gian @ gian @lemmy.grys.it

Posts

0

Comments

446

Joined

2 yr. ago

Did you not catch the part a couple comments ago where I agreed with you?

Nope, miss it. My bad ;-)

Yeah, of course it’s cheaper to not send divers down. All I’m saying is cheaper cheaper doesn’t mean cheap. And my larger point is that it’s probably not cheap enough, not least because they’re planning for a 20 year part replacement cycle on metal bits exposed to high-pressure seawater and that just doesn’t seem plausible to me.

I think that this depends on how much this system can really "produce".
In a 20 years cycle (ok it is theoretical), it does not seems too hard to overcome the maintenance costs, even this high, assuming the production is high enough, which is to be demostrated.

The gig economy is nothing new in itself, it was already present, the only thing these companies did is to make them "modern". Here were not uncommon that people got some gig works to have the money for holidays (teenagers) or to round up salary from time to time.
It is not a problem per se.

The problem is that the gig economy is the only way to have a salary for some people, for various reasons.
That let the companies to pay way less because they have a big pool to choose from and have not any obligations (or advantages) to have a stable set of employees and to resort to gig workers only in peak times.
And that is true expecially in place like the US where the llabor laws are ridiculous.

And my point is that, given how deep these things seems to be, it is cheaper to haul them on the surface than sending a diver down, even if you need to do some unscheduled maintenance, especially because sending down a commercial diver (the only that can hope to work this deep) is not an easy feat in itself.

Obviously it will be expensive either way, I was only pointing out that sending down commercial divers a lot of additional levels of complexity (decompression periods measured in days or weeks, need to hire many more highly specialized people and from a way smaller pool and so on) that will drive up the price.

The article say about 500/600 meters deep. No mention if on the sea floor or not.

Yeah, so instead of sending down divers with equipment you’re hauling hundreds of tons of concrete out of the sea, which means aside from a ship and crew which you’d need anyway you’re still going to need specialized equipment (some big honkin’ chains and winches at a minimum) and tools and such, and that stuff isn’t cheap either.

You need specialized equipment also if you send down people to do the job that deep. And given you need to use many more specialized people (not everyone can work at these depths and they are not cheap) with all the associated support infrastructures like decompression chanbers and so on. I doubt that the cost will be lower that simply hauling the whole thing out of water.

esla… How many new models were made since he got in?

None. But without Tesla you would not have neither all the other models from other car companies. Tesla just started it and demostrated that it is possible to produce an electric car with a decent look (and better that some ICE cars in my opinion) at a time when most of the electric cars done by other company were just some ugly proof of concept (excluding a very few cases) to show at this or that event.
And I read somewhere that what Musk wanted from Tesla was to set the stage, as far as I remember he said that it was ok if Tesla bankrupt after setting the stage.

SpaceX? They got billions to get us to Mars. They never go beyond the super easy part in rocketry, low earth orbit. Anything beyond that is where shit gets really hard and we’re still waiting. All I saw was billions of tax dollars wasted in blown up rocket after blown up rocket and SpaceX cheering nluke idiots over a blown up banana.

Considering that everyone else was not able to do even that, I would not call SpaceX a failure. And it is not that NASA did not have its fair number or launch failures, tbh.
You talk about beyond low earth orbit like something way harder, but it not really true. SpaceX put a Tesla in a orbit beyond Mars with a Falcon heavy some years ago, and they still have (and use) the Falcon Heavy.

Hell, they obliterated a launchpad because btgey were dumb enough to not understand flame diverters…

True but they were trying to launch a rocket that nobody else even tried to build. I would say it is fair that they make some mistakes.

Colonizing the bottom of the ocean would be orders of magnitude easier. Or the South Pole. Or Kīlauea’s open lava pit.

While it is true that you have different sets of problems to solve, nope, they are only cheaper to get to, not necessary easier to colonize, except maybe the South Pole where you just need to build something that only need to withstand the cold, which is easy enough and you could go outside without a space suite or something similar.

The problem with colonizing Mars is the cost, which have as a consequence the cost of everything you send to that place.

But in the end I think that we already have all the basic blocks for a base on Mars (or the Moon) and what it is stopping us is the cost of putting everything together and send it.
We already know how to build isolated environments that can must stay sealed for month or years (subs and International Space Station), we already know how to recycle things like air and water, we already know how to produce vegetables in cramped spaces and with low or no exposure to the sun (think of every weed farm inside houses ;-) ) and minimal water needs, we already know how to develop and deploy complex industrial control systems and so on.

The problem of kmail is the underlying subsystem that is evertything other than stable.

Yeah, the AI absolutely is a problem.

AI is noto a problemi by itself, the problemi is that most of the people who make decisions in the workplace about these things do not understand what they are talking about and even less what something is capable of.

My impression is that AI now is what blockchain was some years ago, the solution to every problemi,which was of course false.

And the news is what, exactly ?

I get the hate for Musk and as a consequence for Tesla, but it is not that other do not recall anything...

Which ones aren’t? Also deciding to copy dumb ideas from elsewhere is even more dumb as someone else did the alpha testing for you, showed it was dumb, and you still copied it.

You don't copy because you think it is a good idea, you copy because everyone did the same thing. If everyone start putting touch button on cars and you not, you will be seen as old. Even if the idea is stupid, it is the hot new idea of the day. Also putting touch screen is cheaper to build and update since in the end the physical button just send a signal to one of the various ECUs on the car anyway.

Buttons for indicators I know are on modern ferraris, I can’t afford one but I still wouldn’t buy one because of them.

Leaving Ferraris aside, it is not that a button as indicators is always a bad idea. What is a stupid idea is to put a touch button without tactile feedback, so you need to look to see if you have pressed it or not.

Try using buttons on a steering wheel when doing a right at a roundabout, just the dumbest shit.

Well, my Renault has some buttons on the steering wheel and it do not seems too bad to use them while driving, I find very convenient to be able to control something without moving my hands from it (ok, they are not touch button).
A car I drove some months ago had double commands: touch ones and physical buttons. Not bad as choice.

Couple that with some truly dumb design ideas from Elon (no lidar, no physical buttons, indicators as buttons, stupidly high repair bills due to design choices) and some even more stupid personal behaviors from him and he has just cut the legs out of his market.

Well, some of these dumb design ideas are not really from Elon and it is not that other car manufacturer are too much different....

I agree.
The point is how much subsidies they receive. Chinese automakers seems to get way more (up to 30% if not more of the cost) than Tesla. That way it is easy to win on competitors.

BTW, the 30% is not a personal educated guest, it is the estimated figure given by a very trustworthy economic journal which did an investigation and discovered that that some chinese automaker could probably absorb a 30% tariffs without changing the selling price.

The problem is that Chinese EVs builder are heavily subsidized from the state and Tesla not (or not to that amount). Also a Tesla has a tag price that put it in the medium-high range, and it is obvious that the biggest market is for low-medium range priced car.

This is not true. Many of the parts I buy off of Amazon are not only cheaper, but I can get them faster as well.

Only the faster part is true, and only if you use prime, else you can buy from everywhere else and have the same price and delivery time.

Cheapest only if you buy a rip-off, buying some item of a certain brand have the same price on Amazon then the brand shop (if not higher on Amazon sometimes)

They’re right! They shouldn’t be responsible for products sold by third parties. If I go to Walmart and buy something, I shouldn’t be allowed to seek remedy from Amazon.

I don't disagree but there is a point that should be considered: Amazon probably get a percentage from the sell, so it earn money even from third parties.

Now, I don't think that Amazon has any responsability about recalling or any other remedy options, but they should at least forced to put a warning on the product page saying that the product is recalled or whatever it is. Even only sending a e-mail to every buyer is good (and Amazon obviously know who buy a product), then it is the buyer that will decide what to do.

I made 3 part because I need some details on what will be the top of the piece, little seams to show the separation of each hex, as well as the thinner walls on the bottom. I did try 2 part molds before, but getting it off the mold was near impossible most of the time. Like this, I can just push the piece off.

Got it. I did't consider the extraction.

Currently, only the presser has holes for the water, should I add it to the bottom piece, too?

Not if it work well.

The thick walls are to endure the pressure and reduce warping, though maybe they could be thinner? I tested adding some gypsum to the mixture, waiting for one piece to dry further and already figured that I have to remove from the mold before it hardens too much, otherwise it’ll end up stuck (that or I have to properly sand/fill the pieces like bluewing said above)

If they endure the pressure they are ok. I would have done them thicker but just to be sure.

For the gypsym it seems strange, every time that I did something with it I had no problem to remove from the mold, expecially if it was made with some sort of plastic. Probably more than the pieces you need to sand the mold to have smooth surfaces, so that the gypsum does not adhere to it.

Two options in my opinion.

First one is to redesign the mold to have only 2 parts that are 2 semi shells, the way you desing it currently need to have a very strict tolerance in the parts which I don't think are doable with a 3d printer (also, the wall seems too little thick). With a 2 part mold, you do some holes for the water on what will be the back side of your tile and you should be good.

Another option is to use something different, like white wall gypsum and maybe adding some acrylic color it needed, and somewhat copy the way the real tile are done.

If what you are doing is for model and/or some game, white gypsum is great, I did some nice diorama for aircraft with them. And it is more durable in my opinion.

You are correct on many of those points. But lets look for edge cases - people living in apartments, they can’t charge their cars when there are no garages, so they need to do what normal people do with gas cars - go to the gas station to charge.

That's a problem, I agree, but you don't design a new car model around edge cases.

So if you have a 600 miles car and drive 35 miles per day that’s enough to supercharge once per week for 30+ minutes and be good for the rest of the week - good for the battery, good for wait times, good for not pissing off the person buying the car as they don’t have to waste multiple hours per week.

True.

If your point is that it’s inneficient to carry heavy batteries around I would agree, but isn’t it less efficient to use gas, to have 2 cars instead of 1, to have to rent a car, etc. I think it balances out and with new battery technology you’ll see that they’ll start competing more fiercely with range, but there is a sweet spot and I think it’s 600 miles, if the battery drain is not affected by cold/hot weather 360 miles would be a good sweetspot.

Again, it depend on the target market. In EU it was relatively common to have 2 cars: a small one for the day by day commute (where other options are not available) and other tasks like taking the kids to/from school, small trip to the grocery store and so on, and a bigger one for the long travel.

It is still true outside the big cities, where services maybe are not that near and normally there are very few options for public transportation. And I don't think that having a small car for the day by day and rent a bigger one for longer trip is really that bad.

Also, consider that often a really big car it not an option in places where street are really narrow to the point you are forced to buy small car (common outside most of the big cities)

I hope the market appreciates this new model, but highly doubt it - most of the other things I suggested in the original post also affect if the buyer would decide to spend their money on the car. I don’t think it’s unrealistic for VW/Audi to make something like this at a competitive price of $120k - same as the starting price for a BMW M5.

I think you are out of price range. I don't know is US (given the use of dollars), but in EU a 120K car is not a common car, I mean, the big cars like the Renault Espace are in the range of 50/70 k, a 120K car is an entry level luxury car here.

I think he means that the headers come from the device making the call, not the one receing it, so a pedo should be able to change the headers of my device which is not that easy.
Then yes, the receing end could simply ignore the header anyway, it would be way easier.