Free Speech and Elon Musk

 

I have long argued that we should focus more on ideas than on the people who endorse them. I still believe that. Ideas are enduring; people too often are not. But when a man or woman makes a significant stand for an idea that’s praiseworthy, that in itself is praiseworthy. Without losing sight of what matters — of the idea — it’s appropriate to praise those who champion it.

Elon Musk claims to be championing an idea that I hold dear, one that is, as I’ve written many times, of paramount importance today, the idea of free and unfettered speech. Indeed, I think it is the single most important challenge faced by those of us who would preserve our country and its values.

Nothing in Musk’s history or conduct has led me to doubt his sincerity, and so I am optimistic that he will follow through on his promise to open Twitter to a diversity of viewpoints, and in doing so will restore an essential balance to America’s cultural and political landscape.

I’m very pleased.


You can now find me on Twitter as @HankRacette. Assuming the deal goes through and Musk keeps his word, I’ll remain there.

Published in Technology
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 94 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    What will this do to Tesla sales?  There must be virtue signalers who bought one and are now deeply concerned about the virtue part.

    • #61
  2. No Caesar Thatcher
    No Caesar
    @NoCaesar

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Henry, I think Elon Musk is sincere in his desire to make Twitter more neutral in terms of the speech allowed. I wish him well in this effort. What remains to be seen is how much internal resistance the communists on staff at TWTR will put up. I can see something like what happened to Trump: directives are handed down, policy set, and it’s all ignored by the folks in the cubicles.

    Now, Musk will have one advantage that DJT did not: he can pretty much fire employees when they go against the company’s stated policy. But the question remains as to how much the folks several levels below him and his executive team will fall in line. He may have to clean house top to bottom.

    True.  However, his track record shows a unwillingness to tolerate obstruction or poor performance.   And the courage to overcome/get rid of/go around obstructions.

    • #62
  3. No Caesar Thatcher
    No Caesar
    @NoCaesar

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Henry, I think Elon Musk is sincere in his desire to make Twitter more neutral in terms of the speech allowed. I wish him well in this effort. What remains to be seen is how much internal resistance the communists on staff at TWTR will put up. I can see something like what happened to Trump: directives are handed down, policy set, and it’s all ignored by the folks in the cubicles.

    Now, Musk will have one advantage that DJT did not: he can pretty much fire employees when they go against the company’s stated policy. But the question remains as to how much the folks several levels below him and his executive team will fall in line. He may have to clean house top to bottom.

    And probably everyone he fires, will sue.

    Maybe, but it will be somewhat difficult for them to win if Twitter’s employment is “at will,” as most large companies are these days. It should be relatively easy to fire someone for cause under the scenario I’ve outlined, while difficult to prove one is fired for discrimination, etc. And it’s not unheard of for new corporate owners, especially when a firm is take private, to close departments, fire/layoff staff, and so forth.

    Of course, the process is the punishment, so we will just have to see how this plays out.

    Given his stated plans for Twitter, I see a substantially smaller headcount need.

    • #63
  4. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    What will this do to Tesla sales? There must be virtue signalers who bought one and are now deeply concerned about the virtue part.

    They can tweet their angst.

    • #64
  5. No Caesar Thatcher
    No Caesar
    @NoCaesar

    I was never a heavy Twitter user, although I was on it from near the beginning.  About 5 years ago I stopped using it.  4 years ago I deleted my account.  My reasons were varied, but mostly a protest against Social Media toxic effects and Twitter’s Orwellian behavior.  While I had an account I rarely tweeted, but just used it as a news ticker service.

    If Elon closes on the purchase, open sources the algorithm, and gets rid of the silencing of non-Left voices, I’ll reactivate my account.  However, I don’t expect to use it any differently, except to watch SpaceX Mars landings.

    In short I think he will succeed and, to my surprise, it looks like he has an ally in “sad Rasputin” Jack Dorsey.

    My prediction for the next Twitter CEO: Seth Manning.  Talk about making heads explode…

     

    CORRECTION: Seth Dillon, not Manning.  I conflated Kyle Mann and Seth Dillon.  Apologies.

    • #65
  6. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    No Caesar (View Comment):
    My prediction for the next Twitter CEO: Seth Manning.  Talk about making heads explode…

    I did a search for the name, but it appears there are a lot of guys with that name. Can you give another clue? 

    • #66
  7. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    What will this do to Tesla sales? There must be virtue signalers who bought one and are now deeply concerned about the virtue part.

    First time I ever thought of buying one.

    • #67
  8. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    What will this do to Tesla sales? There must be virtue signalers who bought one and are now deeply concerned about the virtue part.

    First time I ever thought of buying one.

    Just don’t buy used, cuz Elon doesn’t get any of that money.

    • #68
  9. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    What will this do to Tesla sales? There must be virtue signalers who bought one and are now deeply concerned about the virtue part.

    First time I ever thought of buying one.

    Just don’t buy used, cuz Elon doesn’t get any of that money.

    This is exactly the time to buy used. It’s still a good deal for Musk if it keeps the resale value of the cars in good shape. 

    • #69
  10. Marjorie Reynolds Coolidge
    Marjorie Reynolds
    @MarjorieReynolds

    Our betters in Ireland are telling the peasants it’s bad news. 

    https://gript.ie/official-ireland-accidentally-proves-an-important-free-speech-point/
    Twitter’s European hq is in Dublin as is Facebook and Google. Someday in the future we might find out just how much social engineering they carried out in the country that lavished tax breaks on them. Nobody is currently interested in asking that question.

    • #70
  11. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    What will this do to Tesla sales? There must be virtue signalers who bought one and are now deeply concerned about the virtue part.

    First time I ever thought of buying one.

    I became interested in Tesla from a purely technological POV outside of all the environmental BS. Electric cars are better on every level than internal combustion engine autos. 

    They are only marginally more environmentally friendly -that’s not a selling point for me –  although with more nuclear energy and other non fossil fuel burning generation of electricity, they will be. But I’m not concerned with that aspect.

    The only real drawback is range/charging time/charging availability. All those things are going to improve past the tipping point. Already range is similar at about 300 miles, the problem then is charging time and locations. Charging time is coming down, and locations are going up. But most people don’t drive over 300 miles in a day or take long road trips anyway. Five years from now that will all be a moot point. Once charging time gets under one hour, it will be over.You just plan your meals and stops accordingly. I drive long distances frequently in my Chevy Suburban and I usually stop for at least an hour after 300 miles. 

    The engines and batteries last 500,000 miles easily, and both are quickly approaching a million miles. No fluids are needed, no radiator and cooling system, no oil, and no gas. Maintenance costs are a fraction of those of ICE cars. 

    Performance is far better, and since Musk was able to start his company from scratch, Tesla was able to innovate in every area. The cost of a Tesla amortized over time, is less than a comparable ICE car. Lasts longer, less maintenance required and far fewer repairs

    I told my financial broker friend to buy TSLA at  somewhere around $180 . He didn’t take my advice and I now mention it occasionally to him for fun. 

    Objectively speaking there are real benefits to owning a Tesla and therefore take it entirely out of the ‘virtue signaling’ world that so many of us, um, climate deniers, are fixated on.

    • #71
  12. Keith Lowery Coolidge
    Keith Lowery
    @keithlowery

    Franco (View Comment):
    The only real drawback is range/charging time/charging availability. All those things are going to improve past the tipping point.

    They are not suitable for road trips.  Even if you’re willing to confine yourself to interstate highway driving, it is often the case that super chargers are down or unavailable.  My brother owned 2 Teslas and it recently took him 10 hours to make a trip that should have taken 5.  At one point he had to drive 40 miles out of his way to reach a charging station and then that same 40 miles back again to return to his route. He spent a lot of time sitting around waiting for his car to charge as he hopscotched his way home.  After that trip, he sold both his Teslas (for what he originally paid for them) and bought Toyotas. 

    Teslas are interesting novelty cars and if you want to make a hobby out of your car then they are fun to have. But if your car is just a transportation tool, or if your car’s attractiveness increases as the time requirement for vehicle management approaches zero, then don’t do a Tesla.

    • #72
  13. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Franco (View Comment):
    They are only marginally more environmentally friendly -that’s not a selling point for me –  although with more nuclear energy and other non fossil fuel burning generation of electricity, they will be.

    Ehh, not if you’re a gardener and you recognize the science that CO2 is freaking plant food!!! /in the voice of Sam Kinison

    I’m good with you charging your e-vehicle by burning coal. On that commie holiday Earth Day, when all the greenies are going dark, I turn on all the lights and crank up the heater to tropical setting. I’m an apostate, I know.

    • #73
  14. Justin Other Lawyer Coolidge
    Justin Other Lawyer
    @DouglasMyers

    Keith Lowery (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    The only real drawback is range/charging time/charging availability. All those things are going to improve past the tipping point.

    They are not suitable for road trips. Even if you’re willing to confine yourself to interstate highway driving, it is often the case that super chargers are down or unavailable. My brother owned 2 Teslas and it recently took him 10 hours to make a trip that should have taken 5. At one point he had to drive 40 miles out of his way to reach a charging station and then that same 40 miles back again to return to his route. He spent a lot of time sitting around waiting for his car to charge as he hopscotched his way home. After that trip, he sold both his Teslas (for what he originally paid for them) and bought Toyotas.

    Teslas are interesting novelty cars and if you want to make a hobby out of your car then they are fun to have. But if your car is just a transportation tool, or if your car’s attractiveness increases as the time requirement for vehicle management approaches zero, then don’t do a Tesla.

    I read Franco as acknowledging the limitations you note, but as also saying that those limitations are declining and that in the near future they’ll be essentially non-existent. My guess is that he’s largely correct, the big question being, what constitutes the near future?

    • #74
  15. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    They are only marginally more environmentally friendly -that’s not a selling point for me – although with more nuclear energy and other non fossil fuel burning generation of electricity, they will be.

    Ehh, not if you’re a gardener and you recognize the science that CO2 is freaking plant food!!! /in the voice of Sam Kinison

    I’m good with you charging your e-vehicle by burning coal. On that commie holiday Earth Day, when all the greenies are going dark, I turn on all the lights and crank up the heater to tropical setting. I’m an apostate, I know.

    I’m not sure if I was clear enough. I don’t care one bit about CO2 emissions regarding  EV’s. I know they really don’t save the planet because they are just using electricity which is ( 85%?) generated by fossil fuels. The remaining 15 % is solar wind hydro and nuclear generated. I also question whether this frenzy to reduce carbon emissions might not itself have unintended consequences. At some point I have little doubt that all the mechanisms and laws put in place will over deplete CO2 and we won’t be able to stop it without yet another over-reaction. 

    Outside of all that (which I think conservatives are overly fixated upon BTW) EV’s are superior vehicles and technology. 

    • #75
  16. No Caesar Thatcher
    No Caesar
    @NoCaesar

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    No Caesar (View Comment):
    My prediction for the next Twitter CEO: Seth Manning. Talk about making heads explode…

    I did a search for the name, but it appears there are a lot of guys with that name. Can you give another clue?

    I meant Seth Dillon (don’t know why I wrote Manning).  Dillon is the CEO of Babylon Bee.

    • #76
  17. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    No Caesar (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    No Caesar (View Comment):
    My prediction for the next Twitter CEO: Seth Manning. Talk about making heads explode…

    I did a search for the name, but it appears there are a lot of guys with that name. Can you give another clue?

    I meant Seth Dillon (don’t know why I wrote Manning). Dillon is the CEO of Babylon Bee.

    Ah. That would work!

    • #77
  18. Raven Inactive
    Raven
    @Raven

    Flicker (View Comment):

    I wrote this elsewhere but I’ll repeat it here.

    People have been guessing at what motivated Musk to buy twitter, and Must says it’s to preserve civilization. Good. But then why now? What was the immediate cause?

    When I read that Twitter had reversed itself and was selling to Musk, I thought, So, the CIA gave its permission. The ultimate authority, not the SEC, approved the sale.

    Now I wonder who does this help? Maybe the American people. But we don’t know yet.

    Who does this hurt? Trump and his Truth Social.

    They’ve always been saying, If you don’t like our censorship, build your own platform. And now that Trump’s built his and is about to go mainstream, twitter now changes course to drain his customer base.

    Most of the reason for changing over to Truth Social has been wiped out.

    Then when and if Truth Social closes down, twitter can start censoring again.

    Follow the money!

    • #78
  19. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Franco (View Comment):

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    What will this do to Tesla sales? There must be virtue signalers who bought one and are now deeply concerned about the virtue part.

    First time I ever thought of buying one.

    I became interested in Tesla from a purely technological POV outside of all the environmental BS. Electric cars are better on every level than internal combustion engine autos.

    They are only marginally more environmentally friendly -that’s not a selling point for me – although with more nuclear energy and other non fossil fuel burning generation of electricity, they will be. But I’m not concerned with that aspect.

    The only real drawback is range/charging time/charging availability. All those things are going to improve past the tipping point. Already range is similar at about 300 miles, the problem then is charging time and locations. Charging time is coming down, and locations are going up. But most people don’t drive over 300 miles in a day or take long road trips anyway. Five years from now that will all be a moot point. Once charging time gets under one hour, it will be over.You just plan your meals and stops accordingly. I drive long distances frequently in my Chevy Suburban and I usually stop for at least an hour after 300 miles.

    The engines and batteries last 500,000 miles easily, and both are quickly approaching a million miles. No fluids are needed, no radiator and cooling system, no oil, and no gas. Maintenance costs are a fraction of those of ICE cars.

    Performance is far better, and since Musk was able to start his company from scratch, Tesla was able to innovate in every area. The cost of a Tesla amortized over time, is less than a comparable ICE car. Lasts longer, less maintenance required and far fewer repairs

    I told my financial broker friend to buy TSLA at somewhere around $180 . He didn’t take my advice and I now mention it occasionally to him for fun.

    Objectively speaking there are real benefits to owning a Tesla and therefore take it entirely out of the ‘virtue signaling’ world that so many of us, um, climate deniers, are fixated on.

    Maybe if the lithium etc came from someplace other than China.

    And electric cars in collisions cause some major headaches for firefighters and other emergency/rescue people.

    • #79
  20. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Maybe if the lithium etc came from someplace other than China.

    And electric cars in collisions cause some major headaches for firefighters and other emergency/rescue people.

    Yeah, about the most spectacularly bad thing that can happen in a vehicle is ev battery breach.

    • #80
  21. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Maybe if the lithium etc came from someplace other than China.

    And electric cars in collisions cause some major headaches for firefighters and other emergency/rescue people.

    Yeah, about the most spectacularly bad thing that can happen in a vehicle is ev battery breach.

    Seems to be far worse than leaking gasoline.

    • #81
  22. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Franco (View Comment):

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    What will this do to Tesla sales? There must be virtue signalers who bought one and are now deeply concerned about the virtue part.

    First time I ever thought of buying one.

    I became interested in Tesla from a purely technological POV outside of all the environmental BS. Electric cars are better on every level than internal combustion engine autos.

    They are only marginally more environmentally friendly -that’s not a selling point for me – although with more nuclear energy and other non fossil fuel burning generation of electricity, they will be. But I’m not concerned with that aspect.

    The only real drawback is range/charging time/charging availability. All those things are going to improve past the tipping point. Already range is similar at about 300 miles, the problem then is charging time and locations. Charging time is coming down, and locations are going up. But most people don’t drive over 300 miles in a day or take long road trips anyway. Five years from now that will all be a moot point. Once charging time gets under one hour, it will be over.You just plan your meals and stops accordingly. I drive long distances frequently in my Chevy Suburban and I usually stop for at least an hour after 300 miles.

    The engines and batteries last 500,000 miles easily, and both are quickly approaching a million miles. No fluids are needed, no radiator and cooling system, no oil, and no gas. Maintenance costs are a fraction of those of ICE cars.

    Performance is far better, and since Musk was able to start his company from scratch, Tesla was able to innovate in every area. The cost of a Tesla amortized over time, is less than a comparable ICE car. Lasts longer, less maintenance required and far fewer repairs

    I told my financial broker friend to buy TSLA at somewhere around $180 . He didn’t take my advice and I now mention it occasionally to him for fun.

    Objectively speaking there are real benefits to owning a Tesla and therefore take it entirely out of the ‘virtue signaling’ world that so many of us, um, climate deniers, are fixated on.

    An awful lot of technology development is military-needs driven, even canned food was.

    I’ll not rightly consider an EV until the military shows that they outperform ICEs, for every mission from short-term, in-and-out missions to conducting a country’s long-term pacification.

    Just for example, to refill a few personnel carriers takes a tanker truck.  To recharge a few electric personnel carriers takes a fuel truck to supply the energy and a generator truck to supply the electricity.  Or else a nuclear-powered generator truck.  Or a Mr. Fusion.

    • #82
  23. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Just for example, to refill a few personnel carriers takes a tanker truck.  To recharge a few electric personnel carriers takes a fuel truck to supply the energy and a generator truck to supply the electricity.  Or else a nuclear-powered generator truck.  Or a Mr. Fusion.

    Nah, they can just install solar panels on the top of military vehicles. Solar and wind fix everything!

    • #83
  24. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Just for example, to refill a few personnel carriers takes a tanker truck. To recharge a few electric personnel carriers takes a fuel truck to supply the energy and a generator truck to supply the electricity. Or else a nuclear-powered generator truck. Or a Mr. Fusion.

    Nah, they can just install solar panels on the top of military vehicles. Solar and wind fix everything!

    Of course, a windmill on top is even better.  That way, they charge the batteries as they’re driving!

    • #84
  25. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Flicker (View Comment):

    An awful lot of technology development is military-needs driven, even canned food was.

    I’ll not rightly consider an EV until the military shows that they outperform ICEs, for every mission from short-term, in-and-out missions to conducting a country’s long-term pacification.

    Just for example, to refill a few personnel carriers takes a tanker truck.  To recharge a few electric personnel carriers takes a fuel truck to supply the energy and a generator truck to supply the electricity.  Or else a nuclear-powered generator truck.  Or a Mr. Fusion.

    If we never went to the moon we wouldn’t have Tang

    But seriously, there’s nothing wrong with EV’s for some things and not for others. A lot of people commute.

    I live in the middle of the I-95 corridor that connects Washington Baltimore, Wilmington, Philadelphia, New York and Boston. I also happen to spend two months a year in Texas, a very different place (although plenty of Texans commute too) But a lot of pick-up trucks, and for good reason.

    Tesla is a quite viable successful company worldwide. Because the system wouldn’t be practical on frontline military operation is no indication of its value to others. 

    At some point this will all be solved

    I love the Mr. Fusion idea!

     

     

    • #85
  26. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Franco (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    An awful lot of technology development is military-needs driven, even canned food was.

    I’ll not rightly consider an EV until the military shows that they outperform ICEs, for every mission from short-term, in-and-out missions to conducting a country’s long-term pacification.

    Just for example, to refill a few personnel carriers takes a tanker truck. To recharge a few electric personnel carriers takes a fuel truck to supply the energy and a generator truck to supply the electricity. Or else a nuclear-powered generator truck. Or a Mr. Fusion.

    If we never went to the moon we wouldn’t have Tang!

    But seriously, there’s nothing wrong with EV’s for some things and not for others. A lot of people commute.

    I live in the middle of the I-95 corridor that connects Washington Baltimore, Wilmington, Philadelphia, New York and Boston. I also happen to spend two months a year in Texas, a very different place (although plenty of Texans commute too) But a lot of pick-up trucks, and for good reason.

    Tesla is a quite viable successful company worldwide. Because the system wouldn’t be practical on frontline military operation is no indication of its value to others.

    At some point this will all be solved

    I love the Mr. Fusion idea!

    Except Mr Fusion only powered the time circuits, not the regular car-going stuff.

    • #86
  27. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    An awful lot of technology development is military-needs driven, even canned food was.

    I’ll not rightly consider an EV until the military shows that they outperform ICEs, for every mission from short-term, in-and-out missions to conducting a country’s long-term pacification.

    Just for example, to refill a few personnel carriers takes a tanker truck. To recharge a few electric personnel carriers takes a fuel truck to supply the energy and a generator truck to supply the electricity. Or else a nuclear-powered generator truck. Or a Mr. Fusion.

    If we never went to the moon we wouldn’t have Tang!

    But seriously, there’s nothing wrong with EV’s for some things and not for others. A lot of people commute.

    I live in the middle of the I-95 corridor that connects Washington Baltimore, Wilmington, Philadelphia, New York and Boston. I also happen to spend two months a year in Texas, a very different place (although plenty of Texans commute too) But a lot of pick-up trucks, and for good reason.

    Tesla is a quite viable successful company worldwide. Because the system wouldn’t be practical on frontline military operation is no indication of its value to others.

    At some point this will all be solved

    I love the Mr. Fusion idea!

    Except Mr Fusion only powered the time circuits, not the regular car-going stuff.

    I’d like a citation on this please.  Do you know how much energy it takes to levitate a flying car and spin is on three axes at the same time?

    Answer: Lots.

    • #87
  28. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    An awful lot of technology development is military-needs driven, even canned food was.

    I’ll not rightly consider an EV until the military shows that they outperform ICEs, for every mission from short-term, in-and-out missions to conducting a country’s long-term pacification.

    Just for example, to refill a few personnel carriers takes a tanker truck. To recharge a few electric personnel carriers takes a fuel truck to supply the energy and a generator truck to supply the electricity. Or else a nuclear-powered generator truck. Or a Mr. Fusion.

    If we never went to the moon we wouldn’t have Tang!

    But seriously, there’s nothing wrong with EV’s for some things and not for others. A lot of people commute.

    I live in the middle of the I-95 corridor that connects Washington Baltimore, Wilmington, Philadelphia, New York and Boston. I also happen to spend two months a year in Texas, a very different place (although plenty of Texans commute too) But a lot of pick-up trucks, and for good reason.

    Tesla is a quite viable successful company worldwide. Because the system wouldn’t be practical on frontline military operation is no indication of its value to others.

    At some point this will all be solved

    I love the Mr. Fusion idea!

    Except Mr Fusion only powered the time circuits, not the regular car-going stuff.

    I’d like a citation on this please. Do you know how much energy it takes to levitate a flying car and spin is on three axes at the same time?

    Answer: Lots.

    Mr Fusion was apparently just for the “1.21 gigawatts” burst for the time stuff, not longer-term energy for flying.

    From Back To The Future 3:

    Doc: Mr. Fusion powers the time circuits and the flux capacitor. But 
    the internal combustion engine runs on ordinary gasoline; it always 
    has. There's not going to be a gas station around here until some time 
    in the next century. Without gasoline, we can't get the DeLorean up to 
    88 miles per hour.

    No specific mention of the flying stuff, but you wouldn’t really be able to fly in and out of your garage anyway.

    • #88
  29. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    An awful lot of technology development is military-needs driven, even canned food was.

    I’ll not rightly consider an EV until the military shows that they outperform ICEs, for every mission from short-term, in-and-out missions to conducting a country’s long-term pacification.

    Just for example, to refill a few personnel carriers takes a tanker truck. To recharge a few electric personnel carriers takes a fuel truck to supply the energy and a generator truck to supply the electricity. Or else a nuclear-powered generator truck. Or a Mr. Fusion.

    If we never went to the moon we wouldn’t have Tang!

    But seriously, there’s nothing wrong with EV’s for some things and not for others. A lot of people commute.

    I live in the middle of the I-95 corridor that connects Washington Baltimore, Wilmington, Philadelphia, New York and Boston. I also happen to spend two months a year in Texas, a very different place (although plenty of Texans commute too) But a lot of pick-up trucks, and for good reason.

    Tesla is a quite viable successful company worldwide. Because the system wouldn’t be practical on frontline military operation is no indication of its value to others.

    At some point this will all be solved

    I love the Mr. Fusion idea!

    Except Mr Fusion only powered the time circuits, not the regular car-going stuff.

    I’d like a citation on this please. Do you know how much energy it takes to levitate a flying car and spin is on three axes at the same time?

    Answer: Lots.

    From Back To The Future 3:

    Doc: Mr. Fusion powers the time circuits and the flux capacitor. Butthe internal combustion engine runs on ordinary gasoline; it alwayshas. There's not going to be a gas station around here until some timein the next century. Without gasoline, we can't get the DeLorean up to88 miles per hour.

    No specific mention of the flying stuff, but you wouldn’t really be able to fly in and out of your garage anyway.

    I asked for this, didn’t I?

    • #89
  30. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    An awful lot of technology development is military-needs driven, even canned food was.

    I’ll not rightly consider an EV until the military shows that they outperform ICEs, for every mission from short-term, in-and-out missions to conducting a country’s long-term pacification.

    Just for example, to refill a few personnel carriers takes a tanker truck. To recharge a few electric personnel carriers takes a fuel truck to supply the energy and a generator truck to supply the electricity. Or else a nuclear-powered generator truck. Or a Mr. Fusion.

    If we never went to the moon we wouldn’t have Tang!

    But seriously, there’s nothing wrong with EV’s for some things and not for others. A lot of people commute.

    I live in the middle of the I-95 corridor that connects Washington Baltimore, Wilmington, Philadelphia, New York and Boston. I also happen to spend two months a year in Texas, a very different place (although plenty of Texans commute too) But a lot of pick-up trucks, and for good reason.

    Tesla is a quite viable successful company worldwide. Because the system wouldn’t be practical on frontline military operation is no indication of its value to others.

    At some point this will all be solved

    I love the Mr. Fusion idea!

    Except Mr Fusion only powered the time circuits, not the regular car-going stuff.

    I’d like a citation on this please. Do you know how much energy it takes to levitate a flying car and spin is on three axes at the same time?

    Answer: Lots.

    From Back To The Future 3:

    Doc: Mr. Fusion powers the time circuits and the flux capacitor. Butthe internal combustion engine runs on ordinary gasoline; it alwayshas. There's not going to be a gas station around here until some timein the next century. Without gasoline, we can't get the DeLorean up to88 miles per hour.

    No specific mention of the flying stuff, but you wouldn’t really be able to fly in and out of your garage anyway.

    I asked for this, didn’t I?

    Also from that movie:

    Doc: "Dear Marty: If my calculations are correct, you will receive this 
    letter immediately after you saw the Delorean struck by lightning. 
    First, let me assure you that I am alive and well. I have been living 
    happily these past eight months in the year 1885. The lightning bolt 
    that hit the DeLorean caused a jigowatt overload which scrambled the 
    time circuits, activated the flux capacitor, and sent me back to 1885. 
    The overload shorted out the time circuits and destroyed the flying 
    circuits. Unforunately, the car will never fly again."

     

    Again, no indication of what POWERED the flying.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.