Not really. I was in a factory in Shenzen 25 years ago that was able to spit out ~20 5MVA transformers per week with basic equipment and minimal staff. The only components brought in from outside were bolts and insulators. Doubling capacity only required equipment worth roughly the cost of one transformer.

Solid state solutions are an order of magnitude more complex.

The last time I looked into this for a personal research project was around 2016 related to the ports of LA and Long Beach. At the time, about 30% of all container traffic moved via rail, at least going out of the port. The distribution centers in the inland empire (at the time) mostly had rail spurs, but that was before the big boom, especially with Amazon. I am sure the number is lower today given Amazon's business model on contracting, and also just how many different locations in the region host >>1 million square foot warehouses. The endpoint logistics are what screw up rail more than anything.

Where does rail stop on I10? I know it is still quite active through California to (IIRC) Phoenix.

I used to agree with your thinking. Not sure I do anymore. Rail is more efficient but needs density to be effective; if you need more than ~3 fully loaded semis a day going in the same direction rail might be viable, but it needs infrastructure that doesn't currently exist. Even close to a line, adding a spur and small transfer yard is a lot of work.

Not holding stock in any companies that don't report quarterly, especially ones that haven't earned trust through stability. I might not care about a Berkshire Hathaway, but no tech stocks would fit the category.

For Microsoft it isn't just about Anthropic. This places significant contract risk for *any* contractor that does work in both the private and public sectors, but especially in software and business services. Your costs could double arbitrarily based on political actions by a third party; this is not how a contract works.

The expensive parts of homes are those where multiple trades need to work. Rough framing is relatively inexpensive and easy in that regard. If you want to reduce the cost of housing, go with composting toilets, finish materials that are structural, and prefabricated kitchens and bathroom modules that are fully finished.

I have a reservation... but I would not be an investor. I hope they pull it off, but it has felt like "6 months away" for years.

They really need to focus on eliminating dead zones. In my quest for caffeine in the morning (7-mile journey) there are three dead zones lasting a total 20% of the ride time. I pass at least 6 towers (two full size and four microcells) on the trip.

If you want to force out data centers, make any utility connections over 5MW enter a 20-year power purchase agreement with all infrastructure costs paid up front. Do the same for water. Give the city/county the power to shut off said utilities and block access to the facility if they create a public nuisance

I think it is more alluding to the need that using AI to wholesale replace existing/legacy systems doesn't work because the outputs aren't consistent. AI can't do payroll with probabilistic checks and withholding.

The $33million translates roughly to $22-35 per square feet of data center white space. At some point, going to 3-story facilities starts to make more sense, even given the inherent complications of it. But the power side of the equation really needs to be solved by these developers, at their sole cost.

I can't remember my wife's name but I know I have a 4 digit UID.

(J/k. Her name is wifey poo.)

FWIW, our case was (professional) engineers. Part of the problem was if an EIT/FE was considered a state certification (vs a PE which is more obvious). EIT/FE are issued by the state, so it meets the letter of the law, but it does not confer any rights or responsibilities in and of itself and is just a precursor to the PE. Employees without FE or masters were always treated as hourly per the law.

Elements for "paying by the hour" include things like reporting start time and end time. We later (on advice of legal counsel) changed the term to "hourly bonus" and paid it monthly instead of each paycheck. The "looks suspicious" warrants some level of investigation, but when the name is the only thing really linked to hourly performance it is overreach.