Ocelot @ Ocelot @lemmies.world

Posts

2

Comments

289

Joined

2 yr. ago

Ive had horrible battery life in my 14 pro since 16.6.1. Just installed 17 yesterday and it still seems at least as bad.

how so? what is left after having the system daemon start at boot? this is a super common thing to do. If you wanted to go a step further you could even create a couple chroots or other immutable partitions to swap the bootloader to. This would be a great way to use the package manager and features of nix without the limitations. There is nothing proprietary about what nixos does.

The whole nature of arch is sort of a “roll your own distro” approach. It lets you take features from wherever and combine them. It’s perfect for anyone who finds themselves distro hopping.

Hydrogen takes a lot of energy to extract, transport, and store. It makes it orders of magnitude less efficient than simply using that energy to charge a battery directly.

The best are the downvotes without comment. To me they just read “Shit, thats a great point. But, I can’t outright admit to being wrong so downvote.”

I don’t think this really caught on because not everyone takes care of their batteries to the same degree. Frequently charging to 100% or draining to 0% has some negative impacts reducing range and performance. You’re likely to receive one of these used batteries in your car with a swap.

Imagine doing an engine swap on an ICE vehicle with a used one that never had an oil change.

Anywhere from 150 to 350 kilowatts! Usually 400-800 volts. It’s pretty serious.

I 100% Guarantee you that EV owners spend less time charging their cars than you do getting gas. You don’t have a gas station in your garage (or destination chargers at work, shopping centers, hotels, parking garages etc) that add range to your car while you’re doing literally anything else. You also don’t start every day with a full tank. These destination chargers in parking lots etc are often FREE.

DC fast chargers are only used when you need to travel 200+ miles away. Which isn’t very often.

Example: With the amount that I drive I would need to go out of my way once per week to get gas. This would be conservatively 15 minutes to get to the gas station, pump the gas, and get back on track. With 52 weeks in a year that is about 12-13 hours spent pumping gas into my car. When I get home I plug in my EV and walk away, its fully charged by morning. I spent 0 minutes fuelling it. With occasional road trips I need to use superchargers about 10 times per year at 20 minutes each. ~3 hours vs 13. You would need to fast charge about 50 times per year to start to break even. At 200 miles of range each charge that means you would need to be driving 10,000 miles per year above your normal around-town and commute habits for this to make sense. Like needing to drive straight from NY to LA and back twice every year.

This is a terrible argument against electric cars that needs to die.

“But don’t you remember Chernobyl?!”

Its the same old story. If there’s ONE accident the whole technology needs to be banned. It doesn’t matter if we learned from it or how much safer things are compared to the alternative. I don’t understand the mindset that massive improvements are never good enough. It has to be perfect otherwise we’re better off with the status quo, despite the status quo being catastrophically worse in every sense.

Same reason why the US healthcare system is so bad.

Potatoes never go bad. They just start the process of turning into more potatoes.

Im not really sure how I feel about Neutron.

I wish some propaganda machine would fan these flames of positivity.

Reading this (or trying to) is like being on drugs. You go from “What in god’s name is the author smoking?” to some kind of nirvana.

I had some abdominal issues that caused me to be buckled over in severe pain most of the day. I was unable to eat anything for days at a time. I was constantly feeling faint and nauseous and vomiting frequently. I did a video appointment with my doctor and he referred me to get an abdominal ultrasound.

It took about a week for the office to call me to schedule the tests. They told me the next available appointment they had was 8 months out.

I wound up getting better on my own after about 6 weeks of hell. I never did find out what was wrong.

BTW I’m not in Canada I’m in the good old US of A where we “Don’t experience delays” and have “Top-Notch Healthcare” thanks to out non socialized systems. I even had good insurance.

The healthcare system in the US is in shambles. It is extremely inefficient and absolutely resistant to any kind of change, because as bad as things are right now, change introduces risk that might make it worse. No matter how slim the chance or how much the benefits outweigh the risks, nobody wants to accept meaningful changes.

I think at some point language as a whole will shift. Most languages have had a concept of masculine/feminine and differentiating between genders for most if not all of their history. This seems pretty weird as a concept in modern times since it serves no real benefit. If we were to develop a language from scratch today I don’t think it would have such features.

Its going to take a pretty long time (hundreds of years) but language is constantly evolving. I think it will get there. In the meantime things are going to remain at least a little confusing.

I have a few transgender friends and its still a bit if a mental hurdle to see them as who they want to be identified as sometimes. I sometimes slip up and will call them by their old name or use the wrong pronoun. It’s never intentional of course, but sometimes my mental auto-correct isn’t working at full capacity. If I meet the person post-transition then its never really a problem as I always see them as that gender.

Ah yes, if we can’t currently explain it then logically it must be aliens.

I wasn’t really referring to nuances as those are pretty difficult to expect to get right. As long as the general idea is correctly portrayed then it’s reasonably good journalism.

Im talking mostly about clickbait/ragebait BS. Sometimes critical information is intentionally omitted or inaccurately portrayed just to get more clicks on the article. Often times the article itself even contradicts the headline.

One example was an article making rounds in the UK months ago where some flooding had totaled some electrical components in a car. All the headlines said “Electric vehicle receives thousands in damages from a few inches of water” or some variation of it on a few dozen news sites. Each one had long comment chains about how electric cars are going to kill us all and are completely useless to everyone. The car in question was actually an early-2010s diesel.

Or “Self-Driving Tesla slams in to firetruck”. When the Tesla involved in the incident was a 2014 Model S. Which wasn’t equipped with self-driving tech.

Or the recent mozilla foundation article where they say that cars are “Monitoring facial expressions” when what it actually means is that the car is using infrared cameras to make sure the driver’s eyes are on the road.

This is amazing! I had no idea there was an actual term for this. But yeah I frequently encounter flat out misinformation in most news sources and always have the thought: “If I know these parts are BS, how many of the things I’m not familiar with are also BS?!”

Sadly I can only upvote this once