Thinking On Paper

Radiation-hardened electronics don't get headlines. But nothing in orbit works without them.

Starship, ISS, Starlink, Project Kuiper—all depend on hardware that survives what would kill your laptop in seconds.

Danny Andreev, CEO of Sunburn Schematics, designs systems for real space missions. He explains what keeps spacecraft alive.

The threats:

- Radiation (particles flip bits, corrupt memory, fry circuits)

- Vacuum (no air for cooling or pressure regulation)

- Thermal shock (swing from -150°C to +150°C)

- Gate-driver failures (power systems fail under extreme conditions)

We talk about:

- How particle-induced faults happen at the chip level

- Why space-grade electronics cost 100x terrestrial versions

- Methods to mitigate radiation damage (shielding, redundancy, error correction)

- Why the next phase of space isn't glossy renders—it's industrial infrastructure

- How off-world supply chains will use proven terrestrial machinery

- Why cheaper short-lived satellites might beat expensive hardened ones

- Megawatt-class power standards (mirroring EV infrastructure for space)

The shift: Space is becoming an industry, not a spectacle.

The unromantic truth: You don't need perfect hardware. You need redundant, repairable, replaceable systems. The factory approach, not the museum piece.

This is how space becomes routine.

---

Guest: Danny Andreev, CEO, Sunburn Schematics

Topics: Space electronics, radiation hardening, spacecraft power, thermal management, space infrastructure, satellite design

--

TIMESTAMPS

(00:00) Thinking On Paper Trailer

(02:59) The Role of DC to DC Converters in Space

(03:46) Challenges of Power Systems in Space

(05:30) Designing for Reliability in Space

(07:13) The Impact of Radiation on Electronics

(08:52) Testing and Validation of Space Electronics

(11:03) Environmental Challenges for Space Electronics

(12:28) Success Rates and Lessons Learned

(15:22) The Importance of Music in Space Missions

(22:30) The Future of Space Exploration

(25:23) Building a Lunar Economy

(27:51) Power Conversion in Space

(31:57) Exciting Developments in Space Technology

(35:13) Philosophical Insights on Space and Life

--

Say hello! Connect more technology dots with us elsewhere:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

Email: [email protected]

September 26, 1983. Soviet bunker. Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Petrov watches computers say US nuclear missiles are incoming.

The data says: Launch.

His intuition says: Wait.

Petrov overrides the system. Saves the world.

If AI had been in charge, everyone would be dead.

Mark and Jeremy use the Petrov story to explore Federico Faggin's argument in *Irreducible*: information is not the same as consciousness.

We unpack:

- Why Petrov's decision shows the gap between rule-following and conscious judgment

- How "information makes consciousness" sits at the center of Faggin's theory

- Why AI systems that flip 1s and 0s can't replicate intuition or qualia

- Why AI will never be conscious

Machines follow rules. Petrov broke them. That's consciousness.

The computers processed information perfectly. They were also perfectly wrong. Petrov had something machines don't: the ability to sense what the data couldn't show.

This is a short from our 13-part Book Club on Faggin's *Irreducible*. If you're interested in AI, consciousness, and the limits of information theory, listen to the full series.

The question: As we hand more decisions to machines, what happens when the data is right but the answer is wrong?

---

Series: Irreducible Book Club (Episode excerpt)

Book: *Irreducible* by Federico Faggin

Topics: Consciousness, AI limits, intuition, nuclear weapons, decision-making, information theory

Historical event: 1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm

--

We like you. Connect with us:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

  
  

Email: [email protected]

We speak to Don Norman about humanity centered design.

The godfather of design explains why we need Humanity-Centered Design—a shift from individual users to society, planet, and long-term impact.

The problem: "What's wrong is what's left out."

Every digital product relies on physical infrastructure. Power systems. Data centers. Electricity. Rare earth mining. You can't design a phone without designing its supply chain.

Traditional human-centered design optimizes for the user. It ignores environmental and social consequences. Norman says we must widen the frame.

We talk about:

- Why designing for individual users is no longer enough

- How hidden costs show up far from your device (mining, energy, waste)

- Why efficiency isn't always a virtue (optimizing one thing breaks another)

- How simple metrics distort real outcomes

- What it means to design with communities instead of imposing solutions

- Why responsible design must consider ecosystems, not just usability

- How to avoid "colonial" patterns (extracting value, externalizing harm)

Norman's core argument: The responsibility is collective. So is the impact.

Humanity-Centered Design means:

- Long-term impact over short-term convenience

- Community collaboration instead of top-down solutions

- Systemic thinking (not just product features)

"We're all together," Norman says. Technology either strengthens communities—or weakens them. Design decides which.

The future of design isn't better interfaces. It's understanding how products influence society, policy, and the planet.

---

Guest: Don Norman, Godfather of Design, Author

Topics: Design, humanity-centered design, sustainability, systems thinking, communities, long-term impact

--

Other ways to connect with us:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

  
  

Email: [email protected]

--

Watch On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@thinkingonpaper/videos

Philip Johnston is CEO of Starcloud. They build data centers in space. Their first satellite just launched on SpaceX Falcon 9. You can track it orbiting Earth right now.

This short covers humanoid robots, data centers in orbit, and whether the future includes dancing machines.

We talk about:

- Why Philip predicts 5 billion humanoids by 2035

- What humanoid robots will actually do (not dance—work)

- How space-based data centers solve Earth's power crisis

- Why orbit is better for computing than ground (cooling, energy, latency for some tasks)

- The Starcloud satellite currently in orbit (track it yourself)

- Whether robots need to be humanoid at all (or if we're copying ourselves for ego)

Philip's thesis: Humanoids scale faster than anyone expects. Not because they're better than specialized robots—but because they navigate human infrastructure without redesigning the world.

The question: Do we need 5 billion humanoids? Or do we just think we do because they look like us?

This is a short from the full conversation. Listen to the complete episode for more on space infrastructure, orbital manufacturing, and the future Philip's building.

---

Guest: Philip Johnston, CEO, Starcloud

Topics: Humanoid robots, space data centers, satellites, SpaceX, infrastructure, robotics, orbital computing

Status: Starcloud satellite currently in orbit

Format: Short episode | Full version available

--

Other ways to connect with us:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

Email: [email protected]

AI agents can read feeds, make decisions, coordinate with other agents, and speak on your behalf, without you in the loop.

Andrew Hill explains what agents actually are, why every company is racing to build them, and how close we are to personal agents that manage schedules, explain our thinking, and negotiate with other people's agents.

We talk about:

- What an AI agent actually is (beyond chatbots)

- Why agents coordinate with each other (multi-agent systems)

- How personal agents could represent you online

- What happens when your agent negotiates with someone else's agent

- Why people already share intimate details with AI (and what that means)

- The hard question: Could AI become better relationship partners than humans?

The shift that's already happening: People tell AI things they won't tell friends. They trust agents with calendars, emails, thoughts. The AI knows them better than anyone.

So if agents represent us online—if they speak for us, decide for us, negotiate for us—who are we really talking to anymore?

This gets into trust, privacy, and what changes when the agentic web replaces direct human interaction.

If your agent knows you better than your partner does, what does that make it?

---

Guest: Andrew Hill

Topics: AI agents, agentic web, multi-agent systems, personal AI, trust, privacy, human-AI relationships, coordination

--

Other ways to connect with us:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

• Email: [email protected]

To survive in space, you don't just need engineers. You need a musician. Preferably a guitarist.

Jeremy asks physicist Danny Andreev (CEO, Sunburn Schematics): Could my 1969 Fender Vibrolux amp work in space?

Answer: Yes. Analog gear shrugs off radiation.

What starts as electrical engineering turns into human psychology and Mars survival.

We talk about:

- Why Jeremy's vintage guitar amp would work on the moon (analog circuits resist radiation)

- What modifications it would need (thermal management, vacuum considerations)

- How digital devices fail in space while analog survives

- Why submarines and Arctic research stations need musicians (group cohesion studies)

- How having a guitarist changes crew survival in isolated environments

- Why Mars missions need musicians, comedians, and risk-takers

The research: Studies on submarines and Antarctic bases show musicians are critical for group survival. Not nice-to-have. Critical.

Music affects morale, bonding, and psychological resilience in ways nothing else does.

Elon, if you're listening: You need guitarists on those Mars ships. Not for fun—for survival.

This isn't a gear review. It's about culture, isolation, and what humans actually need when they're far from home.

Rock on.

---

Guest: Danny Andreev, Physicist, CEO Sunburn Schematics

Topics: Space electronics, Mars missions, musicians, isolation, group psychology, analog vs digital, radiation

Fun fact: Vintage amps work in space

--

Other ways to connect with us:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

• Email: [email protected]

Curious Minds Learn about THE REAL IMPACT of technology 👇 Thinking on Paper goes holistic. Your learning goes ballistic.

Other ways to connect with us:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

• Email: [email protected]

AI, Quantum computing, space manufacturing, robotics and Web3! From the CEOS and Silicon Valley Founders spending millions and billions making them useful.

Or destroying the planet for their Egos. Take your curiosity, push it to its limits and see what technology can really do.

Our mission is to help ONE MILLION curious minds ditch their Twitter and LinkedIn feeds and connect the dots for themselves.

Each week, hosts Mark and Jeremy take you inside IBM, NASA, Coinbase, D-Wave, and more. They focus on how systems work, what they cost, who benefits, and the impact on work, policy, culture, and family.

There's a Book Club too. Because the oldest tech is still the best.

Stop scrolling and subscribe.

Carissa Veliz joins us again to speak about AI Ethics, a mirage straight from a Kafka novel. Questions of justice, principles and the rule of law are incompatible with machine learning. Machine learning is statistical analysis of data that outputs responses human beings are likely to find attractive, not true or ethical.

That is not a good way to design ethics.

Carissa Veliz joins Makr & Jeremy to Think On Paper.

She outlines how AI depends on surveillance and statistical pattern-matching that can’t meet the basic standards of a democracy: clear rules and the ability to appeal a decision.

AI thinking clashes with the foundations of a liberal democracy: public rules, transparency, and the right to challenge decisions that shape your life.

We cover:

😀 Why machine-learning decisions are opaque

😀 Why that conflicts with the rule of law

😀 How surveillance sits beneath modern AI systems

Please enjoy the show.

Cheers, 

Mark & Jeremy

Other ways to connect with us:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

• Email: [email protected]

Exxon and Chevron are using Microsoft AI to extract more oil. Faster. Cheaper. The goal: every last drop.

Holly and Will Alpine (Enabled Emissions) paint a stark picture with Microsoft's own numbers:

Exxon deal: 50,000 barrels/day = 6.4 million tonnes CO₂/year

Chevron deal: 400,000 barrels/day = 51 million tonnes CO₂/year

Microsoft's entire FY23 footprint: 17 million tonnes.

Carbon removal booked over 15 years: 5 million tonnes.

Those two deals alone dwarf both numbers.

In Saudi Arabia, Aramco's CEO says AI kept production costs at $3/barrel for two decades. AI makes fossil fuels competitive. It weakens clean energy economics.

AI touches every stage of fossil fuel: exploration, drilling, extraction, refining, distribution.

We talk about:

- How AI cuts production costs 10% while boosting reserves 5%

- Why US oil production tripled since 2007 (AI is a major factor)

- Projects that took 18 months now take 2 weeks

- How aging oil fields stay profitable decades longer

- Why Microsoft's "energy principles" are meaningless (they ignore Scope 3)

- What guardrails could look like (restrict exploration/extraction, allow safety/methane reduction)

Holly and Will left Microsoft to start Enabled Emissions. They're not asking companies to break contracts. They're asking for reasonable guardrails.

The lie you're fed: AI will solve climate change.

The truth: AI is accelerating fossil fuel extraction.

It's ugly. It's real. Learn more.

---

Guests: Holly & Will Alpine, Founders Enabled Emissions (Former Microsoft)

Topics: AI, climate, oil, emissions, Microsoft, Exxon, Chevron, Aramco, enabled emissions

--

Other ways to connect with us:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

• Email: [email protected]

What is a spin qubit? Brandon Severin, founder of Conductor Quantum, explains how a standard silicon transistor can trap a single electron and turn its spin into a quantum bit.Spin up is zero, spin down is one. Add a few extra gates to a transistor, tune the voltages, and you can isolate one electron out of billions, using the same chip factories that make the processor in your phone. No lasers, no vacuum.Watch the full episode on Google’s quantum breakthrough, AI-controlled qubits and the race to a million qubits: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LeN3VBvG0o&t=33sCheers,Mark & JeremyGet more quantum - https://www.thinkingonpaper.xyz/episodes/conductor-quantum-spin-qubits-brandon-severin/

---

Guest: Brandon Severin, CEO Conductor Quantum

Topics: Spin qubits, quantum computing, electrons, silicon fabrication, superposition, scaling

Watch on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LeN3VBvG0o&t=1s

Cheers,

Mark & Jeremy

--

Other ways to connect with us:

• ⁠Listen to every podcast⁠

• Follow us on ⁠Instagram⁠

• Follow us on ⁠X⁠

• Follow Mark on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Follow Jeremy on ⁠LinkedIn⁠

• Read our ⁠Substack⁠

Email: [email protected]