Yeah, I touched a sensitive nerve. It seems "the future" is interpreted by some as "Moore's law applied to everything", with gross disregard to physics, no thermal or optical or energy limits etc.
Year 2000 has passed, and we're all still waiting for our flying cars.
Wrong, current image sensors have around ~50% quantum efficiency nowadays. [1] That's 1 f-stop from the theoretical maximum, while they're pushing around 10 f-stops above the top-of-the-line mobile phone cam / security cam.
The pace of technology is still limited by physics - if they take out the 2kW monster flash then the lens size needs to be increased to a diameter of several meters, just to maintain the same performance at a distance of 1 meter (!).
Wrong, commercial passenger planes going missing are much less expensive. Commercial plane disappearance is close to a 'black swan' event (1/10years) [1]. Tyler Durden this:
* search and rescue for this rare event: $50M/10year = $5M/year
* cost of tracking system: $20k/year amortized cost per system * 5k aircrafts = $100M/year
The airline industry as a whole has made a cumulative loss during its 100-year history. Airlines are already nationalized one way or another, like it or not. [2]
Agreed. People forget that in addition to the nominal cost of a new tracking system ($120k PER PLANE in the article, not including control center cost), just the weight alone costs about $3k/year for each 1kg added to the plane. Add the yearly communication service, maintainance, depreciation costs to this, and we're soon gonna be paying $3k/plane ticket.
In contrast, since MH370, Inmarsat has changed the time period for handshakes with their terminals from one hour to 15 minutes. Cost: $0.
Year 2000 has passed, and we're all still waiting for our flying cars.