Given Tesla's current issues with how they have been reported to treat their workforce, while Larry might be useful in terms of finance and contacts, I'm more interested in discovering what Kathleen is bringing to the table and what her attitudes to things like unions and employee rights in general might be. I suspect that could be at least as make or break as anything Larry might do here.

Yeah, she seems clearly brought in to help with the safety and legal issues with the workforce. Hopefully she can help actually fix the problems and not just manage and price the fallout.

Given the title includes her, I'd like to know what the thought was behind removing her name. I'd be very surprised if it was; 'Larry is bad, so lets not harm people by association'.

Probably along the lines of "Larry is relevant to this community and a controversial figure to boot, so his appointment should be discussed".

Her appointment should also be discussed, given how much of Tesla's bad press has been HR related over the past year. She may prove to be the more important addition.

Tomatoes flavour often gets killed by chilling them too far - https://www.newscientist.com/article/2109336-heres-why-putti...

There are probably other things going on as well, but this seems to be one of the major factors at play.

I have said this before, but Hanlon's razor is good for politeness, but not very good for assessing what people are actually up to, as people regularly disguise maliciousness as incompetence and find it fun to do so, especially in politics and other power games.

One of the many tricks to power is pleading powerlessness on the things you actually planned ahead of time while claiming full responsibility for things that are accidental.

But what you are describing is already part of the premise of Hanlon's razor. It's true you can't always distinguish maliciousness and incompetence, but incompetence is easier to achieve and so occurs more frequently. That's why any given instance like this is more likely to be incompetence than malice.

It's possible this could be some secret plot disguised as incompetence, but it's also totally reasonable for an event like this to happen from incompetence alone, and I don't think it would surprise anyone if that were the case. So we ought to focus on the reality that this kind of outage is totally possible due to incompetence and implement measures to prevent that.

Not only can you not always distinguish them from each other, but they are very far from being mutually exclusive. Which is somewhere else that Hanlon's razor falls down. It sets them up as being options to choose between, which is obviously a very bad model.

To be honest, when I first heard Hanlon's razor, I immediately wondered what nefarious stuff Hanlon had been up to that he wanted to deflect attention away from.

Is a bit like the old aphorism 'You can't cheat an honest man', which is of most use to con artists trying to put honest people at ease before then cheating them.

edit - also you are misrepresenting Hanlon's razor. It is not an argument that says that stupidity is merely more likely, rather it says - "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity".

If it was objectively not true, then you could have infinite compression and any program could be reduced to a single bit.

If "conservation of complexity" were universally true then ANY compression would be impossible.

This isn't a dichotomy. My point is that there are clear examples of situations where you aren't just pushing complexity around, but actually achieving great simplifications.

>If "conservation of complexity" were universally true then ANY compression would be impossible.

No it wouldn't. The complexity of a pattern can usually be conserved while reducing its length, but for each pattern there is a limit. This is the entire concept behind the Kolmogorov complexity of a system and any patterns that cannot be reduced any further without removing complexity are at their limit already.

This is also related to the idea that you cannot have a universal compression algorithm.

Isn't pseudo though as he is also a lawyer. He may be far too used to writing like that.

One thought, if this is combined with a freezer and there is a pumped heat exchanger between that and the fridge, you can effectively use the freezer as the battery.

Small boats used systems like this: freezing blocks of ice to provide convective cooling to a cooler so that things stay cold without the engine running.

A lot of people hated them enough (and the gas used while sailing) to replace it with solar based systems.

Regular refrigerators use the same principle, albeit with a mechanism much simpler than a heat pump. They have holes between the freezer and refrigerator compartments and use a fan to push cold air from the freezer to the refrigerator. A heat pump would make that exchange much more efficient.

I doubt that heat pumps could be more efficient than direct exchange of cold air?

There are periods where you don't want the cold air to move into the refrigerator. Direct exchange allows the cold air to move around at all times -- regular refrigerators just turn a fan on and off, but some heat is always exchanged through the holes. A heat pump would just make the exchange more controllable.

I have a fridge that works with just holes. You can either have the fridge or the freezer at the right temp but not both.

>The problem with this definition is that it is close to making every promotion decision meritocratic by definition.

This is pretty close to what Michael Young was warning about when he coined the term in his 1958 satire, 'The Rise of the Meritocracy'. Here's an article by him on the subject - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/jun/29/comment

Not yet you aren't.