> "This sort of semiconductor would go on to be in the 5G tower in which you get your mobile phone signal, it's going to be in the car charger you plug an EV into, it's going to be in the latest planes."
Okay, but, we have 5G towers, car chargers, and planes right now?
I understand that purer material is better, but to what extent are the impurities of current wafer production methods limiting us? Why is shooting the furnace into space the best option? Why is making wafers 4+ orders of magnitude more expensive the solution we should go for?
“What’s worked for me is a rough three-question filter,” Moxley continues,
“What assumption would be most easily disproven if it’s false?” “What
Is it something that can be cheaply verified in weeks, not months?
“Who would notice if this quietly failed?”
When I don’t skip this, what ends up happening is that I am endorsing the wrong thing. When I do, good ideas also die prematurely.
What the others do, curious to see.
Do you write out assumptions or is it an informal process?
How early do you bring outsiders to poke holes?
Any heuristics for distinguishing between "hard but right" and "just hard"?
Examples always appreciated. Failures too.
Is the idea that it will manufacture all of these chips and then both the 'factory' and the resulting materials will return from space, or that the factory would stay in orbit and send materials back?