[tux3]

It does seem to be written by someone who's very far above the ground — even managing to throw the blockchain in there at the end.

But the point they're making is reasonable. Just because the author isn't deeply technical doesn't mean they can't fit an exponential and extrapolate correctly.

Exponential growth always has to stop somewhere, but that's not in and of itself a reason to think this year is the year that it will. The napkin math about sodium and battery cost is at least reasonable, it's worth considering seriously rather than handwaving the author away as not an engineer.

[icapybara]

Fair. I guess I have an issue with technology projections that assume the technology will follow some fit, because it always has. Every bit of progress is made with tons of risky work and breakthroughs, and none of it is guaranteed like you would think it is just by looking at a fit.

[XorNot]

> they can't fit an exponential and extrapolate correctly.

Anyone fitting an exponential isn't extrapolating correctly pretty much by definition. As you note:

> Exponential growth always has to stop somewhere, but that's not in and of itself a reason to think this year is the year that it will.

This is a god of the gaps argument. There's no reason it should stop this year, there's also no reason it shouldn't. Fitting the curve is only useful if you're actually presenting an argument as to why for the relevant interval it should continue.

[Dylan16807]

There's plenty of reasons it shouldn't end this year. Go look at the battery sizes that we need to switch halfway to electric cars and to stabilize the electrical grid.

Looking at what happens if growth continues until we get into that range is quite reasonable.

[iSnow]

>Fitting the curve is only useful if you're actually presenting an argument as to why for the relevant interval it should continue.

Which he actually does by looking at sodium batteries.