacity for less money with other solutions. Since the resulting fuel is cheap and easy to store, intermittency of supply is a non-issue.

Wind is cheap enough to overbuild to solve your capacity problems.

You do need to build more transmission lines, but you need those no matter what kind of generation you build, and no one wants any of it in their neighborhood so you always have to go long distances.

If you overbuild wind then you wind up with unused capacity, which provides incentive for new uses for intermittent power. It's not a problem at all because wind can be throttled down at will

"Chill with the learn to read BS."

Learn to read first.

I imagine he was talking about the original roadster with the chassis done by lotus. For once he has a point.

That car sold like hotcakes and there is probably enough demand to do another run.

If you're a government, yes you can.

The EU has consistently resisted Apple's fake and hostile "compliance" and they will likely continue to do so.

It has always come at the expense of battery size. That's literally the whole reason they have to throttle old phones.

The implication is that they COULD.

YOU inferred that you should.

The author is only responsible for their implication, not your inference, and nowhere was the activity in question promoted.

"Most people don't know that Moore's Law is about price/transistor"

That's good, because it isn't.

It's about the number of transistors in an IC. Price is orthogonal, although he did make a secondary observation of the cost remaining relatively fixed as the density increased.

Spying is not even interesting because who is putting confidential data on TikTok anyway? The interesting parts all revolve around shaping opinion through algorithmic suppression and promotion of content, and also planting of content.

You think batteries are too heavy, but ignore that hydrogen can't get good energy density without heavy storage solutions. Are you invested in hydrogen?

We don't care as much about rail security because you can't hijack one and crash it into the Pentagon, and we always know where they are.