• 0 Posts
  • 44 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 22nd, 2023

help-circle


  • I was a nuclear operator in the Navy. Here are the actual reasons:

    1. The designs are classified US military assets
    2. They are not refuleable
    3. They only come in 2 “sizes”: aircraft carrier and submarine
    4. They are not scaleable. You can just make a reactor 2x as big
    5. They require as much down time as up time
    6. They are outdated
    7. The military won’t let you interrupt their supply chain to make civilian reactors
    8. New designs over promise and underdeliver
    9. They are optimized for erratic operations (combat) not steady state (normal power loads)
    10. They are engineered assuming they have infinite sea water available for everything

    There’s more but that’s just off the top of my head












  • But we do though. Maybe not exactly test every possible scenario. Typically when we make a design decision we plan for the worst theoretical condition the part will be exposed to. Then we plan for 5-10 times that. Think about the cost and effort added to everything with that level scrutiny. We design for fringe cases. That’s the point I’m trying to make. It’s insane to me that because it’s software, companies get a free pass on that level of scrutiny. As software takes over more car functions that becomes more concerning. It’s bullshit that I’m part of their beta test.



  • The thing that kills me about this sort of thing is the complete lack of accountability. Working class people at assembly plants, dealers, suppliers will all feel the sting from the drop in sales. There’s some dipshit MBA at GM who made and pushed this decision. Any rational person could see that GM is not is a position to push their own infotainment system. Car play and android auto are beloved. Not having one or both is a deal breaker for new car purchasers. We will never know who this person is. Making such an outrageously bad business decision should result thing this person being blackballed from any kind of business role. But that will never happen.




  • Once again, this is not true. They do what is called a prior art search as part of issuing a patent. They look worldwide for anything that could be considered your invention before your filing date before issuing a patent. Even after a patent is issued, if prior art is presented to the patent office they can rescind the patent. It’s a form and like $100. You don’t need a lawyer to bring prior art to the patent office’s attention. The legal battle will be between the patent office and the patent troll if they are trying to contest the prior art.