Journal Journal: SQL: * expansion inside of EXISTS()
[Used gemini for formatting. It seems to have edited the text somewhere, and the table on bottom is atrocious. I ought to come back to this later. It's too late to continue with it now.]
[Used gemini for formatting. It seems to have edited the text somewhere, and the table on bottom is atrocious. I ought to come back to this later. It's too late to continue with it now.]
You might want to read up on how current hybrid vehicles actually work, 'cause it seems you have more than one misconception going on.
I have. For instance, my latest vehicle is the Ford F-159 XLT,, the full-hybrid model of the F-series pickup truck line. Power train is:
- 6 cylinder dual-turbo engine. (runs low power but approoximately doubles output when a lot is needed.)
- 47 HP motor-generator "pancake" on the engine side of the ttransmission, to scavenge / return power to./from a 1.5 kWhr lithium battery.
- 10-speed automatic transmission, working with the lithium battery;s main alternator to fine-tune match the engine/mogen to the current driving situation. Max power of engine plus hybrid mogen; 430 hp.
- full four wheel drive.
So it's primarily a gas-engine power train with an electric-car motor mechanically coupled to the engine shaft. Many other hybrids, from the venerable prius onward, are similar, with plug-in variants having a big scavaging/peaking battery good for pure electric operation of tens of miles rather than a minute or so and a wall-powered charger added.
What I'm looking for is essentially a pure electric - totally electronic "transmission" consisting of alternator(s) between the batteries and the motor(s), plus a tiny engine-generator able to burn gas and feed some teens of KW of charging power into the batteries when running down the road or parked near it.
Do the Waymo batteries use one of the lithium chemistries including cobalt, or a non-cobalt chemistry such as lithium iron phosphate?
Cobalt chemistries have a higher power/weight and energy/weight ratio, which made them the go-to chemistries for vehicle batteries. But they also produce oxygen when the cells overheat, leading to an unextinguishable runaway fire hazard: A burning cell makes enough heat to ignite the adjacent cells, so the whole assembly of them goes. Bad enough when it's a car's worth, but a disaster if it's a shipping-container sized module of a utility energy storage site. (And even worse when the site is a building full of racks, which someone had "protected" from fire with water-spraying, equipment-shorting system, so the whole site burns up, as happened recently with one in California creating a toxic mess.)
That's why purpose-built stationary lithium energy systems use non-cobalt chemistries - heavier, but a shorted cell just kills itself without getting hot enough to light off its neighbors.
I want to see inexpensive plugin hybrids.
But not like the current ones, which are primarily an engine/tranny powertrain with a motor/generator + small battery for scavenging downhill/braking energy for later accelleration/uphill/cruise/power-boost.
I want ones that are primarily a battery-electric with a small aux engine-generator (say 15-20 HP range), big enough to power crusing with a bit left over for gradually charging. That would let you range-extend by the size of your gas tank plus fillups (i.e. indefinitely if only gas is available) or go from battery empty to back on the road in a couple tens of minutes.
The backup engine would only run at max-efficiency speed and could use an atkins-like cycle (see "liquid piston engine") to get the max power out of the fuel. Most operation would use power-grid charging (when available and cheaper than fuel).
It's everywhere right now.
Projects are rejecting AI contributions in needlessly cruel and unnecessary ways.
All they need to do is post an agents md file.
The theatrics are needless.
This kind of thing makes me angry.
Here's a fork I made that explicitly removes the malicious prompt injection.
https://github.com/LynnColeArt...
I had my suspicions, but I didn't want to jump to any conclusions. So for any of you out there wondering how this journal worked out, Web 2.0 is garbage.
https://slashdot.org/journal/161630/web-20-business-networking-is-it-useful-at-all
I hope you find something good soon.
Concerned that the reason we keep doing open source is because we believe in access.
The false tradeoff there, is believing that access and exploitation are necessary corollaries. And I don't think they are.
It's a tough balance, and open source licenses have clearly failed us here.
But I'm not sure where to go with it. Shared source might be better, like the Mongo license, or something like it. The Kimi2 license had the right idea.
On the other hand, when you leave the open source path, you pay by losing access.
Let us not forget that we've spent the last 30 years trying to make ads less invasive. This is a fact. There is what is now an entire category of software that revolves stealthy ways to block them. This was always a weak, ineffective, and arguably immoral stream of revenue, with more than trivial privacy concerns.
If you're still depending on ad revenue to run your website, please think of something else.
Next up, this isn't the first time the google algorithm has changed. Louis Rossman did a great video on this. Where he discussed the ongoing troubles he was having getting his website ranked in Google. TLDR there was that he ended up using Gemini to reword his pages in the particular way that Gemini wanted him to, and he was fine.
But the bigger question is: Why are you still depending on Google?
AI porn is avoidable. It's illegal in fifteen states. Why are you running into so much of it?
I'm actively on social media, all the time, and I intentionally follow the topic, but rarely see it.
What are you doing that's inundating your feed with AI porn? No judgement, just curious.
And a douche bag of a president who drops bombs next to schools and kills 135 kids . Should resign on the spot for that.
Look up "human shields", the practice of siting military targets among (or in or under) large collections of non-military civilians, in order to deter strikes against them or produce propaganda claims of atrocities when they're attacked anyhow.
In such situations the fault for the "collateral damage" is assigned to the side that set up the arrangement, not the side that hit it.
Nevertheless, it should be noted that the US has been trying very hard to use precision munitions and extreme military intelligence to take out military targets with as little harm to the innocents they're embedded among as possible, with impressive success. Compare the amount of collateral damage in this war to any of those conducted in the 20th century.
We all agree on the necessity of compromise. We just can't agree on when it's necessary to compromise. -- Larry Wall