xthexder

Wildcard certs are perfectly fine. Your own instance lemm.ee is using one right now.

Obviously there could be issues if subdomains are shared with other sites, but if the whole domain is owned by 1 person, what does it matter?

If you are the CA, you can sign a new certificate yourself for google.com and the browser will accept it. It's effectively allows MITM for any certificate. Worse, it's not even limited to certificates under that CA. The browser has no way of knowing there's 2 "valid" certs at once, and in fact that is allowed regardless (multiple servers with different instances of the SSL cert is a possibility).

Certificate pinning might save things, since that will force the same certificate as was previously used, but I'm not sure this is a common default.

Well, it's difficult, as it should be, because if you control a certificate in the active chain of trust of browsers, you can hack pretty much anything you want.

Oh man, I forgot about startssl until just now. I definitely had a few of those certs. If you wanted something fancy like a wildcard cert back then, you were paying $$$

Maybe just use percentages instead of these weird units. 0.2 MHh per hour is just 0.2 MW, or 20%.

It seems easier to say solar produces an average of 20% of it's peak capacity.

You bring up heated water as a method of storage, and it reminds me of a neighborhood in Alberta, Canada that uses geothermal + solar heated water storage for 52 homes. They've been able to successfully heat the entire neighborhood with only solar over the winter in 2015-2016 and have gotten > 90% solar heating in other years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_Landing_Solar_Community

There's a huge number of new storage technologies being developed, and the fact that some even work on a seasonal basis for long term storage is amazing.

Less used than the Code key apparently. Their editor must crash A LOT if they need a dedicated button to launch it more than A or Space

They did publish a video of a crash test, but I think Tesla did it themselves and didn't publish any data, just a "comparison video" with an F150 Lightning.

It didn't look great... A lot of people were pointing out how tiny the crumple zone is, and the stop seemed more violent than most vehicles.

I'm definitely a fan of the Lightning, but it's a huge truck, similar to a Raptor in length. It wouldn't fit in my driveway. They need an EV Mavick or Ranger. (I've heard rumors of a Ranger PHEV, which could be a game changer for EV towing)

It's more than a clickbait headline, the first paragraph is just flat out wrong:

Perhaps best of all, it consumes no energy doing it.

Obviously it's consuming energy going uphill. Just because the power source is gravity doesn't mean it's not consuming energy.

Is that if the channel is inactive, or the viewer's account? It seems like if you watch anything else, it's not a problem, but if you're only subscribed to 1 infrequent channel you might have that problem?

I'd click on the link, but then I'd be contributing to the stats.

I do remember seeing this tweet quoted on the Elon missed prediction tracker: https://elonmusk.today/