I've posted several times about the inability of Musk-haters to even mention his contributions to the fight about climate change.
Whatever Tesla's contribution to the fight against climate change is, it's irrelevant to the discussion of Musk's management of the Twitter.
It's relevant to appreciate that the discussion of Musk's management flows out of a Musk-hating mindset* that cannot utter anything positive about him, not even acknowledgement of his extraordinary contributions to the fight against climate change.
Edited to add: * (with limited exceptions here)
do we really need to go back through this thread and find all the comments from people you're arguing with, acknowledging Musk's contributions to clean energy?
You are the only one I recall who made even a half-hearted acknowledgement.
I'm happy to be proven wrong.
"extraordinary"
you're running out of superlatives.
Do you understand CO2 credits? Do you understand that Tesla selling those credits allows other companies to pollute more, essentially negating (some of) Tesla's effects on the environment? Do you understand that Tesla profits off of the polluting of other companies?
Or will you ignore this post as you have my prior posts on credits?
Our time difference with you means that lately, when I get to this thread, there are over 50 posts to read and digest so any thoughts/contributions I might have are way overdue. I’m sorry for that. You’d think that living in your future I could manage my time better!!
Anyway, I just wanted to mention re the wondrous Star Link: it has awful (not aweful) implications for astronomers and meteorologists. There’s too much light/signalled info being generated for them to see clearly what they need to. These implications were discussed several months ago in a series of articles I read in New Scientist, BBC Science or Technology, and our ABC Science had a feature while discussing ‘space clutter’ and hazards for space navigation and research.
There’s a lot of dead parts floating around above us that should be brought back down (safely) before anything else goes up, but no-one talks about it or seems prepared to do anything about it. We’re going to regret not tidying up.
Fewer streaky photos of the sky? NSF and SpaceX hope so.
With the launch of the James Webb Space Telescope, as with the Hubble Space Telescope before it, space-based astronomy gets a lot of attention, but ground-based observatories are the real workhorses of space science, and they have a really big problem: satellites.
Specifically, the problem is the various ways satellites can interfere with an observation, whether it be radio, optical, or infrared. To help mitigate these issues, the National Science Foundation (NSF) and SpaceX, operators of the fast-growing Starlink internetsatellite network, have come to an agreement that they hope will reduce interference with astronomers in an increasingly crowded night sky, according to an NSF statement.
Ground-based observations of near-Earth objects, distant stars, nebulas and galaxies require remote locations with unpolluted night time skies, but they also require long exposure times, with optical lenses collecting light over several seconds or even minutes to accumulate enough distant light to produce an image.
When a passing satellite crosses this field of observation, what looks to a human observer like a single point of moving light becomes a streak across the sky to a telescope, ruining the image astronomers were trying to capture. A 2022 study in The Astronomical Journal Letters found that 5,301 satellite streaks showed up in archival observations captured at the Zwicky Transient Facility in California between November 2019 and September 2021.
"In 2019, 0.5% of twilight images were affected, and now almost 20% are affected," Przemek Mróz, a former Caltech postdoctoral scholar and the study's lead author, said in a Caltech statement published in January 2022.
To mitigate this, SpaceX has already begun working on redesigns for its second-generation Starlink satellites, including solar array mitigation, dielectric mirror film and a new kind of black paint for its satellites that it hopes will reduce brightness.
SpaceX also agreed to look at just how much of an effect, if any, the lasers that NSF facility use to sharpen their instruments' vision actually affect the operation of a satellite. Observatories had been turning off their lasers whenever a Starlink satellite was nearby, but that won't be necessary any longer, according to the statement.
SpaceX is addressing the concerns of radio astronomers as well as optical. The company has agreed to a number of coordination efforts since Starlink satellites use a radio band very close to that used for radio astronomy. In addition, the company has agreed to study the impact of Starlink terminals located near the Very Large Array in New Mexico and the Green Bank Observatory in West Virginia.
(Given the remote nature of radio facilities, the surrounding communities have been historically underserved when it comes to high-speed internet access, a problem that Starlink has specifically cited as a reason for its satellite network in the first place.)
SpaceX and the NSF also agreed to work together more closely going forward to address the concerns of the astronomical community as new issues arise as Starlink's satellite constellation grows even larger.
"We are setting the stage for a successful partnership between commercial and public endeavors that allows important science research to flourish alongside satellite communication," NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan said in the statement.
Speaking of Starlink, Ukraine Pres Zelensky recently made a statement thanking the US business community's contributions to helping Ukraine withstand the Russian invasion.
The first company he mentions is Starlink (at 0:27)
Addressing a Chambers of Commerce meeting in Boca Raton today, Zelensky thanks BlackRock, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and others for their support of Ukraine. Adds that sending Ukraine heavier weapons, like Abrams tanks, represents a "big business" opportunity for US corporations pic.twitter.com/N1h8OVECLt
Do you understand CO2 credits? Do you understand that Tesla selling those credits allows other companies to pollute more, essentially negating (some of) Tesla's effects on the environment? Do you understand that Tesla profits off of the polluting of other companies?
Or will you ignore this post as you have my prior posts on credits?
@paulsurovell is going to ignore this question just as he has every other time it's been posed (including by me earlier this week).
I've posted several times about the inability of Musk-haters to even mention his contributions to the fight about climate change.
Whatever Tesla's contribution to the fight against climate change is, it's irrelevant to the discussion of Musk's management of the Twitter.
It's relevant to appreciate that the discussion of Musk's management flows out of a Musk-hating mindset* that cannot utter anything positive about him, not even acknowledgement of his extraordinary contributions to the fight against climate change.
Edited to add: * (with limited exceptions here)
do we really need to go back through this thread and find all the comments from people you're arguing with, acknowledging Musk's contributions to clean energy?
You are the only one I recall who made even a half-hearted acknowledgement.
I'm happy to be proven wrong.
"extraordinary"
you're running out of superlatives.
Do you understand CO2 credits? Do you understand that Tesla selling those credits allows other companies to pollute more, essentially negating (some of) Tesla's effects on the environment? Do you understand that Tesla profits off of the polluting of other companies?
Or will you ignore this post as you have my prior posts on credits?
It's not whataboutism to question whether or not Musk is saving the world from climate change if he is selling the credits which just allow others to pollute. Why won't you answer this question?
I've posted several times about the inability of Musk-haters to even mention his contributions to the fight about climate change.
Whatever Tesla's contribution to the fight against climate change is, it's irrelevant to the discussion of Musk's management of the Twitter.
It's relevant to appreciate that the discussion of Musk's management flows out of a Musk-hating mindset* that cannot utter anything positive about him, not even acknowledgement of his extraordinary contributions to the fight against climate change.
Edited to add: * (with limited exceptions here)
do we really need to go back through this thread and find all the comments from people you're arguing with, acknowledging Musk's contributions to clean energy?
You are the only one I recall who made even a half-hearted acknowledgement.
I'm happy to be proven wrong.
"extraordinary"
you're running out of superlatives.
Do you understand CO2 credits? Do you understand that Tesla selling those credits allows other companies to pollute more, essentially negating (some of) Tesla's effects on the environment? Do you understand that Tesla profits off of the polluting of other companies?
Or will you ignore this post as you have my prior posts on credits?
Hey Paul, this is from Space.com dated 23 Nov last year :
https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-satellites.html There’s still loads to be concerned about, despite those agreements. Also, checking the latest ‘where’s it available in your country’, it appears that I can only access Starlink in one region in Australia, and that it’s still highly unstable/susceptible to outages due to weather events, snow, trees etc. A shame really because this region is notable for bushfires in old growth forested hills and snowfields.
And part of the reason why DeSantis gets away with using the phrase "woke indoctrination" is that failure to call out out-of-control wokeness by liberals (like you) has enabled DeSantis to deceive the public into thinking that teaching African American studies is part of the woke campaign to chastise people about how they speak and think.
A big factor here is the failure of liberals to reject the term "Critical Race Theory," which is apart from being undefined, suggests a doctrine rather than a well-established academic field (sorry I don't have another word for "field") of study, which is what African American studies is.
Good on Mr. Smedley. I was just making a silly attempt at humor (not as silly as Elon's similar attempt that got a little out of hand).
It's good that there are people who got in at what might prove to be the bottom. But the larger point is that Tesla was trading at about $225 on the day Musk took over Twitter. Not saying that's necessarily the causse of the price decline, but it is what it is.
So if you bought Tesla any time between late 2020 and mid-2022, $166 doesn't look that good.
Gloating over a short-term bounce is silly, but I don't really see it as gloating. I see it more as a rebuttal to all the gleeful postings of every little Elon-sucks news report and tweet storm, as well as the chronicling of $TSLA stock price when it was tanking. So yeah, sometimes what comes around goes around.
Gloating over a short-term bounce is silly, but I don't really see it as gloating. I see it more as a rebuttal to all the gleeful postings of every little Elon-sucks news report and tweet storm, as well as the chronicling of $TSLA stock price when it was tanking. So yeah, sometimes what comes around goes around.
just me, but I'd wait for the price to go around to where it was pre-October before I'd come around to gloat.
Anyone who bought in the previous 2 years is still substantially underwater.
Actually I think the "gloating" you're suddenly objecting to is just more of the ongoing tit-for-tat nyaah-nyaahing b/w Paul and nohero. The below post with cherry-picked numbers for what has (still) been one of the best-performing stocks in the entire market over the past five years seems plenty gloating, but I don't recall that you had a problem with it.
Actually I think the "gloating" you're suddenly objecting to is just more of the ongoing tit-for-tat nyaah-nyaahing b/w Paul and nohero. The below post with cherry-picked numbers for what has (still) been one of the best-performing stocks in the entire market over the past five years seems plenty gloating, but I don't recall that you had a problem with it.
Tesla did lose nearly 70% of its value in 2022, as referenced in the tweet about Tulsi saying Musk was a "winner" in 2022.
Actually I think the "gloating" you're suddenly objecting to is just more of the ongoing tit-for-tat nyaah-nyaahing b/w Paul and nohero. The below post with cherry-picked numbers for what has (still) been one of the best-performing stocks in the entire market over the past five years seems plenty gloating, but I don't recall that you had a problem with it.
I'm not "objecting" to anything. I just think it's silly. Like stopping to do a touchdown dance when you're only on the 30 yard line.
Actually I think the "gloating" you're suddenly objecting to is just more of the ongoing tit-for-tat nyaah-nyaahing b/w Paul and nohero. The below post with cherry-picked numbers for what has (still) been one of the best-performing stocks in the entire market over the past five years seems plenty gloating, but I don't recall that you had a problem with it.
Tesla did lose nearly 70% of its value in 2022, as referenced in the tweet about Tulsi saying Musk was a "winner" in 2022.
Yes and it was a time period cherry-picked to fit the "Elon sucks" narrative. Similar to citing $TSLA being up 65% this year as evidence that Elon rules.
The latter argument,while specious, at least doesn't also run contrary to Tesla's superior longer-term performance.
"extraordinary"
you're running out of superlatives.
Do you understand CO2 credits? Do you understand that Tesla selling those credits allows other companies to pollute more, essentially negating (some of) Tesla's effects on the environment? Do you understand that Tesla profits off of the polluting of other companies?
Or will you ignore this post as you have my prior posts on credits?