Whatever, dude.

Don't knock it until you've tried it.

There's a whole lot there, and I disagree with lots of it, but can't really be arsed to go through it all.

You yourself linked trans stuff and better Republican messaging. So whether you support Republicans or not, you are one of those people who identified this part of what Republicans did as being an important part of how they succeeded. And I therefore stand by my use of "you people". So by all means, disregard the part that talks about people who are invested in the future success of the GOP as being irrelevant to you; it's still relevant to the people who share that analysis with you, but are rooting for future GOP success.

As for the rest, your assertion that messing with people's children is any kind of a block to political success seems absolutely wrong to me. The GOP has supported the banning of books, has twiddled its thumbs while school kids die in numbers that would be politically suicidal in other countries due to gun laws, has a bunch of men with a track record of sexually assaulting children in power along with women who minimise it, has overturned child labour laws in some states, etc etc. The GOP has been messing with kids in terrible ways for decades, and it has not impeded its success.

The trans stuff was a vibe thing.

Who would have thought...

Efficiency is based on differences in energy that are economically accessible, not on some rambling theories in a newline-free paragraph.

You can access room temperature. You can' economically access the blackness of outer space from the earth's surface. Likewise, you can access the negative terminal on your battery, but not some static charge in the upper atmosphere.

You pump X amount of energy into a heat engine, it expels that energy to an accessible exhaust, and typically 70 to 95 percent of that energy is *not* converted to work. You pump X amount of energy into a battery, it dumps that energy through a motor to its negative terminal, and only 5 to 10 percent of that energy is not converted to work. That's the only way to practically analyze the situation.

We could also all have infinite free energy if we could access the levels below the zero point energy in the quantum fields. One little problem: that's not accessible either.

This has been going on since crapto became big enough and its likely a main reason crapto is still around? Crime-support in the from of tax evasion, crime financing and money-laundering was always a major application scenario for crapto. Obviously, it also serves as a scam vessel by "value" manipulation (see Musk and Trump, for examples doing that).

Those sound like they might cut costs and complexity, but it's clear that this system brings its own costs and complexities, so they don't seem massively compelling. I guess we probably need to see them scaled and in the wild to see if they are commercially viable vs the alternatives.

This is called "being careful". They could just have done what Boeing does and risked a few 100 dead but avoided that costly "recall". Instead they determined the possible causes and eliminated the most likely ones, and those include an unknown software fault. They currently are not finding that fault and hence they think it may have been a rare but possible event like a bit flip.

Working class people in the UK are not especially likely to require long (distance) commutes to work More than anyone else. Where on earth did you get that idea? They are more likely to have to rely on public transport, however, because lots of people can't afford a car in the first place.

There is no long UK drive that someone would do of a weekend that's any kind of issue in an EV. No-one is driving from Southend to Aberdeen. They might drive from London to Sheffield or similar, but that's completely fine in an EV.

Huh.

Every house is different, and I don't know anything about electricity beyond the basics, but at least for my house, what the electrician did was to split the supply for the EV off from the main feed with an external isolator switch near the incoming service (a small cable was then taken through the external wall to the consumer unit where the fuses are, required a small hole to be drilled in the outside wall). Probably depends on whether this is allowed, but it worked well for us. I guess another possibility would be a sub-panel. I understand Canadian codes are strict about breaker placement, conductor size, overcurrent protection etc, but I still think it may be possible.

Although obviously this is all theoretical because you're not buying an EV for decades if you can help it, right?

Erm..the first link you provided was about LMR batteries being available in 2028. That's exciting if it happens, but there's many a slip twixt cup and lip.

It just seems silly to me that people are so keen to deny the obvious: the Chinese successfully commercialised-at-industry-scale several important EV battery developments before anyone else, including LFP, sodium and semi-solid state.

Nice! Also pretty accurate. Well, build houses of cards on sand and this happens. What I do not get is that these people do not see it. It is neither difficult to understand not is it without precedent. In fact, there is a very large body of examples from when other engineering disciplines struggled to get to maturity. And it is even in the mainstream media (for example the Titanic, Tchernobyl and Fukushima).

These people must be determinedly dumb, uneducated and incompetent.

Indeed. The problem of IT security has always been asymmetric, but AI makes this massively worse. The small advantages AI offers on the defenders gets annihilated and then steamrollered over by the advantages to the attackers.

Without the influx of tons of Windows people (that do not get it) into the Linux space, systemd would never have been a thing. That same problem could or could not happen with the xBSDs, but it should at the very least be far away. Meanwhile, all my Devuan installations and the few remaining non-systemd Debian installations continue to run perfectly fine and with no gross security problems.

I am currently beginning to think that Rust may actually improve software security. Not because of its features, but because of that steep learning curve. We have too many incompetents writing software. Rust may be too hard for them. If so, good.

But please, get the Rust spec done. A "secure" programming language without a spec is simply embarrassing.