The APIs are mostly cross-platform now, and the SoCs are the same, so the main reason you wouldn't want to just copy a Mac app to the iPad is the touch input. If eye tracking is as good as they say, that's a lot closer to a mouse than touch controls.
Each rocket needs 33 for the booster and 6 for the ship, so thats still about 5 weeks for one, or 10 rockets per year. Will need a lot during development since reusability probably won't work 100% of the time for a while. then their stated goal is having a ton of these things launching for mars, etc.
SLS can get about 27 tons to the moon, Falcon Heavy about 20 tons. Sure, redesigning the plans to handle splitting between two launches is time and money, but two falcon heavies is only ~$300M base price. SLS is a waste even without starship.
maybe they have a good relationship with their boss and communicate in ways that work for them and match the world we live in? does your boss still communicate with you in formal memos?
it's your language, do whatever you want. unless you're forcing others to use that language, there's zero moral issue. obviously you could come up with a number of what-ifs where this becomes some monopoly or the de facto standard, but that's not what this is.
one workaround for this is to turn off "Automatically join this network" for your office wifi and disconnect from it, but don't turn off Wifi entirely. That way it can still make direct wifi connections to your other apple devices.
Anandtech tested power draw of an M1 Mac Mini and found 4.2W at idle, 26.5W for the average multithreaded workload. 1/3rd idle power and the same power draw while running multithreaded benchmarks compared to the laptop serving a single client. Would be interesting to compare.
Basically this: https://voltaicsystems.com/arc20w-kit/. It's a bit on the expensive side, I'm sure you can find cheaper kits. I like that the battery has a USB-C port, so I can charge the MacBook directly. To be truly off-grid, you need something bigger though. 20W is ok for basic work, but if you're compiling or doing other heavy work you need more power. If it's a bit cloudy then the battery won't fully charge with that panel, I'd recommend at least 50-100W. But with that size you're also less mobile. I had a car so mobility wasn't that important for me. The only important thing for me is that I can take the gear onto an airplane when traveling.
I need to investigate if USB-C car charger adapters can charge a MacBook. When traveling with a car and the sun doesn't shine, it would be a nice backup solution. I was basically living in a car + tent for four weeks, traveling and working.
I do similar with gear from https://GoalZero.com, typically using a car-portable 100W panel + 100Wh battery with USB-C support when seriously traveling, and a briefcase-friendly 20W folding panel + same battery when mobile. Wait for specials at https://REI.com to get good prices.
For the load expected for pulling data from a simple redis cache, is an M1 actually the most efficient chip? Isn't the point of the M1 that it supports a bunch of complex workflows while remaining efficient? Aren't there even more power efficient chips out there that focus exclusively on simple integer operations, etc.?
> For the load expected for pulling data from a simple redis cache, is an M1 actually the most efficient chip?
I think that's a good question with no trivial answer, there are certainly boards which consume significantly less energy than that and can serve traffic (using nginx and static content you can serve quite a lot on a watt or two, per https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2020/01/how-sustainable-is...), however if you factor in the need for actual CPU...
Mobile phone SoCs would likely be the way to go for the best processing per watt.
The problem really is one of "how much is enough" more than anything else. Assuming someone wanted to really optimize something like this, a specialty built ARM cpu with lots of cores at a low frequency would likely provide the most ability to act as web server with a small power budget.
Such SoCs, AFAIK, don't really exist. You don't need a particularly fast CPU for web service stuff. You certainly don't need all the mobile extras (AI chips, GPUs, etc). What you need more than anything is core count.
If you wanted to go full data slapstick you'd set up an elaborate protocol on the ISM band between a cluster of Nordic nrf52 or similar where each SoC serves exactly one page from its flash memory. Want to update the about page? Flash it on a spare board, connect it to the battery and disconnect the old version.
It will have awful latency, likely suffer hard from the shared medium if ramped to nontrivial loads, but it will hardly use any power at all.
And it will drive people nuts who know even the tiniest bit about computers, but those who don't will understand it just fine: "I disconnected that new about page and plugged the old version back in"
Sure. "STM32L1 MCUs also feature the industry's lowest power consumption of 170 nA in low-power mode with SRAM retention. ". But I think we're looking for the 'most efficient' general purpose computer.
jesus christ, yes. Elon didn't become a billionaire including assets until 2012, well after nasa awarded them the cargo contract and two years after Falcon 9 started launching. Before that, he was barely a millionaire after PayPal and his investments in Tesla and SpaceX. This tax wouldn't have affected him at all until both SpaceX and Tesla were relatively healthy with both Falcon 9 and Model S.
There's a reason CEO's at this level take $1 in salary.
performance cores are physically larger than the efficiency ones, by about 3-4x. I'm sure there are other tradeoffs cache size like too. So would you rather have 32 performance cores and 8 efficiency or 34 performance?
