It's just ordinary slang.

"Hey, what's the big deal? We used to append 'P.S. I love you. Get your free email at Hotmail' to every outgoing email way back in the day, and no one ever had a problem with that..."

Welcome to the all-new eStop! We know you have concerns, so let us put them to rest straight away.

The site will not change. We respect the investment you've made in learning and navigating the site. However, if you're feeling curious or adventurous, feel free to check out our [new site design prototype]. (This design will become the default landing page in mid-2027; the old site UI will enter maintenance mode for only the most critical bugs.)

To thwart LLMs and other bots, new default limits on bidding have been imposed. Accounts may only bid on a given item no more frequently than once every 20 minutes. If your circumstances require more frequent bidding, have a look at our [eStop Pro Membership Plan] for only $9.95/month (billed annually; no pro-rated refunds), which will allow unlimited bidding frequency. And for members who want to have more than 20 items on sale simultaneously, take some time to review our [eStop Bulk Vendor Programs], charging only 25% of gross sales, or $3600/year + 20% of gross sales.

And to help with "doomscrolling" for that one specific thing you're looking for, we've also partnered with Anthrop\c and X's Grok to help curate your buying experience, surfacing the items most likely to interest you.

(All terms are subject to change without notice.)

All of the chargers that I've stopped at in BC (in between cities) have been in big open areas or parks where you can walk your dog. The OnRoute stops also have green areas.

I greatly suspect that the thing you're asking for is actually not any sort of problem at all, you just haven't looked into it so you don't know. I'm not gonna do your homework for you (more than I already have) but you can actually just search for this stuff. Or, frankly, you can just set out and not worry about it, because a) your car isn't going to take 30 minutes to charge; and b) you're likely to end up near some green space anyway. Just pick up after your dog. That's what people walking their dogs in the city do when the dog doesn't wait for a park or a lawn.

Have you? We live in a society, my guy. Just because you lack planning skills doesn't mean that everyone else should have to choke on your exhaust. Electricity (even from coal plants) is cleaner and more efficient than burning petrol in an engine. It's also much cheaper than gasoline. But in all likelihood, your state has SOME mix of renewable power in there, which just makes it better.

Anyway, if you just plug your car in at home, you leave with a full charge every day. It's LESS time spent filling up.

I lived in an apartment in Montreal. I had street parking. The building had an outdoor socket. I would park near my building whenever I could because I actually drove my car so little that I needed to string a power cable to run a battery charger. I got around the sidewalk blocking by throwing it over the branch of a nearby tree, but I could've found a dozen other ways to do it.

But look, you're not wrong that it's stupid that I even had to do that much. People should have better access to charging. But frankly, the amount you need to charge an EV is surprisingly minimal. There are dozens of level 2 chargers in my city (of 30k--I moved away from Montreal) and many of them are even free; a perk of patronizing one of the businesses in town. The ones that aren't free are pretty cheap. Level 2 isn't fast, but it's enough to keep you on the road. Even a level 3 charger in the middle of nowhere (there's long stretches of nowhere in Canada, and in some of those nowheres, the government has built chargers) costs half as much per unit distance as petrol.

Cities should build more infrastructure for people that park on the street, 100%, no argument. But you really just don't need to care very much, it turns out. Small sips of power here and there will keep you going for a long time.

Listen, ding-dongs, the 'explanation' is ALSO just generated pseudo-random text. It's still just telling you what it thinks you want to hear based on some training data and network weights. It can't introspect, it can't tell you why, it has no memory of doing anything, per se. It goes back and looks at the log maybe, or more likely it just reads that you want an explanation for something and just creates it based on that little bit of text.

I bet you could go to any LLM, tell it to pretend that this whole ordeal is that chatbot's backstory, and it would spin you the same yarn.

IT'S HALLUCINATIONS ALL THE WAY DOWN.

Can these things write some pretty okay code sometimes? Sure, yeah. Can you trust any 'reasoning'? NO. STOP TRYING TO MAKE IT MAKE SENSE.

Just proof that AMERICAN government is bad.

Other governments all over the world manage to build rail systems, it's just here in North America that we're deeply useless.

I read about this phenomenon in the young adult novel "The Secret of Terror Castle", published in 1964. Three teenage detectives investigated a mysterious castle where nobody could spend the night without running away in terror. The culprit? Someone playing the lowest notes on a pipe organ to produce the jitters. This book was the first in a much beloved series called "Alfred Hitchcock and the Three Investigators".

I dunno, I felt like the IIe was peak Apple 2.

(a/k/a Innovation Subscribers Don't Need)

It still amazes me that, as late as the 1990's, and well after 56kbit modems were prolific, ISDN was being offered up by the ILECs as "broadband," at metered rates that made Ma Bell's long distance charges look like spare change.

Happily, it wasn't too long before ISDN was put out of everyone's misery when DSL showed up. And now, finally, after fifty years of pissing about, fiber is finally being pulled to the premises.

If you really need ongoing ISDN support, you can pull the source code from an old Git commit and update it. But I feel quite comfortable in opining: ISDN support will not be missed.

We're talking about different things. I'm talking about load shifting, you're talking about base load and frequency maintenance. You're not wrong, but that's not what I was talking about.

The point of load shifting is that if I have a task I need to do today that consumes power, I can do it when the sun is shining or when it's not. If the power company lets me do it for free because the sun is shining and there is excess power, that helps them to keep the grid balanced during the day, which is good, and that's what you're talking about.

What I'm talking about is that if you have a task that you were always going to do, and you would have done it at, say, 7pm, when renewables generation is low and load is high, and I incentivize you to do it at 4pm, when demand is high and renewables generation is higher, then you aren't going to do that task at 7pm, which means the total load on the grid at 7pm will be less. If I can shift enough of the load away from 7pm, then I don't have to turn on a coal plant in anticipation of base load need at 7pm. That can bring my cost per mwh down from £500/kwh to £40 per mwh. Load is high at that time, so that can save millions of pounds over the course of an hour.

It's really not nonsensical, actually. Base load can be incredibly expensive. If they can avoid firing up the most expensive plant, they make more money. It's really that simple. Even though it seems "free" to you, what's really going on is that you have become part of the supply side of the equation by using power when it's there, and then _not_ using it when an expensive plant would have to be turned on. This is really a case where everybody wins.

This is less and less true as time goes on, and only for either heavily parallelized processes, processes that require ENORMOUS amounts of memory, or processes that require extreme amounts of GPU. Even then, the GPU gap is getting smaller if you're not talking about gaming.

I compile Unreal Engine for my job. I do it a lot. My M1 Mac Mini, 5 years old, keeps up astonishingly well with my work-issued i9. I'm sure an M5 would blow it out of the water.

I'm sure there are workloads where what you're saying is true, but I don't think you can make this as a broad claim anymore. M-series chips aren't low-powered chips, they're higher efficiency chips. They do more with less. I don't look at benchmarks from Apple (or Intel), either--I only pay attention to benchmarks from 3rd parties, and they're still quite favourable. Aside from gaming--where we ABSOLUTELY optimize the hell out of things, and tune things specifically to hardware as best as we can--most general purpose software that runs on both runs within a totally acceptable margin either way.