1. Tesla and Apple’s War of Innovation.
   Not long ago, Tesla’s skeleton-shaped Charger became the North American standard, and existing carmakers decided to join in
   It’s hard to say it’s a one-sided standard war victory for Tesla, but the situation at the back seems more complicated
   However, the analysis that there is no good in the long run for Tesla cannot be agreed at all

2
First of all, you can make a profit from a supercharger that’s been installed a lot
I’m still making money from the charging business, but I have no choice but to make more money in the future
I think the big picture of combining solar power and megapacks will give us momentum

Now that it’s standard, you can get subsidies and increase the number of Shucha for almost no money
It’s an overwhelming number of superchargers anyway, but the charging station can be expanded like crazy with subsidies
Once standardized and charging issues are resolved, EV market expansion gains momentum

4
On the other hand, the bad thing about Tesla is that
From the perspective of Tesla owners, the charging environment may deteriorate as Tesla users only use it to open up to other manufacturers’ cars
However, Tesla owners can also use other charging stations rather than Shucha

5
If you look at it big, there are more charging stations, which is a boon for the expansion of electric vehicles
Tesla With Overwhelming Share Will Benefit If EV Users Expand
Tesla stock recently floated like crazy, so maybe the market is betting on this one?

It’s kind of hard to understand why the hell it’s against Tesla… 1

The person who has his or her interests should be involved in it himself. That’s the concept of “skin in the game.” You shouldn’t let people who don’t have to suffer much damage decide everything.

It’s a concept that everyone vaguely knows from experience. The admonitor’s advice is to just refer to it. That the opinions of the person in the actual game are important. But I had no choice but to run the risk in the insight of Nassim Taleb, who conceptualized it so clearly.

2

If the depth of the river is 120cm on average, it’s better not to walk across the river. If you step wrong, you can lose your life.

People who won’t dip their feet in the river shouldn’t force anyone to cross the river directly because it’s statistically safe. People are really unscientific, saying they don’t know why they don’t cross a statistically safe river. Some people are saying that because they’re instigated by the ghost story of drowning when they enter a river.

3

I don’t trust people who ask to take risks because the risk is low. When the side effects are obvious and the scale is not predicted, it is right not to take such risks. Nuclear power generation is like that to me. There have been at least two fatal accidents in the decades-long history of nuclear power, and it turns out that humanity cannot afford the consequences. The cost of remediation was enormous, too, once causing the Soviet Union to fail, and once Japan to fail. The accident’s probability is low, but the outcome of the accident is neither controllable nor predictable.

Since the risk of nuclear power is low, it is possible to say that we should take some risk. However, unless you are in a position to directly take responsibility for the consequences of that risk, you never believe what he says. Not only do you not believe it, but you also doubt what I mean.

4

**This is because the sentenced person must wield the sword himself. ** If a person needs to take his or her life, he or she is obliged to look him in the eye and listen to his or her will. If he or she cannot bear to do so, he or she is not entitled to the execution. — Ed Stark

Experts who support nuclear power plants can live next to the nuclear power plant. If there is a politician who calls for expanding nuclear power generation, you can host a nuclear power plant in your district. Those who say contaminated water is safe can drink contaminated water.

Some experts say they will drink contaminated water. But no one drank it themselves. Not only did they not drink it, but they are deceiving people. Sampling contaminated water from Fukushima is also difficult, but you can’t bring contaminated water to drink it.

I think it’s a matter of social consensus to what extent to allow the discharge of contaminated water, but it can be referred to if the experts drink and prove it themselves.

5

I don’t know why you’re against scientifically safe contaminated water, people are unscientific. There are people who say it’s because it’s incited by ghost stories.

That’s what I’m really curious about. I don’t know why they think they’re safe when there’s even a meltdown. Any trainer can say anything, but maybe it’s themselves or their family?

My tentative conclusion is that false political beliefs transcend common sense or reason.

To justify anything in support of Luntong or to expose those who don’t want to see him criticizing Luntong.

I don’t know who the hell is looking at who is being unscientific and irrational.

1
As Jim Collins said, Apple pursues a cannonball strategy quite thoroughly after shooting first. It’s like shooting a gun, seeing if it hits the target, and then shooting with a cannon only after making sure it hits the target properly. After checking the popularity of mp3 on the Napster, I’m launching a Macintosh-based iPod and iTunes. If this is successful, I’m releasing it for Windows as well. When the iPod succeeds, it makes an iPhone with call and internet features. When the iPhone becomes a big success, it releases an ios-based iPad with a larger screen.
They make unconventional attempts to get rid of the earphone jack or something, but introducing a whole new product or technology is very salty. Samsung has been moving on to OLED for years, and Apple was very salty and slow, like licking John Goodman’s armpits. No matter how innovative it may look, when you open it, you always prefer technology that has been fully proven in the market.

2
By the way, isn’t this Vision Pro more like cannon shooting than shooting? We should pay attention to the name Pro. The order is to release a regular type and then a pro. I don’t plan on selling a lot of “pro”, and I can’t sell many expensive products like this. At the most, AirPods Max?
Yes, Vision Pro is the shooting of a spatial computer. If this is successful, I’m sure you’ll start selling more by lowering the price.
There is no need for ordinary people to work with VR headsets. However, it seems that there is a possibility for special jobs for companies. You only need to come up with the appropriate app.
There are many occupations in the world where quick information and quick decision-making are more important than anything else. Intelligence agencies, military, police officers, emergency doctors, etc. There are many occupations that are ready to beat any amount of money for decision-making speed.

3
It’s a machine that sticks to your eyes, but you shouldn’t have too much heat. So you can’t use a high-performance CPU. But if you don’t use a high-performance CPU, the resolution and performance decrease.
This is the dilemma of VR devices. Since the price is also the price, we have no choice but to compromise appropriately.
In order to give you a sense of reality, you have to process two resolutions of 4K or higher in real time and apply all kinds of sensors, but there was no way to do that. But what if the Apple M2 chip, which has both performance and heat generation, is dispatched?
For the time being, devices like Vision Pro can only be made by Apple. I can’t make them. I have to make something like M2 first.

4
By the time competitors slowly follow suit, Apple will be using another strategy to mobilize the Apple ecosystem to make it impossible for users to leave, right?
Anyway, there are people in Korea who have actually used it. As expected, Daeho-pyeong has only one color..