Yep. Whole society doing enshittification.

On the other hand, I wonder whether that slop will get any listeners.

Latin may be useful. Cursive is worthless.

I’m not angry. I’m pointing out you were pompous, and I feel no compunction to be polite about it. And you’ve now said that the reason you complained about me talking about my situation instead of talking systemically is because of your personal situation, which you bang on and on about, proving that you have absolutely no problem with talking about EVs in relation to personal situations so long as it’s *your* personal situation, which you want to whine about. So now I’m calling you a steaming great hypocrite too.

Also, your reading comprehension sucks. I said “70% of UK cars are parked off-street overnight”. Off-street means on a driveway or in a garage. It’s the literal exact opposite of being parked “out in the street”.

I don’t know how you can struggle so much with basic stuff: you said “A majority of people can not charge at 'home'.” That is the fake fact. A majority of people can, in fact, charge at home, in both the UK and the US. *You* are in the minority, not me.

As for what was pompous, I told you up above, and I’ll repeat it here: “Perhaps you should take that into consideration when you are doing evaluations on other people's actions” absolutely reeks of pomposity, from the “Perhaps” to the “take that into consideration” to the “doing evaluations [sic] on other people’s [sic] actions”.

It’s the last bit that’s the chef’s kiss of pompous misreading for me, because, my reply was not an “evaluation” of the OP’s “actions”, it was a question to try to understand what they meant by “4 hour turn around”, with a couple of examples of how I charge so that they could see if that was the same or different from what they meant by that phrase.

70% of UK cars are parked off-street overnight. The percentage in the US is even higher. And in the UK and many other European countries, we are seeing a large-scale rollout of on-street charging options, for example Ubitricity lamp-post charging, cable gully installations, on-street dedicated chargers, etc etc. So you can take your pomposity (“Perhaps you should take that into consideration”) and shove it right back up your own bottom where it can look for the source of the fake-facts you spew.

Nice bunch of extreme lies you have there. Not any surprise.

Here is the first one: In actual reality, the industrial value of gold is not far from its market price. Typically about 50% of it. Do you really think it would get used in industrial applications if it was 100x more expensive than the value using it provides?

That comment is so dumb and disconnected, you are clearly just trying dishonest manipulation.

Well, maybe eventually it may make sense.
But not anytime soon: https://www.schneier.com/blog/...

Obviously, Microsoft is prioritizing profits over everything, as usual.

... which, to be clear, is a good thing. Working around the compiler is dangerous and a code smell, so it shouldn't be something that is easy to do. It usually indicates that either the compiler's capabilities aren't sufficient to meet your needs (in which case, a better solution would be either a better compiler, or to re-evaluate the wisdom of your approach), or that you are doing something the wrong way and should find a way to do it that works with the compiler, rather than around it, so that you get the benefits of the compiler's co-operation.

Indeed. Typical MAGA-level of no insight whatsoever.

It may be *possible* to squint really hard and make up bullshit good-faith justifications for policies that mean one can avoid naming the obvious bad-faith actual justification for said policies. But it is not *advisable*. It makes you look like either a credulous buffoon, or someone who thinks other people on here are all credulous buffoons.

It’s not like Trump and his administration have *hidden* their desire to support ICE vehicles and damage EV vehicles, is it? There was some sort of weird hiatus in Trump’s own rhetoric when he was sucking up [sic and also sick] to Musk for a few months, but since then he’s been back to saying what he said beforehand, that he thinks EVs are shit and should be discouraged. And the rest of his admin never indulged in the hiatus.

Hear hooves, expect horses, not zebras.

And now accuse Peter Gutmann of the same. I dare you.

Incidentally, I know what is at stake. But I also, quite unlike you, understand why "QCs" are not a credible threat.

You still have not read or understood what I wrote. There is nothing wrong with Physics experiments. There is a lot wrong with claiming Physics experiments are computers, when they are anything but.

What do you mean by a four hour turnaround? I’m really confused.

My EV has a 330 mile range and my charging is either done at home (plug in at night, unplug in morning) or at my destination (typically a hotel, and once again plug in at night, unplug in the morning). If I really have to do a fast charge on a longer trip, I can go 10 to 80% in about 40 minutes, so I’ll time a charge for when I’m hungry. But I’ve only done that a couple of times in the last two years.

So it might well be that my current EV meets your nominal needs. Unless you mean something else by turnaround.

This 15k replacement battery thing is clearly absolutely a totemic piece of idiocy that you guys are absolutely stuck on, isn’t it?

I used to have a Renault Zoe with an NMC pack. Here’s the numbers:
Summer range when new: 245 miles
UK average daily driving: 20 miles/day
Battery reaches 80% state of health after 750 equivalent full cycles (EFC) (could actually be as high as 1500 cycles, but let’s be cautious)

1. Daily distance driven = 0.08 of an EFC (20/245)
2. Days to reach 750 EFC = 750 / (20/245) = 9187.5 days.
3. Years to 750 EFC = 9187.5 / 365.25 = approx 25.15 years.
4. If you assume linear degradation and solve, that reduces to approx 23 years

At which point the thing will *still* drive you 200 miles in the summer.

If we now look at a new EV with a 300 mile LFP battery, then the battery will reach 80% state of health after more like 3000 cycles. So we are talking about 300 * 3000 = 900,000 miles of driving, which would take the typical UK driver more than 120 years to reach. At which point the battery would *still* be good for 240 miles of range.

Worrying about range degradation is right up there with worrying about fire risk as being a stupid thing to worry about.

Ending subsidies is also *not* the only thing the Trump administration has done to damage the EV market, so you’re whaling away on a strawman of your own invention. The Trump administration has also:
- Rolled back vehicle emissions / fuel-economy standards
- Attempted to revoke California’s EV-friendly regulatory authority / waivers
- Imposed tariffs on EV supply-chain components
- Raised tariff and non-tariff barriers on Chinese EVs
- Cut EV infrastructure support including *removing installed chargers*
- Ended the regulatory credit system that benefited EV makers
- Raided the Hyundai battery plant
Etc