Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:All according to plan. (Score 1) 209

Yeah but I have to drive 1000 miles up hill (both ways) every day for work in temperatures where lithium itself freezes, and I only pee on Sundays.

I don't need 1000 miles. 600 (unencumbered) is definitely sufficient, and 500 might be okay. The thing is that I'll lose half to 2/3 of that range when towing my camp trailer, and that's not even considering that I'm typically towing it up into the mountains, gaining ~5000 vertical feet. I also need minimum 12k pounds of towing capacity and I'd like a little headroom, so call it 16k, and the bed payload has to be able to take at least 2000 pounds, because that's how much the trailer puts on the fifth-wheel hitch.

I'm anxiously awaiting an EV pickup that can do this. I'd love to have essentially unllimited electricity to buffer cloudy days (I have 1 kW of solar panels on the trailer and on sunny days they generate way more than enough, but consecutive cloudy days can leave be difficult).

3/4 ton and 1-ton gas and diesel pickups typically have oversized fuel tanks that provide about 600 miles of range, because that's what you actually need when you start hauling or towing significant loads. I don't think an EV pickup needs to have more range, but it needs to be comparable, and to be able to tow and haul comparable loads.

I'm not anti-EV by any means. I bought my first EV in 2011, and have had electric cars ever since. Trucks are a different sort of problem, though.

Comment Re:All according to plan. (Score 1) 209

Oh, I think the Silverado EV's are adequate. 480+ mile range in best conditions still puts me way over my bladders ability to drive even in the absolute worst conditions of that tow + cold weather. That thing will still be 200'ish miles of towing in cold weather.

That's getting there, though I'd like to see some driving tests with a good-sized fifth wheel at highway speeds. The towing capacity is probably okay, though it provides very little headroom for when I'm towing both my camp trailer (~8k) and my boat (~3.5k), which I actually do several times each summer. But I think the payload capacity is too small to tow the trailer, which puts about 2000 points on the truck.

Comment Re:beat them senseless (Score 1) 102

>"They aren't printing every single part of the gun, but yeah, they are printing guns."

Well, no. They are printing parts of guns, not a whole gun. The barrel is certainly not printed. Nor are springs, fasteners, striker, etc.

>"You can make your own rifled barrels with EDM"

At least for now, [essentially] nobody has an EDM machine at home. And this is no different from just making parts with metal machining tools. Are we going to ban/restrict metal lathes and such? Or force computers on them so they can somehow detect you are manually making a barrel, trigger, firing pin, charger, springs, etc?

>"so you actually can manufacture every part of the firearm yourself."

Right. You could always do that. This new stuff doesn't really change that much. And it doesn't replace needing metal work. It might make some things easier, but still requires a lot of work/time and some expertise.

Comment Re:All according to plan. (Score 1) 209

Agreed. My sedan has been electric for nearly a decade now, but I'm still driving a diesel pickup (1-ton, though a 3/4 ton would be sufficient) because EV pickup range is inadequate -- and I think it may be inadequate for a while. I need 250 miles of range when towing a trailer, which means I need ~500 -- maybe 600 -- miles of range without.

I'm not generally a fan of hybrids, but I think plug-in hybrids with large-ish batteries may be the sweet spot for a while with pickups. The Dodge Ramcharger is looking really good to me, though I'd like to see them make a 2500.

Comment Re: Symptomatic of US decline (Score 3, Interesting) 209

You're looking at Detroit automakers, who have gotten complacent after numerous bailouts, with the rest of the US, where this really isn't happening. For an apples-to-apples comparison:

https://evmagazine.com/news/ho...

It's also noteworthy that the last American car to do as well internationally as the Tesla Model Y was the Ford Model T. It also turns out that Tesla has been reclaiming ground previously lost to BYD, including in China. The Canadian government is currently having to rethink things after Tesla began importing its Chinese made Model 3 Premium, selling it for $29,000 there to take advantage of the fact that Canada elevated China to most favored nation status, virtually eliminating tariffs while benefiting from Chinese labor. Canada's government is anticipating that Tesla will take a majority of the import cap before BYD has a chance to sell anything at all, which isn't sitting well with them.

https://electrek.co/2026/05/01...

Comment Re:beat them senseless (Score 3, Insightful) 102

>"This is another instance of gun nuts ruining things for the rest of us."

Please define "gun nuts" because exercising your constitutional and lawful rights to be able to defend yourself and others is not nutty. And printing accessory parts isn't really all that nutty, either. People aren't "printing guns", at least not with plastic printers.

Your ire should be pointed squarely at the people at fault for making this mess- legislators who are apparently completely clueless about both firearms and technology.

Submission + - Tesla imports $29,000 USD ($39,490CAD) Chinese made Model 3 Premium to Canada

ArmoredDragon writes: After Canada dropped its 106.1% tariff on Chinese imports to 6.1%, (which is Canada's standard tariff rate for most favored nations) and raised 25% tariffs against the United States, Tesla moved its inventory manufactured in Fremont, CA back to the US and began importing its Shanghai produced Model 3 to take advantage of the lower rates. This presented a problem for the Canadian government, which currently has a 49,000 unit cap for Chinese vehicle imports, as Tesla already had all the necessary infrastructure in place to begin shipping and distributing cars, where the Chinese competitors such as BYD do not. By becoming the first mover, Tesla would consume most or all of the 49,000 cap before any other competitors have a chance to sell any units.

It's worth emphasizing that this is the premium version of the Model 3, not the newer but lower cost Standard version. It also appears to be made to the same specification as Tesla vehicles that were already being sold in Canada, including using the US EPA standards for EV range estimates, as opposed to the more internationally used WLTC or NEDC standards, or even the Chinese CLTC standard. Deliveries are expected to begin no later than June.

Comment Re:Sad. (Score 1) 94

>"The new Harleys have a feature that randomly dumps oil on the ground to mimic the classic HD experience."

You forgot the horrible out-of-balance vibrations, strange noise, and mediocre performance. Then you would get closer.

There is a reason I ride a 16 valve inline 4 with variable valve timing (and stock muffler).

Comment Re:Just what we need (Score 1) 94

>"Frankly I'm thinking... whatever it takes to sell bikers on replacing their painfully noisy kill-me machines with silent kill-me machines is worth it."

They are only loud if illegally modified. Mine is no louder than most cars.

The problem with electric motorcycles is that there is not enough room for batteries. Until you can produce something with 160+hp per 600lbs *AND* 250 mile range, not interested.

Comment Re:Meanwhile actual industry analysts (Score 1) 5

Those are just the analysts that you cherry-picked. Here's why you picked poorly:

satellite internet that itself has pretty much maxed out the number of potential users because there's only so many people who don't have access to wired high-speed internet and can afford $100 a month for high-speed internet...

Your "analysts" have been saying this since Starlink was at 2 million active terminals. And the simple reason for that is basically this: It isn't a simple matter of "do you have access to wired internet?", chiefly because a lot of that wired internet is basically dogshit. Before Starlink, slashdot routinely ran pieces about how cable ISPs wouldn't serve areas that they told the FCC that they served, basically to prevent funding going towards rival broadband services, especially fiber, and somebody would have to pay insane prices just to get the last mile connection added where the ISP already said it was. These guys always had DSL access, but it was crap. Even when these guys have cable, it's still usually crap.

More importantly though, for their claims to be accurate, then we should have already seen Starlink's growth stagnate by now. But as a matter of fact, exactly the opposite has been happening:

https://www.reuters.com/busine...

Another critical thing you're missing is that Starlink isn't done increasing its total aggregate bandwidth. Not even close, really. You're also assuming that the demand for Starlink only exists for residential broadband, which is also a very bad assumption.

This is hype and people buying in because they are anticipating a bunch of people who can't get in on SpaceX IPOs and are going to want to just buy something related to space.

This article is about Rocket Lab, who is seeing increased demand just for launch services, and only launch services. That isn't hype, it's actual growth in a market that basically didn't exist until about 8 years ago.

YouTuber Patrick Boyle has a pretty good video explaining all of this in detail and explaining why the SpaceX IPO is a giant scam that's going to hit the economy like a truck.

That isn't what he said, moreover, he's working under the assumption that there will be no more significant growth in all things related to space. He could be right, he could be wrong. Prior to podcasting, he was a hedge fund manager. I don't know about his record in particular, but hedge fund managers are notorious for underperforming indexes, especially the S&P.

Most notably the rules of the NASDAQ were changed to allow all sorts of nasty little shenanigans

He's talking about the NASDAQ-100 index fund, not the NASDAQ exchange. S&P-500 is making a similar rule change. The people who run these indexes, aka index providers, don't make their decisions on a whim, rather they're quite calculated. In fact, people like Patrick Doyle pay these guys big money just to have access to the decisions that they make, which is exactly how S&P makes its money. Maybe he's got better ideas about how they'll perform than the S&P does, but people who say they do...rarely ever do. As for whether this rule change is right or wrong, I have no idea, but the fact that two indices are doing it suggests that it could be the right call.

I don't even know emotionally or intellectually how to process just how bad all this is going to be when it comes down on our heads. And we all know it always comes down on our heads and not the heads of the billionaire Epstein class assholes who made all this happen...

This is exactly the problem you're having: Your decision-making is entirely based on emotion. You clearly don't even understand about 75% of what you're talking about, rather you're just listening to whatever it is you want to hear while pretending the rest either doesn't exist or is "fake news". People who invest this way lose their money. Your emotion in this case is likely focused squarely on Elon, so for example, you're probably not aware (or just plain denying) that Tesla has gained EV market share in the US, China, and broadly in Europe over the last year. Sales in the US are down, largely due to the loss of tax incentives, but Tesla still remains quite profitable even here. Is the stock overvalued? Without a doubt. But that doesn't change the fact that your nonstop shouting about Tesla not being able to profit without the government incentives, which probably came from some of your cherry-picked analysts, has already proven to be very wrong, and the numbers reflect that. If you were betting actual money against Tesla, again based on emotion, you would have lost this particular bet.

Comment Re: meh (Score 2) 36

I started at $145k (which by the way, I only asked for $130k, and they countered with $145k, go figure) back in 2022 for just the base salary. Shares pushed that up to $209k. But just only thinking about base pay, $145k in 2022 dollars translates to roughly $163k today. Nevertheless, base pay has since risen to $175k, which is well ahead of the rate of inflation. The actual amount on my W2 has since risen basically on an exponential curve, due to the RSUs appreciating in value. Which is unfortunate, because if I had known then what I know now, I would have chosen stock options instead of RSUs, and kept my W2 income as low as possible.

If I wanted to, I could transfer to Texas and gain a bonus on top of my existing base pay. The real estate out there is dirt cheap, making it a real win financially, but the land in Texas is so...desolate... Florida is my top choice, and I think I can finally get it, but haven't seized the opportunity yet because I still need to stay in LA for the time being, entirely because of its (relatively close) proximity to Phoenix.

Regardless, there are plenty of opportunities well beyond the LA/SF/NYC/Seattle regions. The real question, as always, remains: What do you bring to the table?

Comment Re:Really? I wonder (Score 2) 12

I think it's both. I've personally gotten a lot of use out of claude recently just for quickly getting started with somebody else's code (we weren't even allowed to use it a month ago even if we wanted to, which I didn't until I was specifically asked to use it.) E.g. ask it a question like "where is X done?" or "where should start for working on Y?". I don't ask it to make any direct changes. Basically the kind of stuff you do with a knowledge transfer, only you don't have access to the original developer(s) to do pair coding with (in this case, an open source library that I needed to modify) I think it's quite good for that.

Once I asked it to look for possible optimizations that I may have missed in a custom lz77 implementation I wrote, and it made a bunch of changes, only one of them actually made sense and yielded a tiny speed increase. The rest of them were just "this might make more sense" type of changes that actually broke the implementation (made it incompatible) without improving anything. For example, it reversed the order of the mask bits in each mask byte from right to left, to left to right, which is just dumb when the whole point of right to left was specifically for compatibility, and doesn't do a god damn thing to make the code run any faster. Still has a ways to go for making code changes IMO.

I can't speak for all of these companies, but in the case of Amazon, I think this is why management wants it:

https://archive.is/20260122220...

Comment Re:META is doing this to make them quit (Score 1) 91

That's actually a smart strategy.

It is effective at reducing staff cheaply, but it has a huge downside, shared with most attrition-based schemes for reducing payroll: The best employees are also the ones who find it the easiest to leave. The worst employees are also the ones who will grit their teeth and hold on to the bitter end.

It's harder and more costly (in the short term) to do targeted layoffs which allows the company to target low-performers, or those who are low performers relative to their cost. It's the better choice, though.

But I wonder how many employees will quit in today's job market.

Lots of the top performers will.

Slashdot Top Deals

To the landlord belongs the doorknobs.

Working...