I wrote this for senior business leaders outside of the space industry so they can be aware of, evaluate, and anticipate what new capabilities and price-points may be feasible in the coming years that will affect their enterprises.
Perhaps, but the reverse engineering efforts you mention may have already led to incredible breakthroughs over the past few decades. Lasers, integrated circuits, Kevlar, fiber optics, and more technologies were said to have been seeded among the research community based on recovered UAP components. This is based on Army Colonel Philip Corso’s account in his memoir, “The Day After Roswell”. [1]
Communities like Sketchfab [1] serve some of these needs. Although not 100% FOSS, ‘content hubs’ like this can be a fun place for creators/artists to share their work — and to potentially get paid — and for others to hunt for high quality assets. Sketchfab was acquired by Epic Games in 2021. [2]
Maintaining stylistic consistency from one asset to another is a challenge, however, but maybe upcoming advancements in AI-powered tools like Point-E [3] will enable assets of one style to be re-envisioned en masse into another style. E.g., a text prompt could be “I want all assets from artist X and artist Y to be stylized like the game GTA: Vice City.”
I think the parent commenter may have been referring to how Ford was floundering with no apparent clue. In 2019, there was little public indication of the legacy automobile manufacturers being serious about EVs. Meanwhile, Tesla had been investing in battery manufacturing technology for years.
It takes a long time to thoughtfully design a new chassis, electrified or not. It also takes a long time to build up manufacturing capacity, especially when they key ingredients such as battery cells were not integral to the chassis of the past.
The F-150 Lightning has clearly evoked interest. It could have come a lot sooner. But perhaps Ford can be an effective fast follower, especially if it figures out how to address sticky points like 1) managing dealer relationships and 2) writing software. These issues are business/cultural challenges, so may require more care to address than engineering problems, which Ford has a history (a century!) solving effectively.
While my inner webdev agrees with you, my interpretation of the mmm.page philosophy is that planning "breakpoints" etc takes too much thought, and hence runs against the "mindless" aspect.
"Mindlessly responsive" -> When the content is outside the demarcated safe zone, it's not visible on little screens. Simple ruleset, no brain required. If I just want to get some fun content on a webpage, I either paint in the lines or intentionally paint beyond them.