And the boundary is fuzzy. One can get ideas from bots without copying them verbatim. "Never look at bot output" is a silly request.

So let me get this straight. If I live in a hot or cold environment, and/or I regularly use the advertised range (or as much of it that the car will give me, realistically) to avoid having to sit and wait for fast charge to 80% for an hour on a road trip, I'm looking at (probably) no more than 80% capacity available after 5 years?

That torpedos the used market solidly. No wonder they're available so much cheaper.

Pfffft, only Web5? we offer Web6!

...armpit of domain name registrars. Those in the armpit business want to keep their armpit niche alive.

In that case they are not really "investors" but "fund managers". However, I agree the boundary can get murky...and shady.

Milk the bubble before it pops with even bigger pie-in-sky.

3D-printed space-launched quantum fusion AI datacenters self-constructed by AI agents using EM-drive tech to spontaneous generate building material.

Suggestions for more buzzwords?...

People often overestimate short-term tech improvement and underestimate medium to long-term improvement.

Most investors don't want a long-term payoff, they have other options that are more likely to pay off in the shorter term. I doubt most quantum investors would accept a 40-year return if they knew that was the future.

Slippery slope fallacy, zzzzz. Plenty of stable nations are socialist-leaning.

It's good for your system and forces you to move every 90 minutes or so. Just not before long meetings.

Canada and Northern Europe are doing just fine. Better mental heath than USA by far.

> This isn't even a bubble.

I'm suggesting the "AI everywhere" is a bubble, space-server-farms is only an extension of it.

> you might prefer Cuba, North Korea or (as of recently) Russia.

Argument-by-extreme-example. They are not even democracies. I'm not suggestion ending democratic rule.

Though sending PROMISE to the moon would leave Perseverance and Curiosity -- both of which remain active on Mars -- without an Earth-based testbed, Isaacman thinks it would be worth it. "We've had years now of experience operating the two rovers on the surface of Mars,...

But the older that Perseverance and Curiosity get the more engineering baby-sitting they will need. Repurposing the test rover risks shortening their life. Judging the need based on the first half of Mars missions is insufficient. Past 50 people need a doctor much more often. Rovers are similar.

Francis Crick calculated how long it would take for life to evolve from scratch, and concluded it would take longer than the earth has existed. In response, he developed the hypothesis of panspermia

Any such calculation is likely to be off either direction by a factor of about 10 such that the age of the Earth and age of the universe is not different enough to distinguish. And we don't know all the pathways to biogenesis such that estimating the early stages is a fuzzy art.

Panspermia is certainly a realistic possibility, as some microbes have incredible survival abilities.

Note that my early description didn't mention that the chemicals the intermediate-step proto-cells would consume and produce may be partial or full fuel for the subsequent stage(s), perhaps after being altered by the environment a bit. Having to rely on the environment to "adjust" the food supply may be why separate sub-microbes are necessary.

More evidence we need to tax the rich, they have way too much money and are chasing really stupid shit. After you have 20 yachts then #21 doesn't have the same ego kick, so you look for pie-in-sky investments.