I have a different experience with EVs.
I’ve got an EV with 265mi of range and an ICE car. I almost never use the ICE car, except for 2 reasons: is a 7-seater and sometimes I need both cars at the same time. In 100% of all cases, no matter how short or long the drive is, no matter the temperature outside (I live in an area where we get all the way to -40 and multiple months below 32F/0C.
I’ve never had any problem with that. I mostly charge home, this is where I agree that it’s a lot more convenient if you have a driveway, but all new and recent constructions are required to come with EV plugs in apartment complexes, etc. More and more lvl2 chargers are being installed throughout the city. Spent 5 days at my sister in law’s in the city while we lost electricity at home, I simply charged at work during the week and one time I went to charge at the corner of the street (<2min walk) for a few hours. It was actually a lot easier than I thought it would be.

The range decrease is no real issue during winter, my day starts with 100% of range everyday and in long road trips I will stop more frequently, but only for about 15-20 min max every few hours and will cost about 10$/charge. Super simple.

I thought I’d wanted to keep an ICE car as the second one, but already I see no point in it.

The only concern I think is valid is degradation in the long run. But best EV cars have very little degradation (as you mentioned), but also we technology improves, the batteries get better and better as well as cheaper, so I believe the batteries in 20 years will be incredible compared to today’s which is already super impressive. Also the infrastructure will be a lot better. Replacing a battery won’t cost as much.

2 years with an EV now and I can’t see many reasons to use ICE cars. Only left are heavy lifters (pickup trucks who tow big trailers everyday in winter, that’s a 75% range reduction). But this will also improve.

One day, while working on a website, I was wondering how to calculate a specific point in a graph. After googling, the answer was by using sine and cosine. Mind blew away, I had always thought I’d never use them.

Would make more sense to do that on people in the videos. Prevent child pornography or teen nudes. Let teenagers watch porn, we did that in the 90s

Elon Musk is a hero and we should all praise him, buy Teslas and use autopilot all the time while checking out our phones.

Only if the software is causing the accident or preventing the driver from avoiding one. Here the fault of the software was to not slow down out of the highway (which by experience must be a very specific situation because it most certainly do), the drive could have disengage autopilot or applied brakes to stop at the red light. The software specifically mentions it can’t stop at red lights and alerts the driver when it’s about to burn one. 100% of fault is the driver here.

When the accident is caused by a blatant lack of paying attention, I believe it would. Not paying attention, causing death of someone? 2 years in jail. You’re responsible of what you do.

They’re not using the product in the manner approved by the manufacturer at all. Driver is 100% responsible in this case and 23k is an absolute insult to the victims and the judicial system.

We are missing some info regarding why the penalty was so low, though. With the details from the article, the sentence doesn’t make any sense.

Human beings controlling cars are extremely dangerous. Drunk drivers, racing, going through red lights and stops, speeding, not paying attention, etc. No need for autopilot for the streets to be dangerous for pedestrians. Autopilot keeps the car in line, which is already way safer than most 100% human-controlled accidents.

And again, the driver is responsible to keep their eyes on the road, even when using cruise-control or any sort of driving assistance.

Until you drive it. You know the capabilities, you know when you can and cannot activate it, you know how often it tells you to look at the road and if you don’t prove you’ve got your hands on the wheel, it disables itself for the drive (you need to park to reactivate it). No Tesla driver thinks autopilot is more than a lane and distance keeping assistance.

Autopilot is a marketing name, that’s it.

I use it every single day. My phone just died, I have a temporary phone with Jack, but I know my next one won’t have one and I’m afraid of that change.

I’ve tried using an adapter and the quality sucks.

It has become for teens. It’s like wearing the right brand. To then, if you’re a green bubble, shame on you.

Of course it originates from the degraded experience, but at the moment, it all came down to the color of the bubble without taking into consideration the features/experience.

It will never take 1 year for 15 launches… Also HLS will be ready before astronauts are sent to the lunar orbit.

You clearly don’t and refuse to understand how SpaceX works. Your arguments show how little you understand any of it and using “lmao” at the end of your wrong arguments to prove how good they are is completely ridiculous.

I will watch your video because I’m always curious to understand other viewpoints and learn things, but I’m not planning on replying any further.

Fully reusable falcon 9 have been scrapped a very long time ago because they realized it wasn’t the right hardware for that. Starship will be and way way more capable. The test flight that exploded never intended to survive. Hoped? For sure. Intended? Absolutely not. It was a test prototype, not a rocket in the sense you make it.

Turnaround for space shuttle was 54 days at best before the explosion of challenger, 88 days since. Falcon 9 is down to 32 and keeps going down. 32 vs 88 is not almost the same. Second stage will never be reused neither will parachutes on Dragon landing. SpaceX wanted propulsion landing, NASA refused. One day they might change their mind (NASA) with starship.

You keep pointing at possibilities that might have been discussed or even said at some points, and I understand your frustration, but none of these were signed deals, they were possibilities or goals to try to achieve while developing the technology, then realising a better solution works (like catching the fairing halves vs. grabbing them from the ocean).

The timeline that’s over confident is for the sales pitch, that’s for sure.

Sources are from Wikipedia articles for both starship and Orion as well as an article from the planetary society on the cost of SLS.

The trajectory was chosen by NASA because the Orion capsule on top of the SLS rocket do not have enough efficiency to be on a low regular lunar orbit while landing and bringing back astronauts. This trajectory has nothing to do with SpaceX.

When comparing the one rocket to land on the moon to the 15 launches (thank you for writing launches and not rockets, as Destin Sandlin wrongly did) is because the mass delivered to the surface is gigantic compared to Apollo. Why? Because we do not want to say “we did it!” We want to say “we live there!”.

Can people stop saying SpaceX rockets explode? They do not. Super rarely they have, but that’s not something that happens on a regular basis and happens as rarely to all other companies. Explosions are either caused by landing first stages (nobody does that, the mission success, they are pushing the limits to reuse parts and they haven’t exploded in a very long while, while adding capacity no other company has) and prototypes that are meant to rapidly test limits and new technology explode, that’s actually the goal: push further, test, improve, nice on to next new system. It’s just a completely different approach from other rocket companies. Instead of spending years and years in research and development, they spend months, test, boom, months, test, boom. What that brings is huge innovation.

When comparing SLS to Starship, check how long has SLS taken and how much it costs while looking at its capacity:
$24B for the first rocket, 4+ per next rocket
$20.4B for Orion
11 years to get the first rocket
16 years to get the first capsule
Can bring 690ft³ of payload

As of now, and evolving for Starship:
$7B cost, 4 from NASA for the first 2 missions
11 years for the first tests, still no rocket
Can bring 220,00lb and 35,000ft³ to the moon
And they still and up with a rocket NASA can continue to use at very low price (less than 25% than SLS per mission)

Linkin Park too with Lost as the most played song.

The mother still pays and is very capable of providing. 3k is not the bare minimum when it’s, by decree, the maximum allowed by the state.

It’s not because you can spend that you should and want to spend your money (I could spend more than I do, I prefer keeping some for emergencies and special projects and investments.

Texas has a child support limit, but it might not be the only reason he wants to do it the, he might have more chance to keep custody there over California.

People keep downvoting anyone who is not against Elon Musk, no need to be supportive of him, just simply stating that some arguments against him might be wrong is enough to get downvoted to hell.
This is just Reddit all over again.

The issue is not that it’s to limit to less than 3k. It’s to have a limit at to begin with (California doesn’t have any, so it might cost him dozens or hundreds of thousands a month). Plus, maybe he’s got more chances to keep custody (shared) in Texas than California.

He’s actually known for the opposite: letting his pretty young child run around, exploring, even in the SpaceX factory (always while watching at a distance). He understands that children need not to be over protected.

Want*. He only needs 1