site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5d ago (text post)   2516 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for October 16, 2026

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Super cool, but I am afraid it'd be the same as with jetpacks - the tech exists for a while now but it's not practically usable outside of flashy demos.

Really? Cold gas thrusters on a car? I could be wrong, but is there anyone else who’s done this? Even as a personal side project? I would have guessed there are zero other companies that could design or install this tech, let alone program the software to invert a car and do a soft landing. Maybe another aerospace company could do it, but they haven’t. In the loosest definition, we have both cars and thrusters - but there’s something special about this.

Are the other auto companies that have found ways to radically change the traction equation?

I think you misunderstood my meaning. I don't say the tech already existed, I am saying once this tech is released, even if it becomes widely known how to do it, it still won't gain common use due to various other factors - just as there are a lot of ways to make a jetpack now, but not a lot of common use of them. I am not questioning Musk's priority, just the future of it as a consumer technology.

That said, he was able to make electric car and satellite internet a consumer technology, so what do I know. Hopefully somebody will read this in ten years, point at it and laugh, calling me an idiot.

True but I feel like wireless internet and electric cars were more 'how do we get there' issues than 'this thing is of dubious desirability'. Maybe I'm too bearish on personal floatation but I wouldn't take a helicopter presently even if I were a billionaire when I'm likely getting more or less the same trade-offs with a 'abovestreet legal' flying car

I don't know, if I were a billionaire I totally would take a helicopter everywhere. Or at least like when going from the airport to the hotel and such. The problem is that it costs about 100x of what I'd pay for such a ride, based on my current net worth. If money weren't an issue, I'd totally do it.

Have you been in a helicopter before? Like for me it's a big drop in comfort and practicality in exchange for small time savings. I'd rather just get a normal driver and a luxury vehicle

Yes, I have, but if the alternative is between 10 minute discomfort and an hour+ in traffic, I think I'd rather take discomfort. OTOH, maybe if I am a billionaire I can use my time way more freely than I am now, so maybe my opinion would change then. That said, if fully automated taxis take over - which I think will happen pretty soon - I might change my opinion.

If you've got a driver and a top end Executive vehicle you're probably insulated from traffic

I take the bus because riding in traffic is a massive quality of life improvement to driving in traffic. A driver and a town car would be an even more massive improvement, but it's not free.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats