即刻App年轻人的同好社区
下载
置顶
Elon Musk表示，他会设定一个实现概率为50%的最激进截止日期，心里清楚有一半的情况会延期。因为一项五年的计划，最终总会拖满整整五年。
“我一直在寻找制约整件事的瓶颈。所以在截止日期这件事上，我一般会把目标定在我预估成功率50%的节点。”
“也就是说，这不是完全不可能完成的期限，而是我能想到的最大胆、仍有五成机会落地的时间。这也就意味着，一半情况会延期。”
“有一条类似气体膨胀定律的规律适用于项目计划。好比你说一件事要用五年完成——对我来说五年近乎无限长的时间，工作量就会膨胀，填满全部可用时间，最后刚好花掉五年。”
Neuralink总裁DJ Seo称，马斯克这种激进的排期是严谨的第一性原理工程思维。在“全绿灯计划”模型下，80%至90%的延误都只是人们想当然的预设。
“我的体会是，这并非随意的管理手段，而是一套严谨的工程方法，基于第一性原理。当然，这更多适用于实体硬件领域。我们有个概念叫全绿灯计划，它迫使我们思考：如果所有环节一路绿灯，没有行政负担、物流延误、风险或是老旧系统带来的瓶颈，我们最快多久能把产品造出来？”
“当你站在这个角度思考，剔除所有人为造成的阻碍，去提问：芯片最快多久量产？机器人最快多久完成设计与测试？结果会发现，虽然我没法给出精确数字，但至少80%到90%的延误，只是大家习惯默认本该如此，从来没有从这个角度重新审视问题。”
“我一直在寻找制约整件事的瓶颈。所以在截止日期这件事上，我一般会把目标定在我预估成功率50%的节点。”
“也就是说，这不是完全不可能完成的期限，而是我能想到的最大胆、仍有五成机会落地的时间。这也就意味着，一半情况会延期。”
“有一条类似气体膨胀定律的规律适用于项目计划。好比你说一件事要用五年完成——对我来说五年近乎无限长的时间，工作量就会膨胀，填满全部可用时间，最后刚好花掉五年。”
Neuralink总裁DJ Seo称，马斯克这种激进的排期是严谨的第一性原理工程思维。在“全绿灯计划”模型下，80%至90%的延误都只是人们想当然的预设。
“我的体会是，这并非随意的管理手段，而是一套严谨的工程方法，基于第一性原理。当然，这更多适用于实体硬件领域。我们有个概念叫全绿灯计划，它迫使我们思考：如果所有环节一路绿灯，没有行政负担、物流延误、风险或是老旧系统带来的瓶颈，我们最快多久能把产品造出来？”
“当你站在这个角度思考，剔除所有人为造成的阻碍，去提问：芯片最快多久量产？机器人最快多久完成设计与测试？结果会发现，虽然我没法给出精确数字，但至少80%到90%的延误，只是大家习惯默认本该如此，从来没有从这个角度重新审视问题。”
2 01
Balanced piece by Judge: the civil service is 12% smaller, cuts to grants far less steep than even I had hoped, but done well overall.
"By most indications, the federal government is running much as it did before. Some critics may have to admit: the DOGE workforce cuts worked."
"By most indications, the federal government is running much as it did before. Some critics may have to admit: the DOGE workforce cuts worked."
2 00
A retired NASA engineer who had worked on the Space Shuttle program for 25 years was hired by SpaceX at age 62. He described the first week as the most disorienting experience of his professional life.
At NASA, a design change required 3 meetings, 2 committees, a review board, and 6 to 18 months of documentation. At SpaceX, his new supervisor said "if it works, build it. If it doesn't, change it by Friday."
He sat at his desk after the first day and called his wife. He told her he felt like a man who had been swimming with ankle weights for 25 years and someone just cut them off. He could move. He could decide. He could build something in the morning and test it in the afternoon. The constraint that he had accepted as the nature of aerospace engineering turned out to be the nature of bureaucracy.
Within 6 months he had contributed to more design iterations than he had completed in his last 5 years at NASA. Not because he was working harder. Because the time between having an idea and testing the idea collapsed from months to hours. The same brain. The same knowledge. A different operating system.
He described a specific moment where he proposed a modification to a Raptor engine component. At NASA, the proposal would have entered a queue. At SpaceX, the modification was machined by the end of the day and tested by the following morning. He watched his idea become a physical object in 18 hours. At NASA, 18 hours would not have been enough to schedule the first meeting to discuss whether to schedule a meeting.
He told an interviewer: "I didn't get smarter when I went to SpaceX. I got faster. The intelligence was always there. The system was in the way."
The difference between SpaceX and NASA is not talent. NASA has extraordinary talent. The difference is the time between a thought and a test. SpaceX compresses it. NASA elongates it. The same engineer produces 10x more at SpaceX than at NASA because the bottleneck was never the engineer. It was the meetings about the meetings about the work.
At NASA, a design change required 3 meetings, 2 committees, a review board, and 6 to 18 months of documentation. At SpaceX, his new supervisor said "if it works, build it. If it doesn't, change it by Friday."
He sat at his desk after the first day and called his wife. He told her he felt like a man who had been swimming with ankle weights for 25 years and someone just cut them off. He could move. He could decide. He could build something in the morning and test it in the afternoon. The constraint that he had accepted as the nature of aerospace engineering turned out to be the nature of bureaucracy.
Within 6 months he had contributed to more design iterations than he had completed in his last 5 years at NASA. Not because he was working harder. Because the time between having an idea and testing the idea collapsed from months to hours. The same brain. The same knowledge. A different operating system.
He described a specific moment where he proposed a modification to a Raptor engine component. At NASA, the proposal would have entered a queue. At SpaceX, the modification was machined by the end of the day and tested by the following morning. He watched his idea become a physical object in 18 hours. At NASA, 18 hours would not have been enough to schedule the first meeting to discuss whether to schedule a meeting.
He told an interviewer: "I didn't get smarter when I went to SpaceX. I got faster. The intelligence was always there. The system was in the way."
The difference between SpaceX and NASA is not talent. NASA has extraordinary talent. The difference is the time between a thought and a test. SpaceX compresses it. NASA elongates it. The same engineer produces 10x more at SpaceX than at NASA because the bottleneck was never the engineer. It was the meetings about the meetings about the work.
3 00
20 年前， 在 2003 年的一次演讲中，埃隆·马斯克详细阐述了 SpaceX 在过去 20 多年中一直遵循的确切战略：
他说，他们将从一个真实且经过验证的市场入手：发射小型到中型卫星，以产生稳定的收入。
从那里，开始进入载人运输领域
今天，自 2020 年首次载人以来，马斯克的（龙飞船）已累计执行载人任务 21 次，将 80 人次送入太空、82 人次送回地球。
到今天为止，马斯克的龙飞船依然是世界上最先进，且唯一可重复使用的载人飞船。
他说，他们将从一个真实且经过验证的市场入手：发射小型到中型卫星，以产生稳定的收入。
从那里，开始进入载人运输领域
今天，自 2020 年首次载人以来，马斯克的（龙飞船）已累计执行载人任务 21 次，将 80 人次送入太空、82 人次送回地球。
到今天为止，马斯克的龙飞船依然是世界上最先进，且唯一可重复使用的载人飞船。
00:54
3 00
