Not mentioned here is that the lack of a complicated gearbox in an EV eliminates the need for maintenance and potential problems of a transmission.

I get that manual transmissions are fun. I suspect more EV manufacturers will adjust to include them if the market is large enough. I do hope that there's some room for engineering types and gearheads to have something to play around with in an EV-only future. As it is now, what sort of mechanical tinkering is possible with current EVs? Motor modifications? Weight shifting? Or is most tinkering happening on the electronic side?

No, it's a moral obligation. Legally it was settled more or less. Maybe not according to current laws in every jurisdiction but generally yes.

Playboy owned all rights and didn't object to _fair_use_ of the image. They didn't actively promote it but have been publically said to have silently allowed it; never objecting to it. Too many decades of that practice have gone by to change their mind.

She has also not had a problem with it for decades. But recently she has changed her mind and backed the ideas of those who correctly feel that it puts females in a certain frame. She no longer wishes to be immortalized by that image.

Past publications aren't being censored nor are there licensing fees or lawsuits. Just future publications will no longer be accepted. They just want to move on.

And any serious organization should have the moral norms to accept that. I personally like her image. It isn't overly sexual nor provocative nor demeaning. And no one is chastising me for that opinion. She just doesn't want me using it anymore and I can respect that.

It would be nice if we had some sort of examples of progress of this. I been hearing about AI and automation for 35 years! Automation has heavily progressed over the decades but no where the hype.

Wake me when I can step into my car anywhere in the US, go to sleep, and wake up at my 14hr long destination averaging around the speed limit and the ride is as smooth and efficient as a train. Ants do this all day.

Much of the stuff I hear about AI "solving problems"... my dad did 30 years ago. His simulations were more specific in their scope & execution and took a week. Today's AI doesn't need his PhD nor more than 2 days... but I don't find that progress all that impressive.

I think many of these people who say Labor will be replaced at a revolutionary level... haven't done much labor themselves. If they did, they would know most of it could have been replaced 40-60 years ago. And if they did a lot of labor... they would realize why it hasn't been.

He saved them in 2016, when he switched parties and beat up the entire Republican line up; including Bush & Huckabee.

He saved them in 2018 when he clamped down the Republican Dynasties like Cheney, McCarthy, and McConnell.

He saved them in 2020 when he flipped GA, PA, MI, WI, and AZ.... mostly from getting Dems to vote in unprecedented numbers. He ousted McCarthy. He killed off a good number of Republican voters by telling them not to take COVID seriously.

He tried killing one of the most conservative Republican VP they had. He exposed the agents colluding with Russia. He is ousting McConnell and a few others. He got Fox News to lose a ton of cash and fire the host of the most watched show.

Recently he stopped the border bill so Dems didn't need to make that concession for their stuff. Now he has basically bankrupted the RNC, the small donor Republican base, and a few PACs. He kicked out the RNC head and took it over! And he is still taking more from his supporters trying to do a pump and dump of his social media stock.

Like you got to wonder just how many digits the Dems are paying him under the table. I don't think the Dems have EVER had a more effective spokesman than Trump.

If this is something that is +/- 1 second on a few years timescale, what systems rely on getting the earths rotational speed correct to that level over a few years? Do GPS systems require it? Maybe some geodesy studies would need to account for it?

By this logic my toddler has aged me 463 years. Feels about right.

Recording Engineers generally try to master separately for vinyl if they are allowed to do so, but whether or not that is actually done depends on the record label and artist's wishes. Most of the time, the label wants to do the thing that costs the least. Given the opportunity, those same engineers will also create separate mixes for mono and stereo and possibly some flavors of multichannel (e.g. Atmos) as well.

I don't like the way vinyl sounds and I hate the idea of a medium that degrades every time it's used, but my much-younger partner generally thinks of vinyl as decorative anyway. It's the only physical audio media she owns and we definitely don't have a turntable, either.

I drive a commercial vehicle with an ELD. Incredibly useful replacement for paper-based logging. Their job is to log location, hours driven, and fuel use. I'm shocked that there are ones that have the ability to control a vehicle.

There are two mechanisms that I can think of to slow down a truck against the driver's wishes. One is if they are running low on diesel exhaust fluid (DEF), the engine drops its RPM and forces you to basically crawl along until you find a gas station. This is mandatory on commercial diesel vehicles. The second is a remote shutoff system to stop the vehicle if it's been stolen (not mandatory). I suppose those systems could be linked up to the ELD. I'm not aware of any ELDs that do that, but maybe mine is just old. I certainly wouldn't be comfortable with my ELD being able to control the truck.

I was thinking the same. I'm a scientist that would never analyze large datasets in Excel because that's not what it's made for. But it does have a lot of capability, especially for financial analysis, and is quite convenient for quick calculations (for my work, at least).

I'd like to see the history of this excel workbook. I bet this started a very long time ago as a small-ish workbook when they realized they needed to transition away from paper, and excel was easy to implement. There are many many examples of that in small business.

There is a balance. The objective isn't to make it a challenge to write safe or unsafe code. If many people can naturally gravitate to one set of implementations and the many many other people who will follow them to maintain said results also gravitate to similar coding practices... then it's a good general purpose language. Additionally a mediocre fresher should be able to come up to speed pretty quickly in syncing with the seniors.

There are _plenty_ of languages that meet these requirements including plain C and Erlang. C++ and Perl are not one of those. Both have a HUGE boilerplate of discussions before any maintainable code is written. Perl doesn't use its coding speed to jump into every use case like C++ does.

C++'s faults have everything to do with its management and lack of making tough calls than the language syntax or workflow; which are pretty normal.

I honestly agree that C++ should be a niche deployment. And generally people should move to languages that actively encourage safer designs even at the cost of performance or time to delivery.

"Just use it right" isn't a proper response without the context of how easy that is to do. C++ is a great example as it has a "make everyone happy" mentality and thus there are multiple ways to do the same thing which means multiple ways to screw it up. It also means an unnecessary amount of mental load for devs and _more_importantly_ maintainers.

I think C is fine thou. Its has its faults but I don't fine it as bad as C++.

"Information" is the key word here. It appears to mostly be garbage or worse misleading. I have one of those trackers in my car. Luckliy, the insurance company is too cheap to put a SIM in it and wants to use my cellphone and app. So it tracks your trips and sends you alerts and advice. The number of things it gets wrong is astounding!

Heavy acceleration detected, off a speed bump jumping to 30 in a 25mph zone. Or on a short on ramp to a highway. Heavy breaking, when you come to a slightly faster halt due to a light changing to yellow. High speed detected, when you are going 60mph in a 55 but it incorrectly thinks the speed is 35 for that road. Highspeed turn, when taking an exit at the posted limit. Worst was going on the highway and it thought I jumped onto the parallel 35mph neighborhood road. That was an audio alert for going 2x the speed limit! It thinks the phone is in use because it is bouncing around in the cup holder.

And this is before you get to all the false positives that are actually very safe driving like braking to avoid a bad driver or speeding up to safely merge or normal u-turns (yes, the app thinks you did a too fast turn.

On the highway it appears to be ok, but everywhere else, the "Safe Driving" recommendations are 50% junk and sometimes just bad advice. I leave it off 90% of the time. The app also wants to track your location all the time and shaves a few hours off the battery.

So the bigger problem I see is the potential for misuse. These measurements are horrible and will result in poor outcomes that will go unnoticed for decades. Then there is the financial incentive to fudge with the measures to meet performance goals. Maybe this quarter you want to set the speeding rating to 8 over the limit rather than 10 so you can charge those drivers more.

The best data on driver risk is home location, work location, driver & location histories, age, car type & car value. Outside this, I don't think people are smart enough to get this right.

Sure, I do try to reduce my GHG emissions in other ways, where I can. What's your point?

Sorry for the double post, but I just found this, discussing the bison vs modern cattle impact, with more details on the differences:

https://factcheck.afp.com/doc....

There are about 90 million domesticated cattle in the U.S. today, compared to a max of about 60 million bison in the late 18th century. So no, the methane impact is larger now from
domesticated cattle compared to bison.

Rumination emissions aren't the only methane produced by domesticated cattle. Manure lagoons are a major contributor as well, and can match the rumination methane emissions at dairies and feedlots. The methane-producing anaerobic conditions in these lagoons are not reproduced naturally by roaming bison. There are other sources of GHG emissions associated with industrial dairies and feedlots as well, like extra N2O emissions from the intensive fertilization of crops to feed the cattle. This fertilization wasn't happening for grazing bison.

In addition, natural grazing is climate beneficial, as it regenerates rangeland grasses and maintains healthy soil, making the rangeland a better CO2 sink. Domesticated cattle only graze for a fraction of their life before heading to the feedlot or dairy.

The fact is that domesticated cattle are contributing to methane emissions in the U.S., and by virtue of being domesticated, that methane is attributable to human activity. There are (and were) lots of natural GHG sources, but the domesticated cattle industry is an area where we can decrease methane emissions. So I'm in favor of any mechanism that will help us push those emissions down.