I just watched this video, and it’s an old video from the year 2018. We’re now on the second day of the year 2021, and I really can’t imagine how even more efficient in speed and the level of automation has had occurred in the factory in which the video right after the break reveals. The question is, will humans go the way of the horses in the future? Hmm… I think that we can automate pretty much everything except for human intuition and creativity. Well, just maybe not yet!
I don’t know much about the manufacturing process of PCBs (Printed Circuit Boards) and other electronic devices. I know that doing the 3D printing of complicated layers for electronic devices from just a sophisticated 2D blueprint is rather complicated. Luckily, I’ve come across some information that enlightens me on this whole shebang.
CEO of Nano Dimension, Yoav Stern, suggests that currently, the process of unsophisticated 3D printing of electronic devices can only print 2D electronic layers on any 3D devices. Yoav Stern suggests that the 3D printed technology using the Additive Manufacturing Electronics method patented by Nano Dimension can do better. According to Yoav Stern, Nano Dimension can allow any company to print complicated electronic devices such as PCBs easily from sophisticated 2D blueprints (i.e., blueprints generated by computer software). It means that these 3D printers made by Nano Dimension can deploy as sophisticated prototype 3D printers.
The benefits of using in-house prototype 3D printers to print electronic prototypes are plenty. For example, IP (Intellectual Property) can be kept in-house secretly since the company doesn’t have to send out the IP to a third party to work on the prototypes. Moreover, these 3D printers from Nano Dimension can also be used as backup manufacturing machines for electronic devices such as PCBs. When the needs arise, any company can switch on the 3d printers to start doing the sophisticated 3D printing of electronic devices.
Honestly, I’d purchased shares of Nano Dimension’s stock, and so I’m glad to be able to get more details on this company through the video right after the break. In the video, Yoav Stern goes into detail on why Nano Dimension’s Additive Manufacturing Electronics technology (3D printers) can outdo their competitors.
Tesla is still leading the way to electrification. Nio and other well known Chinese electric car makers are revving up their effort in competing both against Tesla and the old-school Internal Combustion Engine car manufacturers. Since electrification requires fewer moving parts, the cars should be less complicated to produce and streamline the supply chain — but there are limits still in improving the electrification process. One of such limits is the battery range. Another is the battery’s not so robust recharge cycle amount before the degradation of a battery begins to take place when every time it gets charged up.
No worry though, I think Tesla is doing its best to improve these limits. Lately, Nio upgraded 75 kWh battery technology to 100 kWh, and this means Nio’s car owners now can either choose to use the old tech battery or upgrade to a newer one which is the 100 kWh. The 100 kWh battery allows Nio cars to have a better mileage range. Nio’s 100 kWh battery allows Nio cars, depending on the vehicle sizes, to travel up to 615 km (382 miles) per charge. Other EV (Electrical Vehicle) makers are not idling by either because they’re too improving the battery tech and getting rid of more limits in the electrification process.
Besides improving the battery tech, sometimes it’s also better to reinvent the wheel, and so other EV innovators are coming up with ways of reinventing the whole EV battery tech altogether. Instead of relying on the common lithium-ion battery tech which relies on a liquid electrolytic solution, some EV innovators are hard at work in pushing out solid-state battery tech which gives a better recharged time. For example, QuantumScape — which went public recently through a SPAC (Special Purpose Acquisition Company) merger — is promising to push out solid-state battery tech which allows an EV battery to be recharged about 80% but it takes only 15 minutes to do so. QuantumScape mentioned that they will begin the manufacturing process around 2024 to get this tech onto the market — which is four years from now.
Here I thought QuantumScape is already a game-changer, then suddenly Toyota announces that they will release an EV in 2021 with a solid-state battery tech that allows the vehicle to be fully recharged within 10 minutes. I think the age of electrification is now heating up and ready to go much farther in terms of overtaking the traditional ICE makers fast. Check out a cool video right after the break where Toyota boasts about their electrification process of Lexus cars in the near future.
I’m no strategic kind of person since I’m rather a straightforward chap. Nonetheless, I do have my own opinions in the matter of whatever could be happening in the next decades or so. I don’t think I’m prophetic, but I guess if you keep guessing, something ought to turn out just like the way you’ve had imagined. Thus, if the experts are correct on how China would want to invade Taiwan soon, then I think China will do it in a similar fashion to how the United States had done Iraq in 2003. A complete overwhelming show of force.
By showing an overwhelmed show of force in Iraq, the United States has made China eagerly to update and upgrade its military structure, tech strategy, and weapon knowhows. China would not want to be the next Iraq. So, it is logical for China to think like the United States if China has to invade Taiwan. I think China will try to overwhelm Taiwan in an invasion of Taiwan to the point that, perhaps, could shame the one that the United States had done in Iraq in 2003. Why? By overwhelming an enemy force rather easily, China sends a message to unfriendly countries that it’s not to be trifled with.
I think the invasion of Iraq by the United States and the fall of Saddam Hussein had pushed China to be even more cautious and paranoid of the United States. This event may have had pushed China into going all out in upgrading its military and related capabilities. Furthermore, China is now eager to advance in other tech industry sectors such as quantum computer/satellite and space techs. This way, China could use these advances during peacetime for economic purposes — but the dual usage of these capabilities will be a tremendous, helpful kind of force in wartime for China.
So, to my understanding, the more qbits there are the faster quantum computer can be. For who doesn’t know, qbit is a Quantum Bit. Before the world was introduced to qbit, scientists like Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein were arguing about the realness of the Quantum Mechanics science since they weren’t sure why the fundamentals for the Quantum Mechanics are so different than the traditional Physics ones. I think Niels Bohr’s and Albert Einstein’s many heated debates gave way to the idea of Quantum Entanglement. Einstein was frustrated how could one quantum particle instantly know what the other quantum particle would do and behave accordingly as if the cause and effect would instantly occur regardless of the distance between the two quantum particles. Einstein said that this is like spooky action at a distance. Nowadays, we’re trying to harness this spooky action at a distance for forming our quantum computing foundation by using strings of qbits to program quantum software so we could use the software to calculate results that would be zillion times faster than the traditional supercomputers that use traditional microchips.
The importance of harnessing the power of Quantum Entanglement could not be described in a determinable amount at our present time since we would never know what this power could yield further technologies that would form our future tech environment. Nonetheless, we already see how powerful this power is as we are trying to harness it to build quantum computers. Thus, I think it’s important for us all to understand or even to make stupid suggestions on why and how could quantum entanglement occurs in the natural world where spooky action at a distance is possible.
I imagine spooky action at a distance is like God who is a programmer and he is using a godly software to draw two similar objects that are the cause and effect — these objects should spring into existence simultaneously whenever one quantum particle of the two related ones is being disturbed. This way, we could also imagine an artist (not using a computer with software) who is using a piece of paper to draw similar objects at the same time by using his left and right hands. For this instance, we could imagine the artist as the spooky connection between the two quantum particles. To further our fantasy, I think we could imagine the artist is not the artist, but the artist is a force that is outside of our universe — this force can and will manipulate all activities between quantum particles by the law of this force which can be observed by us through the consequences that the force had dictated. At this point, I think arguing that this is a force is making more sense since this force has its own limit in which it could only operate the spooky action at a distance whenever a correlated quantum particle is activated. Still, I think it’s important for me to imagine that this force is outside of our universe and cannot be contained within the universe that we’re currently occupied.
In summary, it’s easier for me to imagine that spooky action at a distance between two quantum particles could happen only when a force, an artist, or a God who/what resides outside of our universe — to be able to allow the chemistry between two correlated quantum particles to have the same cause and effect outcome. Of course, this what I suggest and imagine up and thinking of, and so I could imagine how wrong this idea could be. I don’t think there would even be a second person who could agree with me more about this idea. Anyhow, it’s an interesting idea I think!
Before you read on, I want to clarify my standing in regard to the pure electrical vehicle all related matters. To sum it up, I do think the EV market will be huge in the future. Furthermore, I bought some common shares (stock) and go long on an EV maker which I will not name here. So, my standing is that I’m biased and positive in the EV sector.
A question I want to address in this blog post is that can a country or a company in a car industry be left behind by ignoring the EV market? It seems Toyota is still moving too slow on going all-in in producing pure electrical cars. I’m wondering, perhaps, Toyota thinks that the EV market is not big enough and there isn’t enough demand for EV out there, and so it’s OK for them to move slowly into this market. Nonetheless, I think this would be a big mistake for Toyota and other automakers out there that think the same way as Toyota is currently thinking in regards to EV of all things.
I suspect that Tesla and other EV makers out there who are going long and early into the EV market will be able to set some standards for the whole EV industry. Why do you think Chinese and South Korean automakers cannot shine brighter than automakers in Japan and Europe? Well, most automakers in Europe and Japan have been at the game much longer than the ones in South Korea and China. The European and Japan automakers have been churning out complicated but well respected non-luxurious and luxurious vehicles with internal combustion engines for decades. Nonetheless, when it comes to electrical vehicles, it’s still anybody’s game.
I’m no expert in the auto industry and whatever I’m spewing here is just an ordinary Joe’s perspective on the car industry. Nonetheless, my suspicion is that the EV market will be so huge and has a very big potential for investors because of several things.
Firstly, China got the biggest auto consumption market in the world. Nowadays, if you’re an automaker, I doubt that you would want to neglect such a big auto market as the one in China. So, when the Chinese government prioritizes EV (and other new energy sources for making vehicles and other transportation means) — I think it’s a very big deal. After all, the Chinese government demands a certain percentage of pure EVs to be made and sold by each automaker that wants to participate in a growing Chinese auto market.
Secondly, as a country like China and Germany build up EV charging points to promote pure electric vehicles, people are going to be more comfortable to go out and buy more EVs since they know they can charge their vehicles anywhere eventually. Meanwhile, some EV makers are also trying to improve battery range and charging speed, and thus greatly enhancing the demand for a pure electric vehicle. Some automakers go as far as to provide a battery switching option which could take less than five minutes to switch out a drained out battery with a full charge one so you can drive your EV out of the charging station in no time.
I think high-cost value products like a car rely on reputation a lot. Thus, I think when all necessary ingredients are eventually be put in place for the pure electric automakers to thrive, they only have their reputation to depend and fall back onto. This means, whoever is in the game the longest doesn’t necessarily be the best, the biggest, and the most awesome if the reputation is stink. Nonetheless, when the time is right for the EV sector to grow, a great reputation is exactly the thing a pure electric automaker needs to thrive onward. Thus, I think as long a pure electric automaker got an early head start and keeps on building a great reputation, it will be very hard for the newcomers to come in and uprooting the foundation of the great pure electric automaker.
One more thing, Mr. Bill Gates had mentioned that it was his mistake of not pushing more focus into the smartphone industry thus Apple and other Android smartphone makers were able to thrive but Microsoft did not do so great in making a well respected and well-known smartphone. I think Toyota and whatever automakers out there should take the lesson of Microsoft in regards to being a more focus early bird.