Something I was taught during manager training in an unrelated field was the mantra “clear and concise”.

Details are important but there is a time and place. Most of the time people asking questions will ask for more info if they want it.

The figure you are looking for is called MPGe or miles-per-gallon equivalent, and most battery ev’s get 100-120 mpge now.

We might be able to sit in our seats and say that anything they’re doing as a company is a technology that has existed for many years, but for many years people were saying that the tech wasn’t feasible on a large scale for xyz reasons. GM could’ve made an electric vehicle (and they since have) but they weren’t going to make a fast charging network (and they aren’t going to). It was never going to be realistic to have one without the other, so Tesla did both.

Now the market exists where there are companies doing the infrastructure and companies doing the cars. I’d argue that jumpstarting the market was revolutionary. I’d also contend that we’re seeing the beginnings of the another market jumpstart from Tesla in the pairing of battery storage with renewables.

There probably are deep insights that lead to the root cause of success in both situations. Once these insights are made public or more people discover and exploit them on a widespread level, the market inefficiencies that gave the possibility for outperformance then disappear. If you don't find a new edge, you revert to the mean (or maybe rather, the "mean" catches up to you).

I think olfactory’s implication is that they get lucky at first, develop a reputation due to that luck, then revert to the mean. That there is no secret sauce at all.

It’s an interesting theory.

Even if others don't discover and adopt your ideas - there is a limited market size for most investment strategies.

If you are good at picking winners for some specific type of startups, but there are only 10 of them per year, then you can't grow your fund from 10 to 100 investments per year and keep the same returns.

If you discover a clever arbitrage opportunity or market inefficiency, but there is only 1M of trades happening in that market, then you can't dump 100M into the strategy and keep the same returns.

Typically the claims of heavily improved single threaded performance are "up to x% faster", and the only time you see those peak performance improvements are during uncommon benchmarks.

Until full reviews come out it's hard to say how much of improvement across the board we'll see, but recently 2-3% ipc improvement on average plus whatever boost to frequency seems to be standard per release.

For what it's worth, brewing coffee directly over ice is extremely common in Vietnam as well.

I live in Edmonton, which has about 20 Vietnamese restaurants for every Japanese one. I've always known it to be Vietnamese iced coffee, and had no idea it's done in Japan as well. Although here the coffee conventionally drips over a mixture of ice and sweentened, condensed milk. I'm not sure if that's done elsewhere.

Iceberg is a texture, not a taste per se. Used in combination with other greens and veggies it has a place.

This might be a dumb question, but is there any reason other than costs that we couldn't eventually just blast unrecycleable nuclear waste off into the sun/space? There must be an inflection point where the cost of storing the hazardous material safely on earth is more expensive after a period of time than just sending it out of orbit on a space elevator/ICBM.

Sending things to outer space is crazily expensive in terms of fuel; the same holds if you aim for the Sun - the common idea that it's easy is very wrong. The Earth is moving around the Sun at 30km/sec, you need to burn off most of that velocity to actually hit it. For leaving the Solar System, the Internet provides the value of around 40km/sec. You can get most of those speeds by clever use of slingshot maneuvers though, and this is the way we usually do missions to outer planets.

Also, honestly, I don't see the point. The amount of nuclear waste we produce is minuscule compared to other equally or more dangerous chemical substances. Besides wasting perfectly good rocket fuel, destroying it this way would rob us of opportunity to reuse it in the future - hell, we already know how to reprocess some of the spent nuclear fuel for next-gen fission reactors!

Humans can eat raw meat and do. Tartare, sushi, uncooked shellfish, blue rare, and so on is all raw, though not necessarily common because of disease caused by unsafe handling of the meats and the potential for eating live parasites from when the animal was alive.

A secondary reason for cooking meat is that it'll be more nutritious from the heat making the nutrients more accessible for the human body's digestive system.

Also, just for the record animals that do eat raw meat can get sick from it and/ or acquire parasites just the same as humans. Most people who have pets (particularly dogs that'll eat anything) for a long time experience this at some point.