Meegul

    ________________________________________
  / "We report here our experimental        \
  | demonstration of flexible egocentric     |
  | tooling in a pet cow (Bos taurus),       |
  | Veronika, who uses a deck brush to self- |
  | scratch. Across randomized trials, she   |
  | preferred the bristled end but switched  |
  | to the stick end when targeting softer   |
  | lower-body areas. This adaptive          |
  | deployment of tool features reveals      |
  | multi-purpose tool use not previously    |
  \ reported in non-primate mammals."       /
    ----------------------------------------
           \   ^__^
            \  (oo)\_______
               (__)\       )\/\
                   ||----w |
                   ||     ||

Do you plan on monetizing this somehow? If not, open sourcing some, if not all, would be pretty cool, even if it weren't necessarily licensed in a way that others could 'take' it, if that's your concern. Nonetheless, a very cool project.

Model Ys still have a separate, standard 12V battery that power many of the car's non-drivetrain related parts. So in this case, the battery pack contactor failing open would cause the car to lose the ability to drive, but the doors/windows/lights/screen would all still likely be working.

511 - Chrome without any extensions

433 - Clean firefox install

500 - Clean edge install

On an AMD Ryzen 7950X3D / 5600MHz RAM

Interestingly, I got substantially different results depending on whether I used chrome with my typical extensions or not. Looking at the flamegraph, I don't seem to see the full picture of why there's such a substantial difference. Bitwarden/React Developer tools (the 2 primary extensions I use) don't seem to make enough of an impact to account for the roughly 40% performance increase seen without them. The browserbench javascript accounted for ~38.6% of the overall time taken for the benchmark, but the sum of my extensions was only 6.5%. I'm not incredibly familiar with browser performance profiling, so there's probably more to the story.

We all know that their engineers are paid well, but that's still potentially more than an order of magnitude off of the value they generate. Of course, there are many other expenses to running their business, but to claim that broadly developers are overvalued when one of the most prolific employers of developers is generating 10x+ the revenue of what they spend on them, is likely no more than only occasionally correct.

Edit: I appreciate you toning down the more combative part of your comment.

Even this paper doesn't claim to have a particularly good superconductor as far as overall performance is concerned. It's not particularly close to the state of the art in critical field or current. But if it does turn out that their hypothesis claiming that the internal stress of the material allows it to bypass the current need for extremely high pressures / low temperatures, then perhaps there can be new materials developed that are better superconductors while still overcoming the current limitations presented by REBCOs and other leading superconductors. Also, that's not even mentioning that LK-99 has no particularly exotic materials. REBCOs rely on rare earth elements like Yttrium, but this just uses lead, copper, and phosphorus.

Tiny bug aside, I hope you find success in this venture. I'm sure there'll be a lot of naysayers, but I find it inspiring that someone is actually trying to do something in the sustainable air travel space with technology we have today rather than putting all of their eggs in the basket of yet to be seen technology.

Edit: I did unreasonably make the assumption that you were making the case the SpaceX was receiving subisidies for "nothing" and I see that you weren't now.