The privacy issues are a little exaggerated because if a Glass user went around recording everything then his battery would be dead in half an hour. However, I don't disagree with you. I should have written "regardless of the privacy issues" instead.

Oh good... now all they need is a Twiddler2 and a software stack that doesn't upload your entire life (and the lives of everyone around you) to be data-mined and then it'll not suck.

On the contrary, his devices had a lot fewer limitations! Sure, they were bulkier, but he had a real input device (chording keyboard) and longer lasting batteries (not to mention the ability to change batteries).

Not to mention, the main "killer app" he used to use (IIRC, custom Emacs macros for note-taking and looking up stuff) is nowhere to be found on Glass.

Glass never had a chance, not because of the privacy issues but because it just didn't actually have the processing power or battery life to do anything useful. Considering the guy who designed it has worn wearable computers for more than a decade, I expected better.

I'm sure somebody could recommend a normal-size UPS with uptime much greater than an hour (even when running this as a server, plus your router, plus your cable/dsl modem), which seems better to me.

hmmm, hadn't considered used nozzles. I was sort of lured in to the +35HP aspect of the new, bigger ones. But maybe not worth the bucks.

Oh, you can get used, bigger ones too. Mine are Bosch .216s sourced from somebody who upgraded to even bigger ones.

By the way, if you want more power, get a tune too. (And then if you really want to go crazy, whenever you eventually replace your turbo, use it as an excuse to upgrade!)

I'm using Android TorquePro to monitor temps. I see it also has a boost gauge, not sure how accurate that is. Will do more research, esp. if it is related to the oil usage.

I like my Scangauge because I can leave it in the car instead of having to re-sync the bluetooth OBD device to my phone every time.

Just in case the oil usage actually is from the seals on your turbo starting to go, make sure you know how to deal with an engine runaway without breaking your car. (Leaving the car in gear and without using the clutch, apply the brake until the car stops and the engine stalls. Then do not attempt to re-start -- have the car towed to whoever is going to fix it. An engine runaway would leave substantial amounts of incompressible oil in the cylinders; re-starting would cause bent connecting rods.)

My point on oil changes was more about the $10(?) filters, compared to maybe $5 for a gas engine. I only paid $16 for my last jug of T6, really not much different than the synthetic Mobil 1 I normally use for gas engine oil changes. (actually, just checked, filter is $6 online, so I'm off base on this point. mis-remembering)

Buy Mann, Mahle or similar from somewhere like idparts.com or boraparts.com in bulk when they go on sale.

As an addition to my original point, the shop says I need 3 new glow plugs and wanted $215 for that work. Just shopping online for the parts, seems like DIY is going to be $50 at least for parts. (I have the manual, it has 4 glow plugs on the engine, and three more in the coolant - need to do more research about the coolant ones) Some of the DIY glow plug articles suggest replacing glow plugs every 4 years, just because. No way is that going to contribute to low maintenance on diesels :-)

First, you only need glow plugs for starting in cold weather (say, less than 45 degrees Fahrenheit, maybe?). If they fail in the summer, you might not even notice or care for a few months (aside from the dashboard light). Second, are you sure the "three in the coolant" actually exist? I've never heard of such a thing.

Next, some noob is going to ask what "ESR," "hairy" and "jargon file" are. And then somebody else won't know what "noob" means. It's the Eternal September all over again (said the guy with the six-digit ID to the guy with the four-digit one)...

The Curiosity Foo seems weak in this current generation.

I'm not sure if your spelling-fu is weak, or if you just don't know what the etymology of "[concept]-fu" is.

"Obviously, if it were important then somebody would be willing to spend money on it!" -- Republicans

("'Tragedy of the Commons?' What's that?" -- also Republicans)

I chose examples that exclude legislation as the reason lightweight cars aren't built any more.

How so? Lotuses and Smarts and whatnot still have to meet safety standards. In fact, a US-spec Smart Fortwo has eight airbags! (That also helps explain why it weighs almost 500 lbs more than the Honda CRX I keep comparing it to.)

In Europe, there's an entire class of cars smaller than the Mirage and Fiesta. The VW Up (47 mpg), Suzuki Alto (54 mpg), Toyota Aygo (56 mpg) to name a few (and that's real-world fuel consumption, not a theoretical rating).

Oh, don't get me wrong: we have a few tiny cars too, including a Toyota even smaller than the Aygo (the Scion iQ). But even it only gets 37 MPG.

Part of the problem in this discussion is that your UK gallons are larger, which makes the European cars seem better than they actually are -- or makes the US ones seem worse than they actually are, depending on your point of view.

The sad thing is that "minicars" like the iQ and the Smart actually lose in efficiency to subcompacts (either outright in the case of Fortwo vs. Mirage, or at least after considering utility -- a usable back seat is worth losing a MPG or two in almost every case.) A minicar needs to come out way ahead -- by at least 5 MPG, I'd say -- to actually win (a feat which the old cars accomplished). There is, after all, a reason why Geo Metro XFIs are so popular on ecomodder.com, even though they're 20+ years old.

This site has RW usage of the Metro at closer to 40 than 47.

All the numbers I've been quoting are the official EPA numbers from fueleconomy.gov. The "real world" numbers must be assumed to be bullshit because there's no controlling for sample size or bias. (For example: the "real world" MPG for the 2014 Mitsubishi Mirage is 46.8 while for the 2015 it's 33.0, even though they're exactly the same damn car!) If you want to compare "real world" MPG, you're probably better off using fuelly.com, but even then hypermilers skew the data.

If, when you die, that's it... you are done and over with, and none of the choices you would have made will actually have any bearing on you, then you can do whatever you want, live your life as irresponsibly as you want, in full assurance that death will enable you to escape whatever consequence might otherwise befall you.

If you need fear of damnation to stop you from doing evil things, then you are a sociopath.

Research data really ought to just get published with the paper. Then (A) it's easier to peer-review / reproduce / verify the research, and (B) storing it becomes somebody else's problem. As Linus said, "Only wimps use tape backup: real men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it ;)"

Because if the number of times you need something times the time it takes for you to search for it is less than the time it takes to organize it carefully, then it's not worth organizing.

Part of my "filing" system is literally a pile of papers in a box, stacked in roughly-chronological order. Insertion is O(1); retrieval is O(n) (maybe faster if I know how old the thing I'm looking for is). I insert much more often than I retrieve, so it works just fine.

The reason almost nobody builds cars like that anymore is almost nobody buys cars like that anymore.

On the contrary: the reason almost nobody buys cars like that anymore is that almost nobody builds cars like that anymore.

Lightweight cars are still possible. Lotus and Smart for example. VW XL1. Austere cars are still available too (in Europe at least, IDK about the States) (a recent Citroen, Dacia).

For your examples of "lightweight" cars, you listed an expensive sports car (that isn't sold in the US anymore), a car that gets piss-poor economy relative to its size (in America, the shitty gasoline-only Smart gets only 36 mpg -- in comparison, even a gasoline midsize sedan (Mazda6) gets 32), and a concept car that doesn't actually exist as a product. Then, for "austere" cars you mentioned things that are indeed not available in America. Forgive me if I am not persuaded.

(Actually, there are a few halfway-decent small and cheap new cars: the Mitsubishi Mirage and the Ford Fiesta... but even then, they only manage 40 and 36 mpg respectively, and only get even that much because they have 3-cylinder engines. In comparison, the 1989 Honda CRX HF got 44 MPG (on the same scale) with a 4-cylinder engine and the 1991 Geo Metro XFI got 47 mpg with a 3-cylinder engine... look how far we've fallen!)

I know it's a stupid argument. That's why I was refuting it, not making it.