Fairly inevitable. Like all YC companies, they were total frauds, but they made the cardinal mistake of defrauding other YC companies instead of the general public. Bad move.
There was more than enough skepticism and cautious optimism too. While it sounded too soon to be real, it wasn't unlike carbon nanotubes, graphene, or solid state batteries — previously unachievable material-tech getting validation in the lab, with a 20yr pipeline for global production. With even nuclear fusion being achieved in very specific / limited instances in the last decade, it's not inconceivable to hope that maybe RTSC are just around the corner.
The joke is, more or less, you can reduce everyone into two piles. But that's almost assuredly wrong.
It's very very hard to have what most people would call "autistic" levels of rationality in discourse in this world. But if you hold yourself to high standards, you quickly compute the logical argument OP is making (people who were excited were gullible marks etc. etc.) and realize it's wrong in several different ways (happy to explicate if unclear).
This is, of course, very easy if you were A) excited and B) didn't think it'd come to pass. Also observing that A does not imply B and vice versa is the minimally sufficient observation to rule out OPs comment being rational*
* n.b. "rational" means something akin to "not affected by a psychoactive disorder" in everyday discourse. In philosophy / logic class, it means, the statements x conclusion are internally coherent. "The moon is made of cheese because it is yellow" is rational, "The moon is made of cheese because Teddy Roosevelt likes cheese" is irrational. "The moon is made of cheese because the Pope likes cheese" is rational with the implied premises "God controls all, and he loves the pope"
Why are room temperature superconductors an 'obviously-impossible' technological claim?
Asking since we've managed to increase superconductor temperature several times in the past, right? (to ~ -130 degrees celsius right now IIRC). Why is our current temperature of, say ~30 degrees celsius special?
If you look at a list of known superconductors and their transition temperatures - it appears that the difficulty of getting a material to superconduct is proportional some unfriendly power of the absolute temperature.
Superconducting does seem much easier under a few hundred GPa's of pressure - but that's less convenient to maintain than liquid helium cooling.
> Why are room temperature superconductors an 'obviously-impossible' technological claim?
Disclaimer - all I know about superconductors, I know from high school physics, and I left high school some 35 years ago so I know the State of the Art is waaaay over there somewhere now, and here I am still playing with my mercury cuprate stuff.
Anyway.
You have a car. It's similar to my car. It has a 200bhp engine, weighs about two tonnes, and tops out at about 100mph. How would you make that a 200mph car?
Well, you'd need more energy, for a start, but E=1/2mv^2 turns into sqrt(2E/m) right, so you need four times as much power for twice the speed. This is okay. You're not getting 800bhp out of the engine you have now but it's doable. You can buy cars with 800bhp engines, these days maybe you'd be looking at some electric motor.
But you're still not doing 200mph because the drag increases as the square of the speed too, so you'd actually need 1600bhp to get to 200mph, which is still doable but opens up even more problems because now everything needs to be heavier to cope with the power.
So all else being the same you're actually onto about 2400bhp or so before you crack 200mph.
Which you achieve just as you either run out of road, or more likely petrol, at £1.50 a litre, so you're not taking too many attempts at it.
Anyway, the tl;dr - it's not just one thing that's stopping you getting that transition point higher, it's a bunch of stuff that interacts in weird ways.
Its not at all clear that room temperature superconductors are impossible, it's a materials problem. If someone was to find one that is probably how they would do it - testing materials for some other property and finding it accidentally.
Room temperature is totally possible. Room temperature AND room pressure is another story. Superconductivity acrose a couple nanometers inside a diamond anvil is not very useful even if at "room" temperatures.
Are you paying for the dial up service? If not, gosh, you seem to be out of luck.
(Fresh out of college while the dot-com crash was still in effect, I briefly took a job for a local phone company. Their primary income was from people who were still paying 1996-ish prices for T1 lines, of hundreds and hundreds a month. Meanwhile I would go home to my cable modem which was about 4 times faster for ~$50/month. Now, techically, the T1s were dedicated bandwidth and of course my cable modem was shared, but it was still a terrible deal for them. And they weren't even getting subsidized computers out of it!)
It really depends, support is usually the first thing companies adjust when they want to improve their margins.
Even when you're paying millions to AWS you have to get through their first line of support and they will ask silly questions until you can convince them to escalate.
Not really, you get "really dedicated support" at most, but not a "really good" one, otherwise all those decades-old bugs common in many software producs would've been fixed since they affect people at all tiers
It says something about modern Congress that when one of the powers explicitly granted to Congress became relevant for the first time in 100 years, their first instinct was to delegate it away to the President.
This probably isn't the point either, but I get an almost perverse level of calm knowing that for my most favourite albums, I own a physical representation of the waveform trapped in a medium.
I very rarely listen to them in that form, but I honestly like the idea that in a post-Carrington event, zombie apocalypse or mad-max style future where electricity or electronics become scarce, I can (if desperate enough) listen to them with a nail and a cone.
I guess if you weren't around for the 30 years when every marijuana advocate on the planet wouldn't shut up about it being a cure for anxiety, evidence that it is not wouldn't be particularly interesting to you.
reply