While interesting, this dream team of engineers is trying to tackle a problem that has many more commercially, economically and environmentally viable solutions.
For one, solar power may be easier to harness in outer space. But there's a problem: it's in outer space. There is no reason why we should be resorting to such measures when we have the potential to harness solar energy here on the earth's surface.
There are energy demands that must be met, and it is true that our needs will grow exponentially. However, more earthlings than ever (percentage-wise) have a sufficient source of energy, and I believe this number will continue to climb.
This is not to say that this company's efforts are a waste of time. Far from it. We need overambitious entrepreneurs to at least attempt these solutions so that we can better gauge the difficulty of the problem at hand. While this technology may not be realistically implementable, it very may well lead to a newer, more efficient way of harnessing solar energy. If this technology works, more power to them. And to us.
"If this technology works, more power to them. And to us."
That's the whole point!
Seriously though, space based solar power is definitely the future, unless of course there is a breakthrough in fusion power. There's nothing in the way (atmosphere, clouds .. 100% full power, all the time), you're not using up land, and it's 24 hours. It may not be viable for a while, though, since launch costs are still too high (space elevator?).
Solar panels in space don't get dirty, don't have to support themselves against gravity (so they're way lighter), don't have to pay for the land they sit on. Sure, it's expensive getting them up, and there's engineering challenges to be solves. It's all doable, though, IMO.
It's a question of when, not if. Within 10 years seems a little optimistic. But if there's no fusion breakthrough, if nuclear remains unpopular, and if the climate change thing really starts to get serious (no more coal power), it's definitely a viable option.
When I first filled out my profile at the site I didn't even notice that you were selling shirts. I wouldn't be surprised if other visitors didn't notice either.
Your page is tactful, clean and direct. I immediately recognized what your application did, and signup appeared easy and simple. It appears to me that you've taken the most commonly articulated criticisms of webapp pages into account and adjusted accordingly. However, I feel like I wouldn't be true to my HNness if I didn't offer some trivial criticisms.
The logo is a bit cheesy. The site may appear to be too... clunky - it could use some fit and finish, but not so much that you lose the Zen feel. But you already knew that.
Overall, good job. I'm sure some other perspicacious HN goers can offer some more insight.
I've found in my experience that (many, not all) self-proclaimed "experts" do tend to grossly overestimate the capabilities and competence, and will impede those who are more capable than them for fear that they will diminish the value of their "expert" status. I feel this article is correct in stating that the appropriate way to approach a problem is from the perspective of an amateur, as amateurs typically have little fear of abiding by rules that have congealed within the minds of the "experts", and are more willing to take the chance of being wrong when success is imminent.
As they say, "an expert is someone who has made the greatest possible number of mistakes in their field."
I remember reading about a study where people who are below average at a task tended to rate themselves as competent (or better than average) for that task, while more competent people wold under-rate themselves.
There are all sorts of possible explanations (don't know enough to know you suck, pride, etc) and I don't think the study really looked at causality at all, but yes, I think the phenomenon is well known.
The study you're thinking of is probably "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own
Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments" - it's completely fascinating and slightly worrying.
I'd say that's true of some, perhaps a few self-proclaimed experts. Most people who claim to know something in a field actually do have useful knowledge to impart.
Sure, there are quack doctors and flim-flam car repair men and consultants full of bafflegab. But most doctors really do know something about medicine, most mechanics know how to fix cars, and most consultants have highly useful experience to share.
That's my experience with experts. Maybe I'm not smart enough to know how little experts really know?
I'm not going to mod this article up because I've seen this (and similar articles) countless times before, however I will answer your question, because I do believe there is merit to what is being said in these articles.
1. Exercise. It does help. Not only does it keep you feeling fit, but the chemicals released in the process have been shown to improve cognitive performance. On an unrelated (but interesting) note, people who imagine working out for twenty minutes a day or more actually perform better in exercise tests than people who do not. Cool, eh?
2. Meditation. Again, it not only feels refreshing, but trains your brain to ignore distractions and perform more efficiently. I semi-regularly practice meditation and I find that afterwards I'm endowed with a keen sense of euphoria and concentration.
3. I drink green tea. I've managed to pick up some minimally-processed imported Japonica whole-leaf green tea and I must say, it is bliss in liquid form. The slight caffeine boost enhances cognitive performance, or at least it appears to.
4. Everything else: diversifying your habits, getting hobbies, coding, reading, organizing, starting new projects, communicating with people, writing, etc. all help to get the proverbial gears turning (churning?).
There are no shortcuts to a genius brain, however. Though if you work hard, work efficiently, and supplement your efforts with the activities mentioned in this article, you will most likely see a significant improvement in your mental faculties.
What type of meditation? How often is semi-regularly?
I went on a green tea stint for a couple years. I bought some really expensive green tea also, which tasted delicious and felt wonderful. The problem though, was that I began drinking it too much, and did not feel the effect of the caffeine that I used to. Since then, I have switched to coffee, but I still don't get the feeling that I did when I drank green tea. So sad.
My meditation is hardly regimented and strict, and is the result of many hours of searching the internet for proper meditative technique. I would say it most closely resembles Zen meditation, as it is primarily centered around maintaining a steady breathing rhythm and concentrating on nothing.
I try to meditate several times a week, though I rarely meet my goals. I'd say an average of twice a week for the past few months.
With respect to your comment about the green tea, you will certainly acquire a tolerance to the caffeine after consuming it for an extended period of time. While I no longer experience the caffeine boost that I used to, I still nonetheless feel more alert after drinking.
I get my tea from a local shop in Athens called Fooks Foods which specializes in oriental imports.
The release clearly stated that the Kindle 2 was 20% faster (now corrected on the page). The video demonstrated that this figure was certainly within reason.
I'm certainly not opposed to this, but wouldn't a "suggested revisions" option be more suitable? I could see users quarreling over appropriate article names, and perfectly valid ones being changed without need. For instance, a user could suggest a grammatical revision, and in a small space beneath the title, people could vote on whether or not the revision should supersede the original. A certain set threshold would allow for this. Of course, these changes would also be subject to moderation.
I do not regularly pay for any online service. Why? Because there are an enormity of free and open source alternatives. Granted, some "free alternatives" aren't entirely legal, however they're alternatives nonetheless, just with an associated risk.
For movies and music, I use torrents. For applications, I go open source or free -- I can hardly think of any non-entertainment media whose function couldn't be replicated by a readily available free alternative. For storage, there are plenty of sites which offer gigabytes of online storage, gratis.
For one, solar power may be easier to harness in outer space. But there's a problem: it's in outer space. There is no reason why we should be resorting to such measures when we have the potential to harness solar energy here on the earth's surface.
There are energy demands that must be met, and it is true that our needs will grow exponentially. However, more earthlings than ever (percentage-wise) have a sufficient source of energy, and I believe this number will continue to climb.
This is not to say that this company's efforts are a waste of time. Far from it. We need overambitious entrepreneurs to at least attempt these solutions so that we can better gauge the difficulty of the problem at hand. While this technology may not be realistically implementable, it very may well lead to a newer, more efficient way of harnessing solar energy. If this technology works, more power to them. And to us.