It's stupid that they would need to charge in a garage, as battery warming pads are available aftermarket.

But it's even stupider that the GM for Green Mountain Transit thinks the barrier to charging under 41 degrees "is simply a software update". No it's not, genius, if you charge under 40 degrees you destroy your battery. They really need to have more transparency on these govt projects. Anybody who has a basic knowledge of electronics, or even campers, could fix this.

Get the warming pads off Amazon and you'll be fine.

Honestly I'm sure they're right, all of it can be automated. What's the worst that could happen? After all the only things AI can't do are:

  - Understand Cause and Effect
  - Apply "Common Sense"
  - Avoid Hallucinations
  - Handle Unexpected Situations
  - Possess Empathy or Emotional Intelligence
  - Perform True Creativity or Reasoning
  - Make Ethical/Moral Decisions
  - Multitask Effectively
  - Know What it Doesn't Know

I'm sure nothing bad will happen when all white-collar work in the world is replaced by this

Tried it a year ago, tried it again recently. Even on an M1 macbook, hardware still isn't supported or is poorly supported. Performance is poor, battery life is bad, you can't use all the hardware. You're much better served by selling it and buying a cheaper laptop with full Linux support.

I honestly have no idea what goes through their heads

You'll see a car running with nobody inside it. The people are inside shopping. Left their keys in the car, car on. And not in winter. "I hate auto start/stop" is the exact same thing.

My truck with stop/start is from 2015 and it launches forward in a split second from engine stop. The only difference in how it drives is a small reduction in A/C when stopped. But you can just pump the brake once and the engine runs again.

I don't even care about the environment that much. I would just rather save gas, oil, and engine cycles by not running the engine when it's not needed.

So why remove credits? Same reason the carbon credits were removed. Conservatives run govt like a hedge fund. Cut so much spending it hurts overall productivity and quality but makes a small short term boost in "profit".

About 4 months recently. I got sick and fell off the exercise wagon recently and it put me back to barely being able to do 1

Quitters, the true heroes

Since the studies came out showing significant muscle growth from doing a single curl per day, I have been muscle growth hacking.

I do one set of pull ups a day, as many as I can until I can't anymore. Started with zero; eventually got one; now I'm up to four. From just doing one set once a day. I don't break a sweat or get tired.

For the squat, I don't do multiple squats, I just do 1RM. I started with 40lbs. Now I'm up to 140.

Same for curl. Started with 15lbs. Up to 40.

I'm still fat because I drink too much alcohol. But increased muscle mass burns more calories and increases bone density which increases life span. Plus it's cool to be able to do pull ups.

The only way it would have made economic sense to have electric semis is with the previous administration investing hundreds of billions of dollars in developing the infrastructure needed to keep these trucks charged and on the road and with tax incentives for buyers.

Trump has completely destroyed all renewable incentives and development for the next 3 years. Nobody is going to sell a single electric semi in that time. No new massive charging stations built. No fleets converting to electric.

Even when we were on track for all the investment, there still were no buyers for electric semis. It just doesn't make economic sense. Forget about the cost of the truck, which is half of the problem. The other half is all of the problems and time delays and costs and complications and lack of resources and infrastructure.

Tesla semis weren't even good electric semis. Other semi manufacturers have better trucks built on established platforms with fewer problems.

I don't understand why they're still pretending Tesla is going to sell these to anybody. You will see "pilot programs" and "evaluations", but it's just using budget allocated to Green ventures to make corporations seem more environmentally friendly. They aren't serious.

RedHat's "contributions" over the last 20 years: Making XFS the default rather than ext4, removing Btrfs, introducing Systemd, PulseAudio, PipeWire, DBus, Wayland, Podman, corporate telemetry reporting, dropping 32-bit and fbcon. Aka, all the annoying shit we don't like that makes Linux into an incompatible, monolithic, "opinionated", corporatized operating system. And let's not forget how they closed their source code.

Well before IBM acquired them, RedHat has been slowly corrupting and subverting the entire Linux ecosystem to serve its own corporate interests. Because they're the largest player, they effectively force everyone else to follow suit, or face not being compatible.

That's what people said 120 years ago when electric cars were the most popular car. Turns out that "almost" every way has a pretty big caveat. Petrol was more convenient back then, it's more convenient now.

Literally an entire website dedicated to geek gifts existed for 20 freaking years. And they think this is only now becoming a thing?!

We're the party of small government, unless it's something we want, then we're Federalists. States need the right to be racist, but the federal government needs to stop states from curtailing corporate abuses.

Sony bought up a ton of ram while it was cheap, so they can keep churning out units at a discount. Microsoft didn't have a large pool of excess ram, so their units are actually getting more scarce. Hence the price increase rather than decrease.

There is a very important, and possibly intentional, confusion happening in this quote: "Monsanto's claim that Roundup herbicide and its active ingredient glyphosate don't cause cancer"

Notice that it's Roundup *and its active ingredient glyphosate". But what else is in Roundup other than its active ingredient? This is the critical point: it's all the other additive shit that goes into Roundup that is the most damaging to people.

Glyphosate, by itself, has not been found to be carcinogenic to humans. It's been studdied massively by many different international bodies for decades. Please read up on this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate) and try to understand the difference between Roundup and the ingredient Glyphosate. They are not the same thing. Since the patent on Glyphosate expired, it (and not Roundup) is used cheaply across the globe to increase food yields in poor and rich countries.

More importantly, the alternative to Glyphosate are pesticides that are *absolutely more harmful* to humans and the environment. Glyphosate is by far the least harmful, most effective pesticide we have. And before you insist we all stop using pesticides, consider that the cost of food is only as *cheap and plentiful* as it is now because of pesticides (and chemical fertilizers). We are now entirely dependent on the yields they produce, for everything from all our food to the international trades on crops, even entire economies, which other economies are dependent on.. The impact on the globe from abruptly stopping their use would be catastrophic.

Roundup may indeed be carcinogenic to humans, and should be studied more closely. But don't confuse that with Glyphosate the ingredient in Roundup.