Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | pseudolus's comments login

Remarks from his memorial service by his mother:

https://themakermom.com/2020/02/isaac-moldofsky-mom-eulogy.h...


Great article with a number of well-known references to biographies of Feynman. For those interested in Dirac, some excellent biographies have emerged over the years including: "The Strangest Man: The Hidden Life of Paul Dirac, Mystic of the Atom" and "Dirac: A Scientific Biography ". [0][1].

[0] https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002LDM8QS/ref=dbs_a_def_r...

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Dirac-Scientific-Biography-Helge-Krag...


one anecdote about Dirac. Dirac and Heisenberg discussed about religion. They involved Pauli in the discussion and Pauli summed up Dirac's point of view: "“Es gibt keinen Gott und Dirac ist sein Prophet. (There is no God and Dirac is his Prophet.)"

Related: "Why ambiverts are better leaders" https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20210319-why-ambiverts-...


If dominance is termed as units shipped then it's somewhat of a foregone conclusion that Tesla will, relative to other market players, slip. However, no company has appeared on the horizon that matches Tesla in terms of perceived and actual innovation.


Do customers care about who is the best innovator?

They want cars, which are electric, and BMW et. al. will give them tons of those and that's it.

The other 'nice things' Telsa has are niche feature offers; nice, but not going to change the world.

Elon is betting that he can automate manufacturing better than other companies, that remains to be seen.

===== EDIT:

There's a broad belief in the US that "Tesla has change the world" ... which really isn't true.

If we wanted to attribute it to a car, it's probably the Nissan Leaf though that wouldn't be right either.

I think the 'Tesla Myth' is borne out of pop culture instinct, not really industry reality or data.

Here are the facts [1] (EV sales historical)

Tesla has never been an important EV maker - in terms of volume.

The major manufacturers have always been innovating, tweaking, and out-selling Tesla on EV's by a wide margin.

If Tesla were not on that chart, it wouldn't have changed a thing.

Tesla is a niche player and boldly entered into a locked up market, and helped some pop culture trends and some points of innovation - all of that is meaningful and they deserve credit - they are a great company.

But they didn't move the needle that much and we'd be in roughly the same position otherwise.

[1] https://afdc.energy.gov/data/10567


Tesla’s already changed the world. The fact that traditional car companies like VW can even make a bet to go all electric is because Tesla has showed it’s a viable and highly successful strategy.


This is likely ahistorical. VW was a bit later, but other market leaders Nissan and Renault released their platforms before the Tesla Model S came out.


I think if you drew a graph of electric car adoption and compared it to one from a hypothetical world where Tesla didn't exist, the zoomed in view of the last ten years would be a little higher with Tesla. By the time 2050 rolls around it'll be real hard to tell the difference.


Tesla may have "changed the world," but that doesn't mean it will retain dominance.

Tesla has always been a bet that a tech company can learn to make cars faster than car companies can learn to make tech. Moves like VW's push the latter aggressively, while Tesla is taking longer to scale its car production, giving credence to the idea that the electric car the average person drives twenty years from now will not be a Tesla.

And if that's the case, can Tesla justify its corporate valuation? Comparing Tesla's stock to other automakers, the markets have priced in an expectation of rapid earnings growth; the stock will plummet if those expectations can't be met.


The shift was inevitable and always in progress with or without Tesla.

They have been selling and experimenting with electric cars for a very long time.

Nobody has 'copied' anything that Tesla has done, they've done it on their own terms and sales have been picking up especially in Europe for a long time.

Tesla added some enthusiasm and pop culture flavour to the moment, but they didn't change anything. At most, they accelerated the timeline by a few years.


Other companies have experiment with EVs for a long time and repeatedly, invariably failed miserably at it.

One crucial mistake they all made was focusing on the low-end, where the technology just wasn't viable/practical and couldn't be made viable/practical in one step.

Tesla's genius was focusing on the high end first and letting that trickle down. Starting with a car that didn't have to be practical to be viable.


Everything failed until it didn't.

Millions of EV's are sold by companies that didn't copy or follow Tesla.

I agree with your assessment of how Tesla 'did it' - but other companies were 'doing it' at the same time.


The Renault Zoe (which outsells any Tesla in Europe) came out the same year as the Model S, and is about as low end as (Western) electric cars get. Focusing on the low end apparently worked in that case...


The Cult of Elon is alive and well.

He is a pop culture icon now, and that's marketing that money can't buy.


I don't think it's about Elon, though in the very early days he certainly helped.

They're an upper middle class status symbol now. It's likely gonna take a solid decade of something being better for that to change. As long as the product is at least arguably competitive they'll be fine.


Yes, but they are not more of a status symbol that BMW, at least broadly.

Their brand power is not going to be enough for them to live in a very well established industry of premium and regular brands.

Tesla will do fine, I think they will be a legit new car company, but that's just it: 'another' auto player.


> Yes, but they are not more of a status symbol that BMW, at least broadly.

Forget BMW. They had a lead with the i3, which they squandered. Their latest EV is the Mini One Electric, which is a rebranded i3. BMW dropped the ball.

No decent future lineup of EVs. More importantly, no planned investment in battery factories. BMW is dead in the water, with a lag behind Tesla of 5-10 years.

VW is the first brand I see with a less than five year lag behind Tesla. Battery production capacity is a good metric for how much of a competition each manufacturer is. VW should catch up to Tesla a bit before 2025, assuming no delays and assuming no ramp-up of Tesla Gigafactory investment.


In the short term - yes.

But it's a massive, massive industry. Maybe the biggest. 5 years is a blip.

The 'brand value' of BMW is going nowhere, same can be said for 'all the other brands'.

The industry will catch up, brand by brand, at which point it remains to be seen what Tesla will look like in the mix.

My prediction is that it's a 2cnd tier player, but they are growing fast, they could put themselves in the position of being a major player no doubt. But I don't see the other brands changing that much in terms of status.


Not sure why you’re downvoted considering Corolla is the best seller. If any EV takes largest share in the future, it will be Corolla EV/Golf EV/Focus EV.


From the Abstract of the cited paper: "The identified microbiome pattern of healthy ageing is characterized by a depletion of core genera found across most humans, primarily Bacteroides. Retaining a high Bacteroides dominance into older age, or having a low gut microbiome uniqueness measure, predicts decreased survival in a 4-year follow-up."


A link to the actual paper "Mutual anticipation can contribute to self-organization in human crowds": https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/12/eabe7758


I'm not an expert but if I understand correctly the distinction might lie in the fact that in a symbiotic relationship each organism has its own separate repository of DNA but that in eukaryotes the amalgamation is so complete that there's only one repository (something of an aside but in humans mitochondrial DNA is inherited from the mother).


That's why I quoted that chunk of text: it seems to indicate that the nitrate-metabolizing endosymbiont is almost as completely integrated as mitochondria are. Hence my confusion.


I can't wait until he starts wearing a crown and carrying a scepter. Perhaps he'll starting conferring honorary titles upon his employees and members of the general public. All in all he's got a great sense of humour.


I'd take issue with "betting the farm". Toronto proper is, per Wikipedia 243.32 sq mi, and the land in question totals 12 acres. Granted, Google may not have been the best partner but foregoing the opportunity to build a technology centered city seems like a lost chance to determine whether or not that particular form of architecture is viable - not only for Toronto for other cities as well. A fear of failure and a fear to experiment will end up limiting future horizons.


> Google may not have been the best partner

After how they acted in New York City, I can't believe any city would even pick up their calls.


Could you describe what Google did in New York City for those of us not in the loop?



Yes, nice catch. I'm a big Plautus fan.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: