What do you use for your non-toxic electrodes?

It's in TFA.

Quercetin, a pigment found in almonds and capers, serves as the battery cathode, whereas riboflavin (vitamin B2) makes up the battery anode.

Come on, man, get out of your armchair.

You make a fair point that maybe there is a better way to deal with the extra thermal resistance that the extra cache introduces. However, practicalities might be interfering: if this is a niche part bought only by serious gamers, there might not be enough profit there to justify the extra R&D needed to improve the cooling. There could be other reasons as well, and maybe a later generation of the 3D chips will include better thermal designs, but only if the market demand can justify it.

The X3D variants are just X chips with an additional layer of cache added on top, right? In that case, they probably want to keep the manufacturing process for the two lines as similar as possible: i.e. the X3D runs through the same line as the X but just with an extra step to add a layer at the end.

Argument still applies, to a significant degree. The article you linked makes general reference to JPL having an "unprecedented workload", but unless the people freed up in the project cuts can usefully contribute to other projects, those cuts won't necessarily alleviate that workload. I see no indication in the review board documentation that they took that into consideration.

to free up programmers and engineers for the missions that were closer to their launch dates

This is short-sighted: programmers and engineers are non-fungible.

Even if the ones that were freed up have the right skills for Psyche (not a given if they just looked at reached milestones, even ignoring that VERITAS is a radar mission and Psyche is imager/spectrometer/gravity), getting new people up to speed takes time. There'll be a period where using existing staff to train incoming staff will actually slow down the project. That's fine if you're in the early stages, but Psyche is almost done and already overdue...

Of course you can't put 200 chargers on a 10 kW feed, that's not what I was suggesting.

If *everyone* wants a charger, I don't see a problem - upgrade the feed going to the garage to support 1 MW, and if necessary the building feed, and split the cost across all residents (building upgrade == huge win for your landlord). If there's really only 3 people who want it, well then maybe a 10 kW feed can be made to work safely. This is only a problem if a large minority wants it, enough that the feed needs to be upgraded but not enough to feasibly split the cost of the feed upgrade.

Your landlord's just being obstructionist. And, if your municipal network doesn't currently have the capacity for chargers (doubtful, if we're talking about level 2 chargers) then they better get on that quick, because they're going to have to handle them soon whether they like it or not.

You're also making a very common mistake: fixating on the problem rather than looking for possible solutions.

I do sympathize with your lack of chargers. It's a real problem that needs to be solved, preferably quickly, so that it doesn't hinder EV adoption.

I do think it's possible to solve it, however. Where it's merely a problem of obstructionist landlords, regulation can be introduced: if charger can safely be installed, then the landlord should be allowed to pass the cost on to you but should not be allowed to forbid the installation altogether. California has imposed similar rules on HOAs regarding solar installs in the US - they still try to obstruct installs, but it's harder. I've had family that succeeded in getting the HOA to allow installing a personal charger in the parking garage as long as they paid for it.

I am curious about the fire code issue you mention. What exactly is the issue, and is there an acceptable limit? What about a 4 kW charger instead of a 40 kW, such that you can't rapid charge but do get a full battery by the morning? That'd be barely above the 3.5 kW of an average 220 V 16 A circuit.

Public chargers is an infrastructure gap. I did a 20-hour EV road trip in the US over Thanksgiving and only had to queue once, max 20 minutes, but that's because Tesla has a good network in the US. I know it's not nearly as good for other brands, which is why we need more programs to build out charging networks. It'll happen, eventually.

I did the "10-60% in 20 minutes" thing for a 1300 km drive (7 stops), and it worked quite well. The drive was longer but I was less burnt out by the end of it. It'll continue to get easier as infrastructure improves.

This is a classic straw man argument. No one is arguing that people that HAVE to be in person should be working remotely. The idea is that those that CAN work remotely, there is little reason to be in an office environment unless they WANT to be there.

But, people here are arguing precisely that, via turning it into a black and white issue.

GP made a blanket statement that remote work was always a good thing, with no qualifiers attached. That's the norm here on /. whenever these stories come up: the majority of the comments are that remote work's great and anyone saying anything to the contrary is an extrovert management shill with no life and/or control issues (I exaggerate, but not by much).

"CAN work remotely" is not a black and white division, as far as I see it. I could in theory do the entirety of my job from home, since I don't touch anything physical for my work. However, I've never really had an issue with office distractions (not an open office, and respectful coworkers), so working from home full-time resulted in a drop in productivity for me: there are significant collaborative parts of my job that are clearly slower when done over video conferencing versus in person at a white board. The general opinion here, however, is that meetings are always a waste of time, when in fact the truth is far more nuanced.

Please define for me, unambiguously, what a "left" rotation is to you, because I agree with GP.

If you turn something clockwise the upper half moves right and the lower half moves left. Is that therefore a "left" rotation or a "right" rotation? Can't just use the direction my hand moves in either, as that depends entirely on how I'm holding what's rotating.

I've memorized the open/close rotation as muscle memory, but the words left and right won't stick because my mind rejects them as not meaningful.

I agree. I wasn't saying it was a problem that needs to be fixed, if you go back to my original post.

Rather, I was pointing out that if you go to a system that is more trusting of people, as Western Europe does, you get a more pleasant environment to live in but also some abuses of other sorts. Building a society is always a matter of trade-offs, and of where you're wiling to accept inefficiencies.

I mentioned it at all in the original post because I wanted to point out that these trade-offs exist - switching to a nicer trust-based society does have some consequences, which may or may not be acceptable. Welfare just happened to be the first one that came to mind, and is one that is familiar to both European and American readers (can't speak for the rest of the world).

I agree the number will never be zero. However, I disagree that greed is as dominant as you suggest. Humans as a group are notably altruistic and cooperative. It's strong enough that we can build societies that depend on people not giving in to their greed to the fullest extent, but rather holding back a bit for the sake of the group - there'll always be people who "cheat", but it's largely at a tolerable level.

How much room there is to cheat does vary from society to society, from system to system. My original point was that the US system is harder to cheat, but its adversarial system is less pleasant in other ways. It's a trade-off.

.2% > 0%. Agreed it's infeasible to fix this via state action, but that doesn't mean it's irrelevant. Blaming populist alarimsts won't make it magically disappear either.

Any number greater than zero is a drain. We can argue about the significance and what actions might be taken, but you can't dispute its existence.

That's fair, and I wasn't trying to suggest there's a good way to fix it. At least in Belgium there's abuse because they don't bother to monitor it very well, probably in part because of the cost. I was told on at least one occasion by family "oh, just tell the government and they'll give you a stipend".

However, the abuse being not worth fixing doesn't stop it from being abuse. It remains a drain on the state (one of many) that would disappear if people were more honest.

Imagine if you had a neighbor who decided to be as consistently obnoxious as they could legally get away with...

That's in some ways the impression of the US that Europe has: shouty individualists who are so mistrustful of government and look down on society to the point that they only care about "my rights!", the consequences be damned. Society is treated as an adversary rather than as a fellow deserving of consideration. Anyone who's ever said "you can't require me to put the shopping cart back in the corral!", to use a widespread example, is participating in this line of thinking.

The UK govt suffers from this as well, as was illustrated by Boris Johnson: their government operates based on many unwritten rules, a fair number of which Boris decided to ignore with minimal or delayed repercussion. Happens in the US too, especially but not only in the previous administration, with politicians stonewalling and litigating every inch of ground.

There are systematic abuses of the system in the EU as well (welfare abuse, for one), but because they're not adversarial in this way they feel less toxic.

The majority if not most of my meetings involve hashing out things, a fair number of those involve the whiteboard, and this has been generally true for 8 years running. As much as I like my home space, that justifies going into the office for me. Don't assume everyone's meetings are a waste of time just because yours have been.

We agree on the solution, though - people shouldn't call meetings for things that don't require meetings. I average probably two meetings a week, which I gather is low.