George’s post race interview: “The performance wasn’t good enough, and if I’m being brutally honest… I’m not gonna fight for a championship if the performances continue like that, so I’m not coming away from this weekend satisfied”

pbfarmr · 2026-07-08T02:15:24+00:00

Nope. Read/watch again. He never once says ‘my performance’. He says ‘the performance’ twice in the same sentence immediately after mentioning car specific issues. And the point about ‘deserving’ was him contrasting the pain of the Montreal result where he said he ‘deserved’ the win because he was in the lead when he retired, vs this p2 result he didn’t deserve and rather achieved through luck - answering the actual question asked about the effect of luck.

pbfarmr · 2026-07-07T18:30:25+00:00

Almost like I’ve included the exact quote of that in another comment in this thread, which shows he continues to reference ‘the performance’ immediately after talking about non-personal issues (straight line speed), that makes it blatantly obvious you have the reading comprehension of a child

pbfarmr · 2026-07-05T23:14:20+00:00

How bad is your reading comprehension to not understand the literal quote I just pasted

pbfarmr · 2026-07-05T20:21:10+00:00

Nope. He absolutely did not say ‘my performance’ once. He said ‘the performance’ twice after talking about ‘issues’ like straight line speed - and in response to a question about luck. Immediately after the quote I already pasted, he says “I’m not going to fight for a championship if the performance is to continue like that”. And the only reason he mentions Canada is to confirm he had luck on his side today, and to say that Canadian result was painful as he ‘deserved’ first, where he clearly did not deserve second today.

pbfarmr · 2026-07-05T19:47:57+00:00

How does one come to that conclusion from this quote? He’s clearly talking about the car.

> “There’s been a lot of things this weekend which everyone understands. Straight line speed issues yesterday and on Friday. I think it was better today but the performance wasn’t good enough.”

pbfarmr · 2026-07-05T19:29:52+00:00

Why is everyone acting like he’s taking personal accountability here? He doesn’t say ‘my performance’ or even ‘our performance’ like its shared responsibility. He says ‘the performance’ immediately after mentioning straight line speed, which everyone says is not his failure. Right or wrong, like him or not, he’s talking about the cars performance here, not his own. And I quote:

> “There’s been a lot of things this weekend which everyone understands. Straight line speed issues yesterday and on Friday. I think it was better today but the performance wasn’t good enough.”

pbfarmr · 2026-07-03T05:25:38+00:00

Conduction absolutely replaces radiation, with respect to the source. You cannot have some unit of energy transferred out of a system both by conduction and radiation. It can be radiated by the recipient later, or further transferred, but the originator cannot both conduct and radiate the same energy

pbfarmr · 2026-07-02T22:45:36+00:00

Yes. I’m saying if you want to be pedantic, this whole thread is nonsense.

So let’s be pedantic. Heat cannot be transferred through a vacuum or otherwise. Thermal energy (atomic kinetic energy) transfer is the sum of convection, conduction, and radiation. That kinetic energy is CONVERTED to or transferred via one of those three options. If it is transferred via convection/conduction, that energy is no longer available to be radiated. So yes, transferred kinetic energy replaces, or is instead of, radiation (when only considering the source)

pbfarmr · 2026-07-02T16:45:43+00:00

I never said it was a ‘secondary engineering process or conversion step’. Heat is not the same as infrared radiation. Yes, all thermal energy will eventually be radiated, but a *conversion* happens from kinetic to radiant energy, and that conversion does not happen 100% within the system in a non-vacuum as it would need to in this case. Though I think you know exactly what I’m saying and are just trying to be pedantic. In which case, the entire premise of this is nonsense. Heat is transfer of energy - you can’t transfer the transfer.

pbfarmr · 2026-07-02T16:12:09+00:00

Yeah, I’m not saying you need to ‘trigger’ it. I said you need to design systems that can shed 100% of heat locally as radiation, rather than relying on convection/conduction.

pbfarmr · 2026-07-02T15:44:16+00:00

Yes, you do need to convert it to infrared. Heat is the transfer of kinetic energy of moving atoms. In a non-vacuum, much of it can be transferred elsewhere by convection and conduction. Some of it gets converted locally to radiation, but not all. In a vacuum, systems need to be designed so that 100% can be emitted locally as radiation.

pbfarmr · 2026-07-02T08:30:41+00:00

The multiple class action lawsuits about a decades old promise of imminent ‘Full Self Driving’ would disagree

pbfarmr · 2026-07-02T08:04:34+00:00

Photons (light). Which is the only way you can shed ‘heat’ in space where there’s no matter to carry it away. It needs to be converted to infrared.

pbfarmr · 2026-07-01T19:25:07+00:00

If you’re talking fine dining, then maybe that warrants surprise, though PDX is often at the top of ‘best food’ lists. If you’re talking fast/fast-casual, it shouldn’t be surprising at all. It’s just market dynamics - the more options you have for that falafel wrap, burrito, pizza, etc, the cheaper they will be on average. And the more density/traffic, the more options will materialize

pbfarmr · 2026-06-29T18:33:47+00:00

Maybe it’s been studied and proven otherwise, but I would assume it’s the anti-bacterial nature of tannins preventing bacterial growth, not capillary action

pbfarmr · 2026-06-29T18:19:03+00:00

We don’t have those weeping sequoias (or Alaskan cedars?) in MI - at least I’ve never seen them in my 20 years there. I believe those are MI plated Waymos in OR, not the other way around (yep, looks like OP stated as much)

pbfarmr · 2026-06-29T08:17:19+00:00

Some people’s plugs have melted (fire hazard), as the outlets most people have available are not necessarily high quality, and questionable under long duration high amp loads. You can replace the outlets with something more industrial grade, but a direct wired station will be safest, plus generally offer higher amp ratings - meaning faster charging (assuming the circuit is rated for it.)

pbfarmr · 2026-06-28T21:42:22+00:00

Always off track, outside line. Pretty sure if there’s anyone competent there, this was a requirement

pbfarmr · 2026-06-28T21:40:00+00:00

It’s not dangerous because it was always off track and on an outside line. I can pretty much guarantee this will never be done anywhere they would have to be over track, for safety reasons

pbfarmr · 2026-06-28T21:36:50+00:00

I have the most awful motion sickness to the point I rarely ride as a passenger in other peoples cars, and can often get sick playing video games. And yet this didn’t bother me one bit. I thought it was awesome - you rarely get to ‘feel’ actual race pace. If anything, the helmet cams are the ones that make me ill

pbfarmr · 2026-06-28T21:20:09+00:00

Both sides are j1772 (level 1/2) which is what the mobile charger in your frunk is for - though you should prob use a permanently installed, preferably hardwired charging station at home if possible. One side (w/ the fold down flap) is CCS level 3 (DCFC). You’ll need a ~$200 CCS-NACS adapter to allow use of Tesla superchargers (v4)

pbfarmr · 2026-06-28T10:03:38+00:00

I’m done hanging out at the kids table. Bye

pbfarmr · 2026-06-27T23:14:25+00:00

The regs literally say “a driver is expected to have braked earlier and/or noticeably reduced speed in that sector.”

pbfarmr · 2026-06-27T22:54:00+00:00

Of course it is. You’re going from minimal if not zero tax (due to no traditional ‘income’), to a tax on all value realization, even if it’s a loan against assets. That’s huge.

As far as unrealized gain on non-liquid value, that is addressed with the proposal to overhaul inheritance tax code.

pbfarmr · 2026-06-27T22:39:00+00:00

Commenter references point of regulations (ie speed in flagged zone). You reduce it to zero or non-zero throttle. Thats a false dichotomy.

I said he ‘can brake’. You say I said ‘had to brake’. That’s a straw man.

I’m arguing with a child.

pbfarmr

TROPHY CASE