> Nobody cares the protocol, as long as the plug is standard.

Everyone cares about protocol, because if the plug is standard but the protocol isn't, then you'll plug in and it won't work.

But since the protocols are the standard, you can at least get an adapter if the plugs are different.

> Yeah, old model S have an incompatibility ahead

If by "ahead" you mean they've had that problem for several years now, sure.
=Smidge=

> Nope. 3 million people recharge at home today.

3 million people have gasoline pumps at their house? (I think you missed the context...)
=Smidge=

> With that logic I should not own a car.

I mean... yeah maybe. Have you weighed your options recently? Could be saving a bunch of money.

> DCFC is commonly referred to as Level 3

And "magazines" are commonly referred to as "clips." Doesn't mean it's right though, does it? All your examples are either just recognition that the public uses an unofficial name for it, or articles written by people who don't know better (but probably should). Maybe put your internet searching skills to use and find an actual standards document that calls anything "Level 3."

See also: EVSEs being called "Chargers."
=Smidge=

> Except that either means you're multiplying the amount of trips you need to take to the charger, or the amount of time spent at the charger vs gasoline cars.

The chargers are where you were going anyways, and the time spent is already time you're spending not driving.

> So as was said, unless they're fast chargers they're useless

I can get by indefinitely on L1 at-home charging because it turns out, no matter how much driving I do on a typical day, I do a lot more not-driving in that same 24-hour period.

The quickness of refueling gasoline is only a positive when you realize you absolutely must go to a gas station to do it, and must take time out of your day specifically for the task. After you spend 10 minutes at the gas station you'll drive another mile or two to where you were actually wanting to go and park there for an hour or more with the car doing nothing. If you could avoid the special trip and have your car refuel while you already aren't using it, do you suppose that would be more or less convenient?
=Smidge=

In fairness, the average American drives just under 40 miles per day. Something like 1% of daily driving is over 100 miles and that's not even necessarily all at once. All you need to make that work is access to an L2 charging spot for 3-4 hours at most, cumulative.

You just don't need every charging location to be DCFC.

Also fun fact: There is no such thing as "Level 3" and never has been. It's Level 1 (120VAC), Level 2 (208/240VAC), and DCFC. You know how some gun nuts immediately tune you out if you say "clip" when you actually mean "magazine" because they figure you just don't know enough to have a valid opinion?.. yeah don't fall into that trap.
=Smidge=

> Would you buy a phone if you had to travel at least two miles to somewhere where you wait a long while to charge it? Nah, of course not.

Well for most people a gas station is a mile or two away and I don't see anyone complaining. The key difference is a gas station is a dedicated facility that you need to make a dedicated stop to, whereas EV charging locations are typically places you're already going to for other reasons and, ideally, places you'll be spending some time at anyway.

> The reality is a only very small percentage of people without the ability to charge at home will buy an EV.

Practically 0%* of people who own a car have the ability to refuel at home and it doesn't seem to have been a major hurdle to car ownership.

=Smidge=
*Exception for the handful of people who live on a farm or something

As an EV owner and advocate, whenever I hear "public EV charging location" the immediate question is what the power level is. An "EV charging location" can literally be just a standard NEMA15 outlet, but what most people imagine when they hear those words is a Tesla supercharger or similar.

So digging into the data;

DC Fast Charge: 42,395 chargers across 10,092 locations

AC, Level 2: 131,755 cables across 55,366 locations

AC, Level 1: 813 cables across 186 locations

So the vast majority of these are Level 2 spots, which supply 208-240 volt single phase AC to the vehicle's on-board charger, with the range currently being 3KW to 19KW (though most cars top out at about 9KW). As a very rough gauge multiply that number by 3 to get miles of driving range added per hour, e.g. a L2 spot will get you 9 to 57 miles driveable range with most vehicles and installations getting you around 25-30.

This is is not what most people think of when you mention public EV charging. DC fast chargers start at 50kw for the older units and the current CCS standard in active deployment goes up to 350KW. DC charging curves are not linear and every vehicle is different but we're usually talking on the order of +150 miles in 15 minutes.
=Smidge=

> Nothing quite like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Either you're in a secure environment or you're not. Pick one.

> In the office, yes. I don't think I would be able to point a phone at my computer without someone noticing in the office.

I bet you could, unless you're trying to do a duck-face while taking a selfie with your monitor behind you or something. And in the slim chance that someone notices, the chance they'll give a shit is even lower.

Even if you work in one of those nightmare open plan offices with no privacy at all, there is nothing unusual about whipping out a phone for a few moments and checking it. All it would take is pretending to check your messages and a quick flip to aim the camera at the screen - done and done.

And again, if you work in the kind of environment where that would get noticed *and* someone cared enough to intervene, chances are you wouldn't have much success saving and sending a screenshot either.
=Smidge=

I think that might be the real angle; "Value add" to the Edge browser and leverage that to get corporate networks to block alternatives because Edge is "more secure."

Yeah that 100% tracks.
=Smidge=

> blocking screenshots to close an exfiltration risk ...by potentially creating another one?

In any event, you can just disable Printscreen. You do not need to introduce a Rube Goldberg system that only works in Edge.

> obvious difference between someone's actions

So now we're assuming someone is watching every computer user? If you're already looking over their shoulder why can't you just see them saving the screenshot to file and sending it to someone? Hell, why can't you catch them sending ANY file over ANY connection that isn't authorized? What data exfiltration scenario does this actually prevent? Maybe makes it slightly less convenient at best.

If a system is so locked down that I can't whip out my phone for 10 seconds and take a photo of the screen, or use a USB drive with a portable web browser to view the protected page (bypassing this feature) or even a third party util to save the screen, then this feature is already not necessary nor particularly useful.

Your defense of this bullshit is not as clever as you think it is.
=Smidge=

I've answered every relevant question. You don't get to change the subject. Show me a source for the 5000F claim that isn't someone's anus or fuck off.

Also you're not using "appeal to authority" correctly. I'm not saying it's right because someone presumed to be an authority said it - that's you, posting a link to some dipshit's youtube video as if that makes a point.

But I am saying the very source you used says you're wrong, so there is that.
=Smidge=

We wouldn't want anyone taking screenshots of your desktop. That could be a security risk.

And thank goodness nobody carries around an internet-connected, high definition camera in their pocket everywhere they go.
=Smidge=

> I know right. It's not like there's "research" ever is made fraudulently when there's big money behind it.

I love how you just ignore the fact that the same org you quoted an authoritative is now corrupt and part of a conspiracy, because they no longer agree with you.

Never mind the fact that nobody has provided a study that was the source of the initial 5000F claim, so there is no reason to think it was ever true.
=Smidge=

Who's idea was it to put AI into a simple file search, to put spell check into notepad, and to put version management into the file browser?

We need to find them and kill them. They need to be stopped.
=Smidge=

> I mean we literally have a person who is a director at a EV FireSafe telling us so.

And a year later, that same organization said something else and cited actual research while doing so.

What were you saying about propaganda? You are literally favoring outdated, unsourced information over newer, sourced information because it fits your narrative.
=Smidge=