Month: December 2023

Finished listening to Jeff Bezos’s interview (with Lex Fridman). I liked the part about how to conduct perfect business meetings. I compare this to what I read about fifteen years ago in Barbara Minto’s book about her “pyramid” for organizing thoughts.

(Probably everyone knew this, I just missed it. Someone will probably recommend I read some business book about it now.)

Bezos’s perfect meeting starts with all participants receiving a well-prepared document — a meeting memo (“Clarity that it’s like angels singing from on high”). The document must be written with such clarity that it sets the tone for the meeting. Essentially, it’s the agenda, only characterized by its thoroughness and structure. Typically, it spans six pages and is presented in a narrative form.

Jeff explains that a typical meeting at Amazon and Blue Origin (I assume, starting from a certain level) begins with a six-page memorandum. The first 30 minutes are devoted to quiet reading and note-taking. Jeff says that this often scares new managers because a bunch of people gather and silently stare at computers or papers. This “classroom learning” approach is necessary because people often don’t find the time to read the memos beforehand, leading to unpreparedness and bluffing. “Reading together raises the level of discussion,” Jeff says.

Comparing it to PowerPoint presentations, he notes that they lose out significantly to the memorandum, because they are more about persuasion than about seeking answers. PowerPoint allows careless thinking to hide behind bullet points, whereas the memorandum requires full sentences and narrative structure, making it hard to hide flaws in reasoning. Writing a good six-page memorandum is a challenging task requiring time, but ultimately it proves more useful for the audience, saving time for the entire team, and in the long term, by providing clear, well-thought-out content and a precise definition of what we want to achieve from the meeting.

Interestingly, when someone starts the meeting by presenting something with PowerPoint, they not only persuade people of something, but also attach the formulation of the problem to their own persona, existing reputation, authority, etc. This makes developing objective solutions difficult. In the case of a memorandum, the discussion revolves more around the problem, and it is less tied to the ability to sell, as well as to who brought it and “sells” it. Bluntly speaking, if a boss gathers subordinates and feeds them something via a presentation, there’s a high chance he will get unanimous support, regardless of the content.

Also, Bezos says that when a presentation unfolds slide by slide, the audience constantly has questions, answers to which might appear on subsequent slides, then new questions arise, and ultimately there’s no time left for proper thinking, instead it’s spent on posing questions that could have been avoided (waiting until the end where there will be answers).

Bezos calls the work of writing these memorandums an entire art and science, as it requires making sure that in half an hour the audience not only understands everything but also leaves comments in the margins: clear topic sentences, precise words — verbs and nouns, avoiding bullet points.

“… Musk also saved money by questioning requirements. … Why should building a couple of cranes for lifting the Falcon 9 cost $2,000,000? He was shown all the Air Force safety requirements.

In the end, SpaceX convinced the military to review the requirements, and the cranes ended up costing $300,000.

..In the rocket, a valve cost thirty times more than a similar valve in a car, so Musk constantly insisted that his team look for components from companies not tied to aerospace.

The latches used by NASA on the ISS cost $1500 each. An SpaceX engineer managed to modify a latch used in a restroom cabin and created a locking mechanism for $30.

When the engineer approached Musk’s office and told him that the air cooling system for the Falcon 9 cargo bay would cost over $3,000,000, he yelled to Gwynne Shotwell in the next office, asking how much a home air conditioning system costs. Around $6000, she said. Thus, the SpaceX team purchased several commercial air conditioners and modified their pumps to work on the rocket.

In the end, they built the launch complex at Cape Canaveral for 1/10th of the usual price

I love such stories 😉

A very interesting interview with Jeff Bezos. Currently listening to him talk about friction stir welding – a type of metal welding involving friction and mixing, which I had never heard of before. Bezos also explains why he didn’t choose theoretical physics. He says there are some magical guys who manage to solve differential equations in their minds in ten seconds ending up with a cosine, and then it takes three pages of fine print to explain it to normal people. He cites a college colleague as an example. To which this colleague comments on the video saying that he is Yasantha, Jeff’s college friend from Princeton, who solved the cosine problem for him, and is very grateful for the warm words about their interaction over 40 years ago, who is also an inventor in Silicon Valley, and a scientist in the field of artificial intelligence (I googled it, it’s Yasantha Rajakarunanayake). In general, it’s quite cool, watching it while walking the dog, I recommend

P.S. It’s only about engineering at the beginning, then it covers life and business. Also interesting.

Today I was thinking about what to order at the cafe and saw Frangipane on the menu. Went to Google it, and there it was on Wikipedia. Appetizing!

I read that Moscow is experiencing the snowfall “Vanya”, and all kinds of experts with handbooks are proving on every channel that snow in mid-December has fallen very unexpectedly, asking for understanding regarding its untimely removal. It should be noted that having reserves for such an occasion is actually the city’s responsibility, just like it is the responsibility of healthcare workers to have reserves in case of an outbreak of infectious diseases. But I’m talking about something else – how snow removal is organized in our areas.

I live in Virginia and the snow here is odd. Right now, it’s mid-December, and just a couple of days ago it was 15 degrees Celsius. It’s a bit colder now, but I remember once cycling in shorts in mid-January. Then, all the TVs were bursting with snow warnings for a whole week (it was warm, dry, and sunny outside). People were actively stocking up in stores for a week ahead. And then everything stopped for a couple of days because they were clearing the roads—it was completely snowed in. Of course, there was not enough equipment—it would never be enough, no matter how much there was.

But here’s how it works here. Keeping snowplows in southern states is odd. They are usually not needed. Therefore, in storage, they have snowplows (I don’t know the Russian word, they are called snowplows in English) that attach to powerful SUVs, of which, of course, there are plenty. In the event of snow, all the agency-owned SUVs are gathered, plus a call is put out to anyone who wants to make extra money using their own vehicles. And the snowplows themselves don’t take up much space, don’t require maintenance, they just wait for a snowfall.

Therefore, main roads are cleared quickly. Well, quickly—in the sense that one day was spent on all the major roads, especially if it continues to snow. The second day—they handle the smaller roads. But there weren’t any major snowfalls after that. And clearing paths to individual houses is the responsibility of the homeowners. Many people have these snowplows sitting idle in their garage. Of course, you can always call a number, and they will come to clear the snow. If you live in a village, that’s the headache of the village administration.

It’s worth mentioning that heavy rains have never been a problem here. Rains here simply never form seas or even puddles. Unlike snow, dealing with rain is simply a matter of properly building roads and drainage systems. There are never any puddles at all. If it rains, it means the asphalt will be wet. If it rains heavily and for a long time, it also means that the asphalt will be wet. Once the rain stops—the asphalt dries up quickly. In specialized ditches, water may gurgle for another couple of days, and that’s it.

Discussing Antonio Gracias, a director at Tesla from 2007 to 2021

I am currently reading Elon Musk’s biography. It mentions an interesting fact: when everything was just beginning, there were disputes within Tesla about who should be considered a founder. The company was founded in July 2003 by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning, but the current company leadership refers to Elon Musk, Jeffrey Brian Straubel, and Ian Wright as co-founders. Back in the early 2000s, the press wrote about Tesla as Eberhard’s brainchild, and Musk was occasionally not mentioned at all. Musk played two roles there: he provided funds (~$70M) and contributed extensively to production as an engineer. Isaacson writes that there was a piece in the NYT where Musk was not mentioned at all, while Eberhard and Tarpenning posed for a photo. Musk freaked out and published an essay on Tesla’s website titled “The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan (just between us)”

Probably, someone will tell me that I am 18 years late with this news and it is already an “old story.” Well okay 🙂

Below I provide its translation. The essay itself can be searched by “Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan”. It was published in 2006. I found the engineering calculations in the second half of the essay interesting. The translation is done by machine translation, so if you see anything awkward — tell me, I’ll fix it.

—

“THE SECRET TESLA MASTER PLAN” (Just between us!)

“As you know, the first product of Tesla Motors is the Tesla Roadster electric sports car. However, some readers may not know that our long-term goal is to create a wide range of models, including affordable family cars. This is because the main purpose of Tesla Motors (and the reason I am financing the company) is to help accelerate the transition from an economy based on the extraction and burning of hydrocarbons to a solar-electric economy.

What is critically important for this is the creation of an ‘uncompromised’ electric vehicle. Therefore, the Tesla Roadster is engineered to directly compete and beat gasoline sports cars like Porsche or Ferrari. Moreover, it is twice as energy-efficient as the Prius. However, some may doubt whether this really benefits the world. Do we really need another roadster? Will it actually impact global carbon emissions?

Well.. the answer: no, not really. However, behind this answer is the main point. Virtually any new technology initially has high costs before it can be optimized, and this is especially true for electric cars. Tesla’s strategy is to enter at the high end of the market, where customers are willing to pay a lot, and then move as quickly as possible down-market to higher volume production and lower prices with each subsequent model.

Without revealing too much, I can say that the second model will be a four-door family sports car at about half the price of a $89,000 Tesla Roadster, and the third model will be even more affordable. All free cash flow is reinvested back into research to reduce costs and aimed at as rapid as possible the market introduction of subsequent products. When someone buys a Tesla Roadster sports car, they are actually helping finance the development of an affordable family car.”

Now I would like to respond to two recurring arguments against electric cars—battery disposal and power plant emissions. The answer to the first is short and simple, the second requires a bit of math:

1) Batteries are non-toxic to the environment. I would not recommend them as a topping on your dessert, but Tesla Motors’ lithium-ion batteries are not classified and have never been classified as hazardous, plus they are safe for landfill disposal. However, throwing them away is essentially throwing away money, as the battery can be sold to recycling companies (without subsidies) after its lifespan of over 100,000 miles. Moreover, by this mileage, the battery does not die, it just has a reduced range.

2) Power plant emissions, or ‘The Long Tailpipe'”

A common objection against electric cars as a solution for carbon dioxide emission problems is that it merely shifts CO2 emissions to the power station. The obvious counterargument is the potential for diversifying power generation in various ways, many of which, such as hydro, wind, geothermal, nuclear, solar energy, etc., do not involve CO2 emissions. However, let’s assume for a moment that electricity is generated from a hydrocarbon source like natural gas, which has been the most popular fuel for new power plants in the U.S. in recent years.

General Electric’s H-System combined-cycle generator is 60% efficient in converting natural gas to electricity. ‘Combined cycle’ means that natural gas is burned to generate electricity, and then the waste heat is used to create steam, which drives a second generator. The efficiency of natural gas extraction is 97.5%, processing is also 97.5% efficient, and then the efficiency of transmission across the grid averages about 92%. This gives us an efficiency from the well to the electrical outlet of 97.5% x 97.5% x 60% x 92% = 52.5%.

Despite the body shape, tires, and transmission oriented toward high performance rather than peak efficiency, the Tesla Roadster requires 0.4 MJ per kilometer or, in other words, travels 2.53 km per mega joule of electricity. The overall charging and discharging efficiency of the Tesla Roadster is 86%, meaning that out of every 100 MJ of electricity used to charge the battery, about 86 MJ reaches the motor.

Putting the math together, we get a final efficiency figure of 2.53 km/MJ x 86% x 52.5% = 1.14 km/MJ. Let’s compare this to the Prius and several other options typically considered energy-efficient.”

Fully accounted ‘well-to-wheel’ efficiency for a gasoline-powered vehicle is the energy content of gasoline (34.3 MJ per liter) minus losses in refining and transport (18.3%), multiplied by miles per gallon or kilometers per liter. Thus, a Prius rated by the EPA at 55 miles per gallon has an energy efficiency of 0.56 km/MJ. This is actually an excellent figure compared to a ‘normal’ car, like the Toyota Camry, which clocks at 0.28 km/MJ.”

It’s worth noting that the term ‘hybrid’ in relation to the vehicles currently on the road is somewhat misleading. They are actually just gasoline cars with a bit of battery help, and unless you are one of the few whose car has been modified in the garage, their small battery must be charged by the gasoline engine. Hence, they can be considered just slightly more efficient gasoline cars. If EPA-certified mileage is 55 miles per gallon, it is indistinguishable from a non-hybrid achieving 55 miles per gallon. As my friend says, a world filled entirely with Prius drivers would still be 100% dependent on oil.”

The CO2 content in any given source fuel is well-known. Natural gas contains 14.4 grams of carbon per mega joule, and oil contains 19.9 grams of carbon per mega joule. Applying these carbon content levels to vehicle efficiency, including as a reference cars like Honda running on combusted natural gas and Honda on fuel cell natural gas, the clear winner is purely electric:

Honda CNG

Source: Natural Gas

CO2 Content: 14.4 g/MJ

Efficiency: 0.32 km/MJ

CO2 Emissions: 45.0 g/km

Honda FCX

Source: Natural Gas-Fuel Cell

CO2 Content: 14.4 g/MJ

Efficiency: 0.35 km/MJ

CO2 Emissions: 41.1 g/km

Toyota Prius

Source: Oil

CO2 Content: 19.9 g/MJ

Efficiency: 0.56 km/MJ

CO2 Emissions: 35.8 g/km

Tesla Roadster

Source: Natural Gas-Electricity

CO2 Content: 14.4 g/MJ

Efficiency: 1.14 km/MJ

CO2 Emissions: 12.6 g/km

The Tesla Roadster still wins by a large margin, assuming an average CO2 content per joule in U.S. power production. The higher CO2 content in coal compared to natural gas is offset by the negligible CO2 content in hydroelectricity, nuclear power, geothermal energy, wind power, solar energy, and so forth. The exact makeup of power generation varies from one part of the country to another and changes over time, so here natural gas is used as a fixed benchmark.”

I must mention that Tesla Motors will jointly promote sustainable energy products from other companies along with the car. For instance, among other things, we will offer a modestly sized and priced solar panel from SolarCity, a photovoltaic cell manufacturing company (where I am also a major investor). This system could be installed on your roof in an out-of-the-way spot because of its small size, or set up as a covered parking lot and would generate enough electricity for about 50 miles of driving per day.”

If you drive less than 350 miles per week, you would thereby be ‘energy positive’ with respect to your personal transportation. This is a step beyond conserving or even neutralizing your energy use for transportation—you are actually returning more energy to the system than you consume in transportation! So, in short, the master plan is as follows:

1. Build a sports car.

2. Use that money to build an affordable car.

3. Use that money to build an even more affordable car.

4. While doing above, also provide zero-emission electricity generation options.”

“Don’t tell anyone.”

Yes! They have all the good stuff! You just need to not only listen but also watch;) for instance,

Learning English

Hmm. I would write it as one word.

Is it me forgetting Russian in my America, or is Brushtein playing tricks?