JimmyGlass

The 2.2 in 2015 is not a supply growth from the US, its worldwide increase in consumption vs the previous year. The point of the data is that just the increase in production in the US in 2018 vs 2017 is larger than the total in world increase in consumption from 2017 to 2018. Does anyone think growth in US production from 18->19 will be smaller than from 17->18? Again - I'm not in the industry, but nothing I've read suggests that. ryskey was talking about fundamentals and there is nothing more fundamental than production vs consumption. Based on recent history, growth in supply just from the US will be larger than worldwide growth in demand. The point of my original post was to ask what fundamentals he was talking about - because I don't see anything suggesting the world's supply of oil is going to struggle to keep up with demand in 2019.

I'm not in the oil industry, nor am I am an expert in it. But, what fundamentals are you referring to? In the last 12 months just the US daily production as increased by ~2.1 million bpd. Below are the average increase in world consumption vs the previous year (in mm bpd): 2012: 0.8 2013: 2.0 2014: 0.9 2015: 2.2 2016: 1.3 2017: 1.6 2018: 1.5 If the US simply maintains current rates of growth the rest of the world will have to reduce net output or the worldwide demand will have to increase much faster than recent historical trends. Which of those are you predicting?

To kill bacteria the water has to be brought to a full boil for several minutes. Coffee makers don't do that.

At the lowest point in 2012 Travis held about 340,000 acre feet. Since midnight the volume in Travis has increased by about 310,000 acre feet. Of course that isn't counting the volume released from Mansfield since midnight.

Why do all the marathon runners look like they are 50+ years old? He's 33. If you saw that man just walking around there is no way you'd think he was less than 40.

He certainly needs to step away from twitter. With respect to the deadlines... say it would take some most companies 10 years to design and make a new widget. The CEO of some other company says he can do it in 2 years. He ends up being really late and in the end it takes him five years. You dipshits would be screaming about how incompetent this guy is because he was 3!!?>!?! years late getting the new product to market - meanwhile the competition is just starting early phase prototype testing after five years. By the time the S came out and was clearly a hit ALL major car companies were trying to make an entry level EV car. All of them. Chevy had been working on the Volt for 5+ years before that, and it came out and was a piece of shit. Since the S came out the X and the 3 have been released. The entry level version of the 3 isnt available yet, but it clearly will be before any of the competitors are ready. This idea that because he misses his self imposed deadlines then that means he is an incompetent business man is stupid. He did it faster and thus far better than anyone else has. Are you not aware that putting other people's stuff into orbit is already a profitable industry? And SpaceX is has the lowest prices AND the highest margin per launch of any company. He starts in 2002 or whatever with SpaceX and $100MM and in ~15 years has completely destroyed the market - most of which is run by highly subsidized government defense contractors. And you think he is a fraud because he is annoying on twitter?

This is all Teslas that have caught fire since 2013. They've made ~350,000 cars. https://www.autoblog.com/2018/05/11/a-list-of-tesla-car-fires-since-2013/ I'd dial back the histrionics a few notches. I think everything is going to be ok. Even if you charge an EV with coal produced electricity the amount of CO2 is less than if you use an ICE, but its pretty close. If the electricity is from any other source the EV is way cleaner than the ICE. Ignoring CO2 though, all the serious pollutants from car exhaust, NOx, ground level ozone, particulate, etc is overwhelming lower by using an EV. Even the dirtiest power plants are exceedingly cleaner than an internal combustion engine on a per power output basis. No one asserts "clean energy" is 100% clean and no impact whatsoever. He's annoying - he should stay off twitter. He has ridiculous fan boys, they aren't too hard to ignore. He sets absurd deadlines that he never hits. Unless you are an investor I fail to see why this bothers anyone.

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I'm not as confident as you are that Intel could be successful in the near term ( ~5-10 years) going to a foundry model. As you point out, the business has a design side and a manufacturing side. Intel has always been so far ahead on the design side, and their product was so valuable that they never tolerated any shortage of capacity so they built a lot of fabs. This was justifiable because the loss of revenue from being unable to meet demand due to supply constraints was much more significant than the extra expense of having a lot of fabs not at full capacity, so they overbuilt. That worked out great for them and was almost certainly the right decision at the time. But margins are too thin to run like that in a foundry. And its not as simple as just saying "we'll fill up our factories and get more money out of them." Everything about running the factory has to change. Business processes involved QA, repair and maintenance, operations, have not over the decades been subjected to the same sense of time based urgency as is the case at memory fabs or a pure play foundry. Changing that mindset and culture is quite an undertaking. A second issue is all of the internal organization and infrastructure that has to be created to deal with all the different products and customers. At as single Intel fab they may make 4 families of processors, with several different very similar versions in each family. And the customer for every single one of those chips is Intel, with very clear Intel requirements. At a TSMC fab they will be simultaneously making everything from the SOC for a iPhone, image sensors for an Indian digital camera customer, a display driver for an LG TV, infotainment parts for Ford, ASIC chips for bitcoining mining, etc. There would be hundreds of types of chips and over a 1000 different products and the insane number of reticle sets that go along with that. You have to have an organzied way to maintain SPC charts and monitoring for that many devices. Device engineers who understand the layout of those chips to diagnose issues during manufacturing have to be hired. There need to be people that maintain relationships with hundreds of customers, each of which has different pPk requirements, different requirements for manufacturing turn around time. Intel is fucking great at designing CPUs based on x86. They are great a manufacturing very very expensive chips in a slow and steady way. That has very little to do with running a foundry.

There are no hipster locations in the Domain. Hutto is more hipster than the Domain. Working as an accountant is more hipster than the Domain.

I grew up attending an Assemblies of God church. Jesse Duplantis came to our church once or twice a year and held several services. The place was always packed when he was there - I guess everyone wanted to come and see the fancy talking guy from the TV. I can distinctly recall being 10-12 years old and my parents taking me out of the youth ministry service and letting me attend the adult sermon on a Sunday because Jesse Duplantis was in town. It wasnt really a religious sermon so much as "entertainment." He was just loud a strutting around and telling stories that people laughed at, I remember laughing at some of them. Even at that age I remember thinking "what does this have to do with church?" It was just a comedy act or a one man show. This was ~25 years ago - I'm surprised to hear he's only 68. I would have guessed he was in his mid fifties then.

Paraphrasing... Musk on Twitter - the media sucks, we should set up a crowd sourced ratings network for the media so we can identify who is producing poor / false journalism. Twitter people - That wouldnt work. Corporations would manipulate the ratings for their benefit. The only organizations that would get ratings are those that say those things that corporations want them to say. It wouldnt work, because powerful business interests would control it. Musk on Twitter - Who do you think owns the press? Twitter people - OMG HE MEANS THE JOOS!!

The first season of Seinfeld was in 1989, which is exactly half way between the first year of the Andy Griffith show (1960) and the present.

Alabama is a poor man's Mississippi.

Conversations with my father start with the weather and then devolve into a long list of chores he has accomplished since we last talked. "I baled the hay, and trimmed the trees, and put some more rock in the spot on the driveway that is low and set out some deer corn and on and on." It isnt conversation, its him dictating a mental list. He's stubborn, frustrating and annoying in ways that only family members can be. However, my chief complaint regarding my relationship with my father is my inability to tolerate the frustration and annoyance better. He's old - old people behave in particular ways - mostly because society is incredibly age - segregated and they spend almost no time with people below the age of 60. Me being so frustrated and annoyed because my 66 year old father acts like a 66 year old man is a character flaw in me, not him. Its something I try very hard to be better at, but every time I make some progress he finds new ways to act even weirder.

78702 looks like it's up about 20%. It's a lot but it probably matches what people are paying.

Just upgrade. Why is the address bar at the bottom in chrome? This is stupid. Every search about how to move it back to the top yields results in how to move it to the bottom. This is stupid.

Because lifestyle brands are defined by the people that purchase and engage with them. The fact that a watch is a largely superfluous item and a Rolex costs many thousands of dollars means Rolex can at least control that their brand represents wealth and a lifestyle associated with wealth. Yeti is an "aspirational" purchase that can be had for ~$200. Sure, its a lot for a cooler, but its only out of the buying power of the poorest of poor people. In the end, the most enthusiastic purchasers are mildly poor people who can convince themselves and others that they are rich by purchasing a $200 "luxury" cooler. It is easily the cheapest "I'm rich" purchase anyone can make. The most ardent brand proponents and advocates, and the image the public associates with Yeti is the image of faux wealth. They make a fine product. They were the first to market, they deserve to make a lot of money. Unfortunately, others make and sell a functionally identical product for much less and the nature of the business dictates that any attempt at branding a "luxury" cooler will result in the brand eventually being overtaken by the pathetic cheese dick shitheads that we all think of when we think of Yeti.

They saw a market need and they fulfilled it and executed spectacularly. They went upmarket and successfully sold their product at a huge premium over cost. They marketed a lifestyle their product represents and they made a fucking fortune. Good for them. Unfortunately they have no IP that keeps competitors from making equivalent products for 1/2 price. Most unfortunately for them, their branding became associated with broke dick shit bags with yeti stickers on their 2007 f250 with truck nuts.

I bought several hundred in 2011 so I could buy things on various markets that are most easily accessible by tor. Sometimes you make a $5 million mistake. These things happen.