Hot water heater tanks are easily one of the most obviously good applications of noon excess energy, and resistive heating elements might as well be free.

- home batteries cost more

- homeowners buying batteries are already pretty well off on average

- a large portion of the population (renters) is excluded from the policy.

- prices are falling anyway so the subsidy is just a waste of tax dollars, arguably

- grid scale batteries are more cost effective and benefit everyone via cheap prices broadly, instead of specific homeowners.

Etc. but pork barreling be pork barreling.

A satellite will serve thousands of customers, whereas a fixed line only serves one. I think 10k is also severely understating the cost per customer. There's like hundreds of metres between these houses at a minimum, and in some areas possibly Kilometers from house to house.

Or do you mean all the windows specific stuff etc, I guess I was more imaging the call stack etc.

No insult was intended XD

T2s are so good this is an objectively good tradeoff. It's not about compensating the eco player (though that does happen by extension) its about getting your whole team faster T2 mexes.

Lots of players mean more chances to get a toxic guy who doesn't recognise their own faults and blames others.

I actually just don't really agree about the assertion on player slots. If anything, the better players get the more likely they are to play a front slot, because they have an outside influence on the chances of their team winning.

The one saving grace is s&p isnt changing anything, and they were by far the biggest index.

And then the reality turns out not to be the case - you have to continuously spend on R&D to avoid getting your lunch eaten by someone else.

This isn't a social media network with lockin either. People can and will just switch to whatever whenever they feel like it. Maybe it becomes a defacto standard like google but if someone is much better than you, well...

The alternative funds are a little pricier, but not so much so as to negate the inherent performance advantage. Typical cost ratio is 0.1-0.5% depending on the niche (wide indexes are cheaper, more niche things like small cap value cost more)

Starling is indeed very good, but it alone doesn't get spacex to 1.75T

I wonder how much more complicated and effective statistical predictors are.

Come on, let's be adults here. Is there a prior example of this on a comparable scale?

It's already well known that passive indexes bleed ~0.5% performance solely to front running and exploitation from the market. This is that writ large.

I can't imagine many people seriously believe SpaceX is a business worth 1.75T.