The ability for humankind to communicate across the entire globe at nearly 1/4 of the speed of light has drastically accelerated our technological advancement. There is no doubt that the internet is a HUGE addition to society.
It's not super important when compared to basic needs like plumbing, food, electricity, medical assistance and other silly things we take for granted but are heavily dependent on. We all saw what happened to hospitals during the early stages of the COVID pandemic; we had plenty of internet and electricity but were struggling on the medical part. That was quite bad... I'm not sure if it's any worse if an entire country/continent lost access to the Internet. Quite a lot of our core infrastructure components in society rely on this. And a fair bit of it relies on a common understanding of what time "now" is.
I'd love to believe you, but as a European who - for some reason - never get these sightings unlike Americans, I find it hard to do so. Either our mysterious alien friends really love USA or you guys have some condition that the entire Europe does not, e.g., permissions to test military equipment without having to announce it to the public, let alone the freedom to move around in a large area without it becoming a political drama.
Imagine if the German military started doing unannounced missions in neighboring countries... now imagine if a military base in the US send a couple of fighter jets from one state to another state and back. Only one of those situations would give a cluster f** of international drama, thus "odd sightings" i.e. covert military operations could be more common in the US than the rest of the world.
I'd love to believe... but it always only happens in USA.
Spaniard there; there used to be UFO's in the 70's... coincidentally near the US military bases ;)
There was an infamous one in the Canary Islands.
Also, weird events under Huelva. A few paranormal, but some of them not religion/spiritual based.
If the aliens were real, their technology for sure would look as magic for humans. No, forget flying saucers or whatever. These kind of civilizations would have totally different ways to travel thousands of kilometers across the galaxy.
Teleporting "magic" would just be mundane technology for them.
A simple AM radio receiver with a wire, a coil and a magnet would just be sorcery for even the upper elite from the medieval times. And today an Elementary kid can build a simple receiver with junk from a junkyard or scraps from a workbench.
EDIT:
BTW, I forgot: on paranormal stuff on Huelva, I meant something like this:
The related news was broadcasted in Spain on serious TV news at lunch, not
from some Alex Jones-lite kind of show with Reiki and the like.
On the laws of physics, we are like toddlers discovering an adult world. The quaterion concept it's almost from yesterday, and yet it drives real world stuff. Even networks, such as some
hypercubic topology, as the one I've seen from mycrovtif. Yes, it's bound to the Hamming code, too. You don't need to break physics, but understand them better. And the case it's
that there no intuition once you drive QM, where even 'particles' collide into themselves.
Said this, my point will serve as a slight hint in order to successfully understand the rest.
For an advanced civilization with huge Physics understanding, travel wouldn't be the correct word (moving through space with light speed bound limits).
For instance, when people talk about quantum entangling, information doesn't 'travel' faster than light. There's no transmission, in a similar way that here woudln't be any dx over t. There would be no actual move.
Asserting that physics knowledge purportedly incomprehensible to us would enable this or that is radical bad faith, exacerbated by dishonest word games. No transmission of information means no move, no travel, and so this advanced civilization can't get here, flatly contradicting previous claims. And as I said, our knowledge of physics is adequate to establish this. And that on top of nonsense about "paranormal" being authenticated because it was broadcast on "serious" Spanish television, not Alex Jones--which is a totally circular and bizarrely gullible argument from authority--TV and other mass media is rife with nonsense, especially in this area.
That's the dumbest crap I've ever read. If this was presented on Spanish TV then it's no better than Alex Jones, and no one with an IQ above room temperature believes this happened.
One of the affected passengers was a journalist. You know, you wouldn't want to toss your whole career to the dust bin with a shitty Alex-Jones/paranormal like comment you would find under UFO related magazines and the like. Even more today where you can find smartphones everywhere.
So, if Isabel Orta -she- lied, I would expect to be ridiculed down to the extreme in the media.
Because, let's get fair, people in Spain would just watch stuff like Cuarto Millenio (paranormal, UFO and conspiracies stuff) on Sundays for the laughs on crazy theories and 'discoveries'.
Yet the journalist told her story in prime time, in serious media, not under these kind of magazines turned into TV shows:
> Either our mysterious alien friends really love USA
The USA is the best, who'd blame them! Perhaps aliens love American cheeseburgers and milkshakes from their time in Roswell. ;P
> you guys have some condition that the entire Europe does not, e.g., permissions to test military equipment without having to announce it to the public, let alone the freedom to move around in a large area without it becoming a political drama.
That's an interesting take. Though surely Germany or others have some more remote areas. Scotland has lots of empty land and the UK airforce right?
Then again, the amount of empty space in the wester US is not to be underestimated. I live near Mountain Home Idaho. If you drive over the desert to Nevada you cross air force land with big signs warning about it being an active test grounds. Lots of people have had fighter jets fly up and do simulated bombing runs on them as they drive through.
Being pulled aside by management because your desire for correctness and high quality got you in trouble when you wanted to correct project management kind of sucks. Having your “ah, that’s probably easy” attitude makes you seem arrogant and as if you want to “show off” - even if the thing objectively speaking IS easy to you and even if you could do a better job in less time than your colleagues.
It’s a blessing but when people are envious and agree that your gift is just arrogance from ignorance, then the blessing turns into a curse.
I can solve virtually any technical challenge that I am presented, given enough time (usually 1/10th the time needed by my colleagues) and yet I seem to get in trouble more times than others for the reasons above.
(For ref. I work in IT as probably most here, with an IQ of 135+, i.e. top-1%)
> I can solve virtually any technical challenge that I am presented, given enough time (usually 1/10th the time needed by my colleagues) and yet I seem to get in trouble more times than others for the reasons above.
Apparently you have not solved the problems of how to find the right group and company yet. Either you are in the wrong room or just delusional.
Not open either, so that'll go the same way in the end. People will want more money no? Or get bought and then the buyers want more money... Pick something open and self hosted OR that at least allows you to move everything and tinker with it yourself when (not if) the company becomes evilll.
None of your companies need to worry about licenses. Docker ENGINE is free and open source. Docker DESKTOP is a software suite that requires you to purchase a license to use in a company.
But Docker Engine, the core component which works on Linux, Mac and Windows through WSL2, that is completely and 1000% free to use.
>This section describes how to install Docker Engine on Linux, also known as Docker CE. Docker Engine is also available for Windows, macOS, and Linux, through Docker Desktop.
I'm not an expert but everything I read online says that Docker runs on Linux so with Mac you need a virtual environment like Docker Desktop, Colima, or Podman to run it.
Docker desktop will run a virtual machine for you. But you can simply install docker engine in wsl or in a VM on mac exactly like you would on linux (you give up maybe automatic port forwarding from the VM to your host)
> But you can simply install docker engine in wsl or in a VM on mac exactly like you would on linux (you give up maybe automatic port forwarding from the VM to your host)
and sharing files from the host, ide integration, etc.
Not that it can't be done. But doing it is not just, 'run it'. Now you manage a vm, change your workflow, etc.
Of course, but that's the value-add of Docker Desktop. But you don't have to tie yourself to it, or even if you do use it for a bit to get going faster, you have a migration path open to doing it yourself should you need it.
Ironic username. As a die hard, WSL aint bad though. I just can't deal with an OS that automatically quarantines bittorrent clients, decides to override local administrator policies via windows updates and pops up ad notifications.
I personally use Windows + WSL2 and for work use macOS. I prefer Windows + WSL2 by a longshot. It just "works". macOS never "just works" for me. Colima is fine but requires a static memory allocation for the VM, it doesn't have the level of polish that WSL2 has. Brew is awful compared to apt (which you get with WSL2 because it's just Linux).
And then there's the windowing system of macOS that feels like it's straight from the 90s. "System tray" icons that accumulate over time and are distracting, awful window management with clunky animations, the near useless dock (clicking on VS Code shows all my 6 IDEs, why?). Windows and Linux are much modern in that regard.
The Mac hardware is amazing, well worth its price, but the OS feels like it's from a decade ago.
All my personal machines run linux. At work my choices are Mac or Windows. If Macs were still x86_64 I might choose that and run a VM, but I have no interest in learning the pitfalls of cross arch emulation or dealing with arm64 linux distro for a development machine.
I never notice the difference between arm64 and x86 environments, since I'm flipping between them all the time just because the arm boxes are so much cheaper. The only time it matters to me is building containers, and then it's just a matter of passing `--platform=linux/amd64,linux/arm64` to `docker buildx`.
If you're building really arch-specific stuff, then I could see not wanting to go there, but Rosetta support is pretty much seamless. It's just slower.
I use WSL for work because we have no linux client options. It's generally fine, but both forced windows update reboots as well as seemingly random wsl reboots (assuming because of some component update?) can really bite you if you're in the middle of something.
It's not all that bad these days ever since they added virtio support. Orbstack is well worth paying for as an alternative, but that won't solve anyone's procurement headaches either.
Oh! I wasn’t trying to make a big point except that paying for software isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and if you’re already invested in Macs you’re presumably OK with paying good money for good products.
Having used Docker Desktop on a Mac myself, it seems... fine? It does the job well enough, and it’s part of the development rather than production flow so it doesn’t need to be perfect, just unobtrusive.
I am using MacOS and like a year ago I uninstalled docker and docker desktop, installed podman and podman-compose, and have changed literally nothing else about how I use containers and docker image building/running locally. It was a drop-in replacement for me.
It's well worth it its much more than a gui for it supports running k8s locally, managing custom vm instances, resource monitoring of containers, built in local domain name support with ssl mycontainer.orb, a debug shell that gives you ability to install packages that are not available in the image by default, much better and automated volume mounting and view every container in finder, ability to query logs, an amazing ui, plus it is much, much faster and more resource efficient.
The above features really do make it worth it especially when using existing services that have complicated failure logs or are resource intensive like redis, postgres, livekit, etc or you have a lot of ports running and want to call your service without having to worry about remembering port numbers or complicated docker network configuration.
Docker Desktops also supports a local kubernetes stack, but it takes several minutes to start up, and I think in the end it's just minikube? Haven't tried Orbstack's k8s stack myself since I'm good with k3d. I did have cause though to spin up a VM a while back, and that was buttah.
Yes, Orbstack is significantly better than Docker Desktop, and probably also better than any other Docker replacement out there right now (for macOS), if you aren't bothered by the (reasonable) pricing.
It costs about $100/year per seat for commercial use, IIRC. But it is significantly faster than Docker Desktop at literally everything, has a way better UI, and a bunch of QoL features that are nice. Plus Linux virtualization that is both better and (repeating on this theme) significantly more performant than Parallels or VMWare Fusion or UTM.
I happily embraced it, to each their own I guess. There are folks who mainly work on their mac/windows laptops and just ssh into their workstation, but IT gives us way more freedom (full sudo access) on Linux so I can customize a lot more which makes me a lot happier.
Will the book cover how Ford nearly lost it all in his efforts of improving the manufacturing process and lowering the costs of the Model T? In the end people had enough of the car and wanted something new, but all Ford could produce - arguably really well - was the Model T. The competitors focused their manufacturing process such that they could efficiently reuse components for a handful of years, then they made small changes to make their new models "feel new and exciting", as we see today, which gave them the upper hand when people got fed up of the Model T.
I'm waiting for history to repeat itself with Tesla, but it's not a popular (hi)story to tell. Not as popular as how great an American pioneer Henry Ford was, for sure.
At least the OP excerpt focuses only on Ford’s efficiency engine: precision machining, interchangeable parts, and the moving assembly line combined with extreme production volumes to make the Model T nearly impossible to compete with on cost and reliability. But there’s a deeper lesson than just “Ford was rigid, GM was flexible.”
The real dynamic was that efficiency and scale compound improvements but also compound lock-in. The more Ford optimized his system around one product, the higher the switching cost to change anything fundamental. Every special-purpose machine tool, every supplier contract, every material flow was tuned to one car. At small scale, that’s agility. At massive scale, it’s a straitjacket.
Tesla faces a version of this trap. Its efficiency engine is vertical integration and battery/powertrain mastery. But the stronger that engine gets, the more risk that its identity collapses into “this is what we make, as efficiently as possible,” rather than “this is what the market wants, however we must adapt.” GM in the 1920s wasn’t just adding variety for fun, it was creating a systematic upgrade ladder (“a car for every purse and purpose” as Sloan said at the time) that turned consumer churn into a growth engine (allowing customers to start with basic models like Chevrolet and progressively upgrade to more luxurious brands such as Oldsmobile, Buick, or Cadillac). I agree that Tesla hasn’t yet built an equivalent mechanism to capture customers once they’ve “had enough of the Model T.”
The irony is that efficiency-driven firms almost never stumble because they stop improving; they stumble because all their improvements are local optimizations. Ford’s engineers in 1925 were still making operations faster, parts cheaper, and tolerances tighter, but all within the cage of the Model T. Tesla today is in danger of repeating this exact logic trap: world-class at batteries and drivetrains, but perhaps blind to the fact that consumer perception, design novelty, and product line evolution can erode even the strongest cost advantage.
Tesla would have a massive advantage compared to conventional car makers if they decided to broaden their product line. That advantage is their dealer-light model. They could decide that they'll do a batch of purple cars once a quarter. If you select purple in their configurator, your delivery date gets pushed out by up to 3 months appropriately. No dealer would ever stock a purple car. So Tesla could get a lock on the small number of people who want purple cars.
(Yes, I know about wraps, substitute "purple" for whatever feature or body style or quirk it is you have trouble finding on modern cars)
Maybe Rivian will fill this niche if Tesla doesn't.
Honestly, I think a "MUSK SUCKS" limited edition paint job would sell amazingly well. He is the kind of CEO who would find that joke funny, too (the irony that somebody bought his product in an anti-him version, thus still supporting what they actively advertise that they dislike... it's perfect).
It's not super important when compared to basic needs like plumbing, food, electricity, medical assistance and other silly things we take for granted but are heavily dependent on. We all saw what happened to hospitals during the early stages of the COVID pandemic; we had plenty of internet and electricity but were struggling on the medical part. That was quite bad... I'm not sure if it's any worse if an entire country/continent lost access to the Internet. Quite a lot of our core infrastructure components in society rely on this. And a fair bit of it relies on a common understanding of what time "now" is.