Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "Thunderf00t" channel.

  1. 2
  2. I'm an aerospace engineer and there's 2 points I like to remind people of just so the Muskrats don't go screaming and howling and claiming we are BLIND. And being fair there is a very mixed bag when we objectively look at Musk and his companies. 1) SpaceX did an amazing thing in breaking through the barriers to the space launch business that companies like Boeing dominated. We tend to forget that Boeing got more money to help develop Starliner which is yet to have a 100% successful flight. Crew Dragon in my view is a very good success. Its not ideal but it did get NASA back into flying its own astronauts from its own facilities back into space without having to fly via the Russians. HOWEVER that success does not and will never excuse Elon's stupidity over the Mars fantasy or idiocy on other space related things like Starship. YES my view of Starship is the complete opposite of Crew Dragon because Crew Dragon fulfilled an actual need while Starship does what other than pump Elon's ego? 2) Tesla did an amazing thing by becoming a successful EV manufacturer. I have worked in the Auto sector and getting that sector to change anything is staggeringly hard and yet Tesla go that entire industry to change. HOWEVER when you look at Elon's actual involvement in the development its been disastrous. There's a court case between Martin Eberhard one of the actual founders (with Marc Tarpenning) that's been covered by the YT channel Common Sense Skeptic. The really obvious thing is Cybertruck. That's not something Elon can blame on anyone else. The real tragedy in my view is that there's some fantastic engineers in both SpaceX and Tesla who have done some amazing work. Unfortunately its likely they will never get any credit because Elon will take that from them and once Elon does trash his empire the reputation of those people will also be trashed.
    2
  3. 2
  4. 2
  5. 2
  6. 2
  7. 2
  8. 2
  9. 2
  10. 2
  11. 2
  12. 2
  13. 2
  14. 2
  15. 2
  16. 2
  17. That is such a great line and the full quote is even better "a scream of defiance against weaponized stupidity and the influences of ignorance." I'm an aerospace engineer and the staggering amount of ignorance in the media on reporting almost everything in technology is staggering. I'm Australian but did my degree in America in the late 80s during the Reagan Star Wars era. We worked out back then that the whole energy weapons zapping ballistic missiles was NEVER GOING TO WORK. The classic was that lasers bounce off shiny surfaces. Even if you can deliver the energy required you have vehicles moving at insane speeds and the task of being able to identify track predict and target accurately anything is incredibly hard. Yet just recently here in Australia the head of our "space force" announced they would be pursuing "soft kill" technologies for satellites and the media jumped on it like they have with the word "hypersonic." The ignorant mass of Australia egged on by the clickbait brigade in the media are preparing to spend several billion dollars on junk science that CANNOT EVER WORK. And that's just one of the idiotically stupid things we are up to. Every other developed nation is also doing similarly stupid things. Other than the media a major problem is the consulting industry who just drown the business world and governments under mountains of BS. Go look up British-Italian economist Mariana Mazzucato who's recently written a book called "the big con" about the consulting industry. There's a bunch of talks she's given here on YT about the subject of the consulting industry and how pervasive it is.
    2
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. Answers below Just in case you thought I was being facetious. 1) There's a very thin film of plastic. What's odd about the process is that for a plastic process its done at much higher temperature than injection molding so that it sticks to the paper/cardboard. Normally polyethylene and polyethylene/polypropylene mixes are moulded at 160-180℃ while for paper coating its 300-320 2) Because reflectors have to deal with heat from the light bulbs they were traditionally made from thermoset plastics which look and feel a bit like bread dough. Its pushed into the die where it is HEATED then cooled. The shiny surface is created by first spraying the front side in a lacquer that's UV cured and then under vacuum has a layer of Aluminum about 50-200 atoms thick embedded in the lacquer. Its the lacquer that makes one side shiny and the other dull grey. 3) Copper like many metals is first extracted from the ore using acid leaching. Aluminum does not dissolve from the bauxite using acids and it is instead done with caustic at temperature and pressure. The process is known as the Bayer Process and yes it was by a member of the Bayer family now famous for pharmaceuticals. 4) Copper unlike most metals work hardens as you bend and flex it so it need to be softened through the opposite process to the quench hardening you see on the sword & knife channels. It differs from tempering. Annealing unlike tempering aims to make the metal as soft as practical while tempering aims to specifically keep some hardness while reducing brittleness. To see examples of these processes I recommend watching the sword & knife channels for hardening and tempering and the hobbyist channels making things like model steam engines for annealing. the channel Blondihacks is currently building a model steam engine made from copper. 5) I'd expect that any mechanical engineer knows the difference between a lathe and a mill. Look at what is rotating in the main spindle. A lathe has the part held to the spindle and rotates while the tool is moved in 2 or more axis to shape the part. A mill has the tool mounted in the spindle and it rotates while the part is held to the table and moved around in 2 or more axis to make the part. Where it gets confusing is that it is possible to use a mill as a lathe and a lathe as a mill.
    1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. AEROSPACE ENGINEER HERE: Like many engineers I am TIRED of clowns promoting garbage to the public that we then have to explain and explain and explain why its not possible or it won't work. This crap and nonsense is going on constantly, with scammer after scammer promoting the next thing and wasting everyone's time and money. Just the other day I had some ignorant clown tell me that here in Australia we ALREADY HAVE a couple of Small Modular Reactors operating. Funny thing is NONE of the companies involved in SMRs are saying anything other than they HOPE to have them available by the mid 2030s. According to this clown somehow Australia has time warped in a couple of SMRs. As an aerospace engineer I hear all sorts of nonsense from terraforming Mars (which is simply a fantasy), to Jewish or Chinese Space lasers causing grass fires to hypersonic missiles that manoeuvre and dance around the sky AND ITS ALL BULLSHIT. What Thunder00t is doing with these basic calculations of HOW MUCH IS NEEDED is what I call planetary mechanics. Along with my classmates we were introduced to this by a NASA engineer who did a guest lecture one day. He'd just finished a project for NASA on what it would take to terraform Mars. Once NASA realised just how much stuff (like air) is needed to cover a planet they gave up on the idea of EVER terraforming Mars. But 35 years later there are millions of Elon Musk fans who think they will be going to Mars to terraform it. DID you notice for this proposal the team leader is an Architect? If Architects knew how much engineers HATE THEM. Other than a few of the very best architects who know what their designs do to the people who have to make them, the vast majority of architects are PROBLEM CREATORS. The worst part of their attitude is THEY KNOW they are creating problems for other people to deal with.
    1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. INDUSTRIAL CONTROL SYSTEMS engineer here: This is WHY I KNOW FSD (full self driving) is a false and misleading concept at least for the moment. AND APOLOGIES IF THIS IS LONGISH. FYI - My degree was in aerospace but I have spent 30+ years in industrial control systems, automation and robotics. That has included working with many sensor systems including laser scanning systems. Although I don't work with vision systems I was introduced to the basics of vision systems in 1998 and am fully aware of many of the advancements in that area. The actual problem with FSD is the amount of information that needs to be processed. As human beings we just don't realise how much information our visual cortex processes every second and that's because most of it is processed by our peripheral system which is NOT part of our general conscious. Its all there in our periphery and we aren't focussing on it. Our peripheral system is extraordinary at clumping things together and dismissing irrelevant clumps while alerting our conscious system of potential threats or items of interest. For example we don't see a 100,000 leaves attached to 1,000s branches attached to a trunk connected to a root system we see a tree. We don't see several million yellowish hairs covering 4 legs a body, a tail, a head, big teeth and an even bigger set of fangs we see a lion. Out on the African savannah people don't see millions of blades of grass, 1,000s and 1,000s of antelope, wildebeests, birds, insects and other wild life. OUR BRAIN via our peripheral system filters out the noise and will latch onto that 1 lion out of all those millions and millions of items in our visual range and SCREAM "that's a threat." Similarly when driving a car down the average suburban street we see but don't focus on the millions of leaves - we see the trees and dismiss them as NOT a threat. We see don't see all the nuts, bolts, sheets of glass, sheet metal, paint and rubber - we see parked cars and dismiss them as NOT a threat. We see the bricks, boards, windows, window frames, paint - we see houses and dismiss them as NOT a threat. BUT WE DO SEE the bouncing ball coming down a driveway and our peripheral system SCREAMS that there's a dog or a child chasing after that ball OR we'll see a flash of something else and our peripheral system will alert our conscious brain to be aware of it. Like we'll suddenly notice one of the parked cars just moved. This is what our peripheral system does with incredible speed. It processes a staggering mass of data every second and compares it to previous seconds and then filters out all the noise. This is why certain players in team sports seem so amazing in how they can suddenly pass to another player in a way that asks "How did they see them?" The answer is they are people whose peripheral system just operates better than average and in some rare cases a lot better. NOW TRY AND CONSIDER HOW YOU MIGHT GET A COMPUTER TO DO THAT???? Remember no 2 trees are the same, and no 2 cars are ever parked the same, and no 2 houses are the same PLUS no 2 streets are the same anywhere on the planet. There's always something different. NOW CONSIDER that the perspective (as in the visual angles) on that scene is changing every second because your car is MOVING. You now have to process the next image and compare it to previous images to pick up that movement or notice that item that gets the wider scoping part of the system to flag an item of interest to the higher level decision making part of the system. Suddenly you will realise that the scope of the technological task to get a computer to do what the human peripheral system does is monstrous. Once you understand the scope of the task required to to do FSD you'll quickly realise that it MIGHT BE possible for some limited situations or MIGHT be possible once we get the visual scanning systems capable of sorting through all the noise to find those few items that need a higher level of evaluation we can't even begin the task BUT RIGHT NOW we don't have those systems because if they existed we hear all about it. We'd hear about the camera that's as good or better than a human eye and we'd hear about the processor that's as good as the human peripheral system AND NOBODY is even saying they have it under development or has made "the breakthrough". Lets also NOT forget that a bunch of car manufacturers GAVE UP on FSD about 5 years ago. Uber sold off its FSD once they, (like the car manufacturers) realised just what it would take to do the job. This is also why, with the exception of a few tiny companies desperately trying for attention (and money) have stopped trying to build self FLYING air taxis. Sorry if this was longish but I hope you get the gist of why it might be possible in future but NOT NOW.
    1
  41. 1
  42. Its about 2 digits too few and you keep letting it all burn down. Below this is the comment I addressed to Thunderf00t sorry but its longish ----------- ENGINEER HERE: Normally I would agree 100% with Thunderf00t, but there is a major problem he has missed with the whole carbon capture system and there's simply NO WAY to power it. EVERY VERSION of CARBON CAPTURE REQUIRES ENERGY and by far the single biggest issue facing society right now is energy. I first became aware of the energy issue during a small consulting job in 2016 into Australia's (my country's) future energy needs. Ignoring other things Australia has 22.6 GW of coal fired power to be replaced. Just like many other countries there is no way around this BECAUSE they are OLD and WEARING OUT and HAVE TO BE REPLACED ANYWAY. That build out also has to be double that amount because of population growth. Using Hinkley Point C which is the nuclear power station being constructed in Britain we can get the cost of what it would take Australia to replace that 22.6GW with LOW EMISSION nuclear. Its AU$440 Billion but when you add in expected population growth that doubles to AU$880 Billion. Then when you add in the extra power needed for all the electric cars we want it goes over AU$ 1 Trillion. When you add the power grid upgrades needed it costs around AU$2 TRILLION. I AM NOT AGAINST NUCLEAR POWER but I am calling you and many others out on what it actually costs to do what the job that exists will take. If its going to cost Australia AU$2 Trillion what do you think its going to cost all the other countries around the world with similar problems? Simply put the CO2 removal from the atmosphere has to be done with A LOW ENERGY SYSTEM and I am sorry but that means trees. YES I AGREE with Thunderf00t 100% that doing this with trees will take a monumental world encompassing program and that none of the tree hugging Greenies understand SHlT about what it will take, but trees don't need to be plugged into anything because they're solar powered. At a basic concept it means something like every person on the planet planting 1,000 trees and hoping that 1 in 10 make it to maturity. But those 800 Billion trees that survive to maturity should capture several Trillion tons of Carbon over the next 20-30 years and we need to be thinking about and talking on a level of Trillions of tons. Just so none of you think I'm crazy Statista has the global emissions on graph going from 1940 to 2022. It took the 44 years from 1940 to 1984 to emit 500 Million tons. It took the 21 years to 2005 to emit the second 500 Million tons (making 1 Trillion tons) It took the 15 years to 2020 for the next 500 Million tons making it 1.5 trillion tons of cumulative emissions since 1940. At the current rate of 37 Billion tons a year we'll reach 2 Trillion tons of cumulative emissions around 2033. Sorry TF (and I love your channel) but nobody's mechanical or chemical carbon capture solution is going to work if its needs energy and trees don't need to be plugged in to a power station to work. They only require muscle energy to plant them.
    1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1