I know, that's why I made that analogy.
But that doesn't really make sense.
Lets say someone wants Netflix access, but doesn't use it that much (a couple shows a week).
They need the bandwidth, but don't need all that much total data. They can't choose a lower bandwidth, since then that would mean not getting HD quality, or not even being able to get it at all.
But isn't this technically not "spillage at the bottling plant", but "packaging removed by the delivery men"? So it's almost spillage on your front door...
That is, you're paying for the full weight of the package, including the container.. But when they deliver it, they remove the container and take it away.. So you did pay for delivery of the container, you just don't have it anymore..?
Alpine actually is pretty overgrown.
3) editor (I believe much of the code is shared with pico, but I don't think it launches a separate pico, e.g. for editing headers)
probably does more that I can't even think about.. But because it has the built in friendly behaviors AND ability to use various supplemental things (e.g. external editor), it does seem to me to sort of be outside of the "do one very specific thing well".
and again, I like it, partially BECAUSE of it being "a better UNIX app citizen", IMHO.
OK, I guess I am sort of answering my own question.. Checking the wikipedia
it's the init process. That page also describes that a bunch of other stuff was merged into it.
I have no idea who this is, but on the 2nd page of the quoted article, there is this quoted:
Mike Gancarz sums up the Unix philosophy:
1) Small is beautiful.
2) Make each program do one thing well.
..and a bunch more...
The funny thing is, I agree with those in theory... but in actual practice (yes, I'm alluding to the cliche), pine/alpine is one of the best UNIX programs around.. it's "friendly" (unlike most UNIX programs), but ALSO configurable as heck for those of us who can't stand to use its defaults (e.g. its built in editor)... and you can just move the binaries around, unlike most UNIX programs.. So it's basically a big huge program, comparatively.
(trn's another example of a huge program that does a lot of things well.)
True, but if you limit yourself to the 'average' commute your range is going to be too short for half of commuters, never mind if they need to divert somewhere without charge opportunity.
Actually, I said over double the average commute. Though we're also confusing median and mean, I admit I don't recall which the stat was (I've quoted it in previous EV threads -- from various sites, including government studies).
Are you driving a pure EV or a strong hybrid? I'm thinking a leaf?
Smart electric. About the same range as a Leaf, IIRC. My car usually says about 62 or 63 miles range when it's full, though the federal stat is 68 miles, IIRC. Anecdotally, even though mine says 62 or 63 miles, it is being very conservative, because e.g. I can go 20 miles, but the range estimate has only gone down 15 miles. I have noticed that many times on my one long drive weekly to a friend's house.
Yeah, $2K for free energy forever _for someone who has convenient access to a supercharger_ seems like an incredibly great deal.
I admit I'm using "gas price equivalents" here...
I drive a short distance, but even I would put in over $30 of gas more often than every 2 weeks in my car with a small tank..
That's around 2.5 years payback, and I'm lowballing some of those numbers.
OK, so you're basically unwilling to live within the system, so you're not getting a margin acct. You do realize you're not liable for anything more than $50 (and the credit card companies usually waive that) in fraudulent charges, right?
I'm not sure if he reviews all different types of batteries, but "NLee the Engineer" reviews tons of rechargeable batteries (and other stuff, as you'll see at the link) at Amazon, and he seems to really know his stuff.
Basically, after you've found what you're looking for, his reviews seem to be very knowledgeable. He'll knock bad products and give good reviews to good ones.
BTW, France also has admitted that even reprocessing fuel from thermal reactors doesn't make economic sense.
Can you provide a citation? I thought that with the proper type of reactor, the reprocessing step was basically economically neutral, but of course environmentally useful.
Limited Range: I'll admit that the Model S is currently the only vehicle to compete with gasoline for range
True on absolute terms, but NOT true in the actual day to day commute/usage of the majority of the U.S. population. Even the lowest range electric cars can go over 2x the average commute... and people can charge overnight at home or some at work, as you mention.
The funny thing is, I have more "range anxiety" in my phone battery than I do in my car battery. I even drive one of the lowest range electric cars.
Your broker won't "let" you sell short?
Uhh, get a Schwab, etc., account, and IIRC, the standard is you can do margin for 1/2 of your portfolio value in your account.. Of course you have to pay margin interest.
The article is conflating the web and the Internet, as usual.. sigh..
So what do they actually mean? I presume they really just mean web sites (articles).. Not something like Hulu Plus. I hate regular ads(*) with a passion. I love Tivo, but if there were something like an ad free Hulu Plus, or Netflix with current shows _AND_ past shows, I'd pay a lot for it, instead of regular cable. (I'd expect/want to watch it on TV, not just a computer/phone/tablet.)
Though, even if JUST for web sites, that's freaking cheap. I'd pay it in a minute... and I'm VERY frugal.
(*) Though it bugs some people, product placement very very rarely bugs me, even really blatant ones like on Survivor.
Cheap energy + dinner == win win
I skip prerecorded ads (e.g. beginning, end of Carolla's podcast.. sometimes in the middle). I listen to live reads, for those kinds of mistakes or just riffing..