It was known what would happen if carbon fiber was used for the hull in a submsersible nearly a decade earlier: See the DeepFlight Challenger: "Based on testing at high pressure, the DeepFlight Challenger was determined to be suitable only for a single dive, not the repeated uses that had been planned as part of Virgin Oceanic service. As such, in 2014, Virgin Oceanic scrapped plans for the five dives project using the DeepFlight Challenger, as originally conceived, putting plans on hold until more suitable technologies are developed"

It wasn't about "toes". People died. You seem to be using the same strawman tactics as Stockton Rush.
Everyone else: "This could kill people."
Rush and you: "Your feelings don't matter."

Except they didn't. They did not even try. The Titan was using their second hull after the first one developed cracks. What did OceanGate do differently to prevent cracks in the second hull? Nothing. They did not change the formulation. They did not change the design. This was the concern voiced by James Cameron. Cameron was excited about the possibility of developing new forms of carbon fiber for submersibles. Until he learned OceanGate was not developing new forms of carbon fiber. They just used existing forms which were known not to be suitable.

I have no idea what you are talking about "departments". People have experimented using carbon fiber for hulls. They were found to crack under multiple dives. That's it.

Then you should know the phrase very well: "Regulations are often written in blood." You seem not to understand it though.

IIRC, a "recall" is a notification of a defect in a car that needs addressing. If that can be done OTA, it's still a recall.

With the right hype, and a high enough price tag on the machine, the coffee snobs will be all over this.

From what I remember from the initial report, OceanGate did everything they could to avoid being in any country's jurisdiction so they would not be subject to any country’s rules and regulations. The company was based in Washington state in the United States, but the OceanGate Expeditions, Ltd was registered in the Bahamas. The Titan was not registered in any country as the Bahamas refused to register the submersible without adequate documentation and technical specifications.

In the past, companies building datacenters in rural areas for cheap land would build the infrastructure. After all, the companies needed these datacenters to be reliable as the local infrastructure would not be adequate. Also these rural areas could rarely afford the infrastructure changes needed even if they wanted to build them.

And closed loop cooling uses zero water. Oh it uses less water, not zero water. What about power? Does datacenters use closed-loop power? That does not exist?

Truckee, California. That datacenter did not build their own power. They are just buying all of Truckee's power. Screw the locals.

Small difference: drugs are known to be harmful, and illegal. The harm of social media to developing children has only recently been documented

If it is known that social media harms kids, then doesn't the state share some of the blame? Why is there no law?
If it is not known (or only recently came to light), can you really blame the social media companies? You could blame them for trying to block relevant legislation, but not for harm done in the past.
If the harmful effects were known to the companies and they kept it quiet, then you'd have a case, morally speaking. Bit like the tobacco firms.

It means these RAM companies are not spending years and billions of capital to build more capacity for what might be a temporary situation. To him that is "refusing". That is like my local cafe "refusing" to stock their entire cooler with the latest popular caffeinated energy drink brand I like. I mean how dare they.

Apple does not manufacture their own CPUs. They contract TSMC to make them. Apple also does not manufacture their own SSDs, cameras, etc. Of all the components, RAM is a commodity component that survives on thin margins relying on high volume for profits.

Building a chip fab would take years if Apple had the site, the personnel, plans, permits, etc. today. Then it takes an experienced foundry like TSMC about a year after construction is complete to start making enough acceptable product in volume. So 3 or 4 years from now, Apple might have Apple RAM for their devices. By that point, if the RAM crisis is over, all the existing companies could sell their RAM for less than it costs Apple to make as Apple has to recoup capital costs. In the end, Apple will lose money. For what?

So how about closing that particular loophole, and make them pay capital gains on the profits that they do realize? For instance, by taxing such loans with no "normal" repayment schedule as dividend. We've had similar issues, with business owners borrowing money from their company with no intention of ever repaying it, thus avoiding dividend tax. A new law caps these "non market conformant" loans at 100k.

A cash grab like this is pretty sickening. Even in the rather socialist leaning country I live in, this would probably not stand, local courts and the ECHR might well consider similar taxes to amount to appropriation, and illegal.

How long do you think it would take to "start a RAM company"? If Apple had the personnel, site, plans, equipment, etc, it would take years for them to build the plant. Then the plant does not make 100% sellable product on day 1. That might take months to a year. So 3 years from now, Apple might, maybe have a few chips they could use.

Um no. They existing companies are being lots of money to make specialized memory for AI. They are meeting demand. They are meeting demand of people who are paying them the most. They are not meeting the demand of us peasants who can't afford to throw money at them.

I'm also not opposed to the idea. Not because of a supposed concentration of wealth. Musk does not have a trillion dollars, taken from elsewhere, sitting in a giant warehouse somewhere; it's all stock in a massively overvalued company that he built. His riches do not make us poorer. And I don't envy him his wealth, he's welcome to it.

What I do have an issue with, is the concentration of power this represents. Wealth, whether in actual dollars, publicly traded stock or private stock, represents an undue amount of influence in politics. If we're doing a tax on large companies, or a wealth cap, this would be the reason I'd agree with it. Not a sense of "fairness".

"OpenAI hasn't had their IPO yet, so couldn't they just find some kind of workaround to avoid this?"
Not necessarily. The tax could be paid in stock, in fact that would not be a bad idea. So that the control of important companies does not remain in the hands of a handful of individuals. Again, the only justification of this would be to prevent a concentration of power.

Building one would take years if Apple had the personnel, the expertise, site, etc. And at the end of the it, Apple built a manufacturing plant that does not fit into their strategies. After all, Apple does not manufacture their own CPUs. They contract TSMC to make them.

The problem with memory is manufacturing them at the lowest costs not developing it. Memory is standardized and considered a commodity due to the huge number of patents surrounding it. The problem right now is the RAM manufacturers are getting lots of money not to make consumer grade RAM like DDR5. They are getting lots of money to make HBM for AI servers. Where would Apple make this RAM? Certainly not at Micron, SK Hynix, or Samsung. TSMC could manufacture if they were not fully booked making AI CPUs, AMD CPUs, Apple CPUs, Intel CPUs, NVidia GPUs, AMD GPUs, etc.

This isn't a small business loan. The number of banks that could lend hundreds of billions is very small.

There are other obstacles. Samsung's RAM business is a part of their chip business. They would have to separate it from their foundry business. It is highly unlikely Samsung would ever agree to that. Samsung and SK Hynix are South Korean companies. I would think the country of South Korea would object to the sale. That leaves Micron which is in the US. That's where Dell, HP, Lenovo, Asus, etc would all sue to keep Apple from buying a key supplier.

Also RAM was a commodity industry before the current crisis: Cutthroat competition that survives on thinnest margins and highest volume. That is not the business model Apple wants to invest in. That's why they (like every computer manufacturer) have bought their RAM instead of contract manufacturing it like their other chips.