Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Just launched today our Carbon Fiber Textured Keycaps by Arbiter Studio!! This is how it looks. - Carbon Fiber Textured Keycaps - Arbiter Studio - Tofu 3.0 Case - KBD Fans - ARC60 PCBA Module - Arbiter Studio

17,275 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Elon Musk says steel killed carbon fiber on Starship at one-fiftieth the cost. Carbon fiber was supposed to be the future of rocketry. Lighter than aluminum. Stronger than steel. Trusted by every Formula 1 team. SpaceX picked it for Starship. "Particularly if you go for a high-strength specialized carbon fiber that can handle cryogenic oxygen, it's roughly 50 times the cost of steel." Then progress stalled. The autoclaves needed to cure the resin had to outsize every autoclave on Earth, and the team couldn't even produce a clean barrel section without wrinkles. Musk, watching the Mars timeline slip: "At this rate, we're never going to get to Mars. So we've got to think of something else." So he asked the question nobody at SpaceX had asked: "What about steel?" It became known as the **cryogenic stainless flip**. Musk, who had already shipped Falcon 9 in aluminum-lithium, broke with the textbook. "When you look at the material properties of stainless steel, full-hard, strain hardened stainless steel, at cryogenic temperature the strength to weight is actually similar to carbon fiber." Starship ran on cryogenic methane and oxygen. The airframe lived at temperatures that flipped steel ahead of carbon fiber. "You could smoke a cigar while welding stainless steel." After Musk made the call, steel weighed less than the carbon fiber version. Fifty times cheaper in raw material. Twice the heat tolerance. Half the heat shield mass. Musk, looking back: "In retrospect, we should have started with steel in the beginning. It was dumb not to do steel." What "obvious" material in your work is silently costing you the project? If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. P.S. I've made a free playbook on how to use and create your own mental models. This includes the same thinking strategies Feynman, Munger, and Musk built their careers on. Ttrusted by 5,000+ founders and investors. Grab your copy: — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

829,800 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Dawah is deception. Why are you leaving out the context SeerahPro ? You know right after this he says he doesn’t remember well what he wrote in that entry on Muhaymin. Why leave that part out? He even goes on to say that section seems to be non-committal and he needs to go back and re-read it. So since you don’t want to show every one the full context, I’ll do it, and expose how you are lying now and lied in the debate. Sinai doesn’t help your claim that the Quran believes the previous scriptures were textually corrupted. He says he doesn’t think the Quran believes the previous scriptures were corrupted in the deep past and that they are unrecoverable (Clip 1). Now let’s look at the short clip you pulled in context (Clip 2). First, what he says does not affirm why you cited him to begin with, which is that the Quran is supposed to be a supreme authority and determine which parts of our scriptures are corrupt and which are not. In the very clip you pulled he says, “The Quran is claiming to be able to sort of determine the correct reading of these previous scriptures and to remedy misreading and misunderstandings.” So by arbiter he means it is not determining what parts of our scriptures are true or corrupted, it is only an arbiter in determining meaning. You just buried yourself by citing this, because you implied Sinai was saying the Quran is an arbiter for determining textual corruption, which he doesn’t say. It’s like you didn’t even pay attention to what you pulled. That is embarrassing. Second, right after this (in what you left out) the interviewer reminds him he entertained two possibilities in his book and was noncommittal. Sinai says he doesn’t remember what he said and was probably leaving open possibilities, which is what I already had to correct you on. If you go back to the book, once again, he said on page 707 essentially what I said, “Muhaymin, meanwhile, is derived from Syriac mhaymnā (or conceivably from its equivalent in some other form of Aramaic), a passive participle of the verb haymen and meaning ‘trustworthy, faithful, loyal.’” After this all he does in the book is mention other possibilities and the one you want is more contingent on non-canonical readings. But even if that interpretation is correct (which Sinai confirms in this interview is his view) it doesn’t help you, because you misunderstood what Sinai means by ‘arbiter.’ In Clip 3 he first says, “So I need to reread that entry. I guess it seems to be very non-committal.” But remember you said (Clip 4), “In his 'Key Terms of the Quran' he explicitly says that Muhaymin means the Quran is the arbiter of the contents.” That is incorrect. He did not explicitly say that. Why did you lie? In Clip 3 he goes on to say “But I think entrusted with authority can mean, authorized to sort of authoritatively interpret and determine especially theological significance.” So you don’t even understand what Sinai means by “arbiter.” He doesn’t mean what you mean, that the Quran is determining which parts of our scriptures are true and corrupted, but that it is an arbiter of meaning. The fact that you still do not see this means you are beyond delusional. You never should have cited Sinai because he doesn’t help you at all. The funny thing is we were already planning to go live tomorrow to review this interview because he doesn’t help you at all and unintentionally helps with the Islamic Dilemma.

InspiringPhilosophy - Michael Jones

36,857 Aufrufe • vor 24 Tagen

We created this 13 min episode in less than 2 weeks. We're about to enter a world where our favorite tv shows and movies don't take 4+ years to produce. Our favorite directors will us generative AI and hybrid production workflows to produce their next script, show or film faster. Today, Oscar-nominated director Neill Blomkamp released his first AI film: → NIGHTBORNE, a 13-min sci-fi film made on Seedance 2.0 → Made WITH real concept artists → Features the faces + voices of 32 real people [licensed + consented] → Launched Barley Studios, his new AI studio → Next up: a full AI feature AI is not replacing filmmakers, it's giving them the tools to create their ideas. Our third episode of The Arc is out now on Artlist TV! We created it entirely inside Artlist where we're deployed into the frozen brutality of 1876 Montana, FIVE must survive a lawless frontier of prisoners, bounty hunters and unforgiving wilderness. Along with ELI, a boy who reminds him of the son he's fighting to save. As bounty hunters close in, FIVE learns that in The Arc, survival is looking less like a reality. "The Arc" Created by: Darin Stewart Directed by : Darin Stewart Executive produced by: Simone Ferretti Produced by: BRIANA STEWART AI studio: Happy Monday x Yougenius Al prompt engineer: Darin Stewart Al artist: Mikey Rare Al artist: Edgar Daniel Post production studio: KDK studios Production studio: AFM AI Creator Studio Made entirely on: Artlist.io #aifilm #aifilmmaking #aivideo #generativeai #originalseries

darin stewart

65,442 Aufrufe • vor 18 Tagen

🇮🇹 1981 Italian Grand Prix Lap 20 Car 7 🇬🇧 John Watson - McLaren MP4/1 Car 4 🇮🇹 Michele Alboreto - Tyrrell 010 John Watson’s accident at the 1981 Italian Grand Prix at Monza is widely remembered as one of the most significant turning points in Formula 1 history. It wasn't just a terrifying crash; it was the ultimate, real-world test that permanently changed how racing cars were built. On Lap 20 of the race, Watson lost control of his McLaren exiting the high-speed Second Lesmo bend. The car spun and struck the trackside barriers at roughly 140 mph (225 km/h). The violence of the impact was immense and it tore the engine and gearbox completely off the back of the car. The breakaway rear assembly bounced across the track and clipped Michele Alboreto’s Tyrrell, forcing him out of the race as well. To the absolute shock of the crowd and commentators, Watson opened his visor, unbuckled his harness, and walked away from the smoking, shattered wreckage entirely uninjured. Before the 1981 season, Formula 1 chassis were traditionally constructed from sheets of riveted or welded aluminum. However, for 1981, McLaren designer John Barnard introduced the McLaren MP4/1—the very first F1 car to feature a monocoque made entirely from carbon fiber composite material. The F1 paddock was deeply skeptical of this "mysterious black plastic." Many rival designers and team bosses openly criticized the move, confidently predicting that if a carbon fiber car suffered a major accident, the chassis would "crack like an egg" or disintegrate into a lethal cloud of sharp, black dust. Watson's crash proved the exact opposite. While the aluminum parts and engine mounts sheared off as intended to dissipate energy, the central carbon fiber tub enclosing Watson remained completely intact. It didn't shatter; it absorbed and deflected the massive load, acting as an impenetrable safety cell. Watson's survival at Monza effectively validated carbon fiber technology, establishing the blueprint for the modern carbon composite survival cells that continue to save drivers' lives in motorsport today. 🎥 Formula 1 John Watson McLaren Mastercard Formula 1 Team Autodromo Nazionale Monza #f1 #cars #accident #italy

WRCPAST

68,131 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten