On 8/2/24 7:41 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> On 7/28/24 5:18 AM, D wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 28 Jul 2024, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Been using XFCE for many years and am very happy with it. When it
>>>>> comes to distributions without a woke or socialist code of conduct
>>>>> I've found the following:
>>>>>
>>>>> OpenBSD by far the best in terms of refusing to have one and
>>>>> focusing on shut up and code.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  The BSDs are good ... Open maybe more good. Alas their
>>>>  drivers may not be very up to date and I think SAMBA
>>>>  is still stuck on v1.
>>>
>>> That's what happens with a smaller community. Fortunately for me, I tend
>>> to work in linux only environments, and don't use smb at home either, so
>>> personally that is not a problem. =)
>>
> ...
>>  But, for a terminal/ssh-only file/mail/whatever server,
>>  OpenBSD is probably your safest option at the moment.
>
> Yes... the more crazy the linux world is becoming, the more I am leaning
> towards OpenBSD. I wouldn't be surprised if I actually did base my
> company servers on openbsd in the end. It seems robust, small and well
> thought out.

For "serious" servers - this is my current rec.

Linux is, or can be, great but it's in too-rapid
flux at the moment - with eye-candy and such
becoming the major priorities.

Oh, and Linus isn't young anymore. He has been
the glue holding the system kernel intact and
consistent. Before the last of the good Linux
mags disappeared there were columns from those
in his close orbit relating combat over many
'improvements' that would basically trash a
lot of what is, corrupt the logic of the system.

Once Linus exits .....

>>>>> Then you have debian and free and netbsd, I think they are kind of
>>>>> alright.
>>>>
>>>>  Deb WAS great - until WORM. I think they hired some
>>>>  Canonical rejects ... now POINTLESS complications and
>>>>  changes and abandonment of LONG-standing Linux norms
>>>>  for a lot of stuff. Went to Manjaro because of it.
>>>
>>> What happened? I use bookworm on my kodi tv computer and haven't noticed
>>> anything out of the ordinary. On the other hand, it is not my work
>>> platform, so I haven't looked that closely.
>>
>>  Let's see ... I do a lot with security cams, but the
>>  /dev/video devices constantly switch all around. That
>>  was just the start. The networking setup went all
>>  wonky too ... I actually had to post where the new
>>  files were and some ez templates for those who used
>>  it without a GUI. The CLI utility SUCKS. A surprising
>>  number of people here do NOT add a GUI, esp for Pi
>>  implementations. Anyway, a bunch of very annoying
>>  little things - so I've just DUMPED Deb. Hoping for
>>  an "original fork" distro - kinda Devuian+ - soon.
>>  Just NOT gonna waste any more time with it.
>
> Interesting. Thank you very much for the review.

This was MY experience with OS aspects *I* tend to
use a lot. Other people with other aims may not see
much in the way of problems.

But I see serious problems ... and I'm too old now
to waste lots of time trying to find sneaky ways
around them that will disappear with the next
update, or reboot.

A longstanding goodness of Linux was its relative
simplicity - straight-up code and structure for
common needs. This seems to be disappearing in
favor of trying to become Winders.

>>>>> Slackware and Artix I think are also distributions without too much
>>>>> CoC bullsh*t.
>>>>
>>>>  'Artix' or 'Antix" ??? Antix is super-simple - which
>>>>  CAN be good. Antix IS writ by very depressive communist
>>>>  Greeks alas ...... MX is an improvement.
>>>
>>> Artix. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artix_Linux .
>>>
>>>>> You probably also have seen that Lunduke wants to start his own
>>>>> distribution with CoC b.s. so that could be promising as well! =)
>>>>
>>>>  What's that gonna do - "correct" your pronouns by
>>>>  default/mandate or something ? Wouldn't put it
>>>>  past 'em .....
>>>
>>> YES!
>>>
>>>>  Operating systems are SUPPOSED to be about pure
>>>>  function. No politics or neo-sociology.
>>>
>>> Jokes aside, that is his idea as far as I understand it. A distribution
>>> that focuses on the technology and not the woke B.S.
>>
>>  Let us hope.
>
> We can only pray!

Oh Great And Terrible Lord Siliconus .... :-)

>>  Though that all might be banned if Harris and
>>  friends gain control ... thou SHALL adhere to
>>  the approved groupthink .....
>
> That could definitely be true. In europe, many socialist countries like
> sweden, are using nudgeing to teach people to become more socialist and
> companies too. For instance, there are legal requirements that you must
> have a gender plan, a "green" plan etc. and if you do not have it, you
> are banned from doing business with the public sector.

Much of the EU is decidedly more into enforced
official groupthink. You can see that in the
news almost every day. Anyone a centimeter
outside the 'official' reality is a 'terrorist'
or 'far-right extremist' or 'thug'. Oddly it
was the far-LEFT extemists who sabotaged French
systems last week .........

> Also, in order to get government money as a non-profit, you have to
> conform with democratic principles, which of course in europe means,
> woke:ism as well.
>
>>  I want a Linux that sticks VERY close to the
>>  systems you could get a decade+ ago ... the
>>  ones 95% of the online docs so helpfully
>>  explain. There was nothing wrong, and a lot
>>  right, about that sort of Linux.
>
> Maybe slackware would be your best bet in the linux universe? I am
> getting more and more convinced that for a stable, no-nonsense
> environment, the BSD:s are the ones that change the least and stick the
> most to the basics.

It does seem more 'traditional'. However it also
has a lot of quirks and demands more work to achieve
what you want.

I have been seeing more 'improved' Slack distros
of late though - helpful GUIs - but MAYbe that's
the wrong direction.

>>  Arch derivs like Manjaro are still kind of
>>  there. Haven't fooled much with Slack since
>>  I bought an early distro off the shelf at
>>  WalMart (barely any internet then).
>
> What a conincidence. It was my first, store bought distro too. I bought
> a double CD set at some local linux shop, and that was my start with
> linux. Hmm, maybe I should check it out myself. It still looks pretty
> basic on the surface.

At WalMart I found Slack, SUSE and pre-commercial Red Hat.
This was back in the dial-up days. There was even a cheap
version of Oracle - tuned for SUSE I think - but I never
used it.

>>  DID have substantial annoyances with Manjaro
>>  trying to get an xrandr command to execute
>>  on login ... but all distros are kinda weird
>>  about that kind of stuff, hide everything way
>>  on down and the docs aren't always super
>>  helpful. Seems like it never dawned on the
>>  writers that people might want/need a clean,
>>  standard, way to make that work. ROOT, no
>>  prob, but individual user accts .......
>>

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:49:30 -0400
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

> On 2024-08-02 1:50 p.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:57:36 -0400
> > CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> >
> >> Power lines aren't the problem, you ridiculous cretin. Power
> >> _production_ is the problem. There is no shortage of videos of electric
> >> cars owners lined up to the few charging stations that work because not
> >> only is there not enough electricity being produced there (because we
> >> had to close coal factories after all), the stations themselves cease
> >> to work and nobody is ever around to fix them.
> >
> > I'm trying to keep out of this but Oh boy that is priceless
> > garbage! Most EV owners charge at home overnight taking advantage of the
> > times when the grid is underutilised and electricity is cheap.
>
> And what do you do when you're on a road trip, pray tell? Do you drive

I don't go on road trips, that's a peculiarly American thing. The
longest journey I make (rarely) is about 350km of driving, most current EVs
can easily do that on a charge. I wouldn't want to drive more than that
in a day and then only for one day but if I was going to I'd be planning
rest stops at places with chargers thus recharging self and car at the same
time.

> as many kilometres you can, come back home to charge, drive the same
> kilometres and come back home to charge? Or do you use a charging station?

Obviously when away from home it is usually necessary to depend
on the charging network (unless you're staying somewhere with a charger or
can use a "granny cable") but "charging station" not so much. I see
chargers in supermarket, shopping centre, hotel and municipal car parks as
well as motorway service stations. I rarely see all of the chargers in use
anywhere.
The thing is that long journets are the exception not the norm,
most of the time most cars travel less than 100 miles per day which means
that overnight charging easily keeps them full and even quite small
batteries suffice. A great many people were happy with the original Nissan
Leaf with its 24kWh battery and 120km range (on a good day) - with an EV
that limited I'd hire a car for long journeys and still come out way ahead
on driving costs - 2c/km instead of 10c/km in fuel costs and much cheaper
services (there's usually nothing to do but check everything in an EV
service).

EVs have only two serious downsides - they're expensive to buy and
they depreciate quickly at first because the new models are always much
better every year. These are good reasons not to buy a *new* EV, second
hand ones are getting interesting.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On 02/08/2024 15:47, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 8/2/24 04:48, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/08/2024 20:56, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>>>>   But the un-Natural Philospher is just a mindless
>>>> repeater of slurs, otherwise he would be paying attention
>>>> to real science and demanding more electric cars for the
>>>> sake of reducing climate changing emmissions.
>>>
>>> No. as a true engineer I am aware that electric cars will not reduce
>>> emissions one iota, *overall* and that carbon dioxide emissions are a
>>> minor problem compared with trying to run a civilisation off
>>> windmills and solar panels, as people like you will see if they
>>> continue to try and do it.
>
>     Why do you deniers leave out batteries.  I do not mean the little
> ones in flashlites and so forth but the ones as big as
> boxcars lined up in rows to number in the 100s.
>
Denier of what?

Can you DO Sums?
Can you calculate how much 'battery' is needed, and how much actually
exists in the real world?
Can you calculate how many Hiroshima sized nuclear explosions the
energy in the battery would need to be to keep just a small country
going overnight?

>     Are you paid to ignore the Truth of Global Warming?

The fact that you capitalises it shows its a belief, not a fact.

>     If we do not discover ways to reduce carbon dioxide in the
> atmosphere civilization of any sort may not survive as the people
> remaining alive will have to stuggle not only against the Heat,
> but their fellow surviors for resouces, mainly food and water.
>
If we contunbue to deploy renewable energy to the exclusion of wall
else, civilisation *will* collapse. No 'may' about it.

>     Costs?  Global warming from Fossil Fuel misuse is now costing
> about $800,000,000 a year.  If spent on preparation such as the new
> power lines that would be wonderful.
Urter and total BOLLOCKS and a drop in the ocean compared to th`e cost
of renewables estimated in te trillions

>>
>> When it comes to wind mills and solar, it is not the answer, due to
>> our current ability to store energy cheap, for a long time, is not
>> near enough.
>>
>> It can be added as a complement, but basing countries on it, will lead
>> to brown outs and black outs.
>>
>>> Ultimately the mindless repeating of slurs like 'climate denier' is
>>> coming from the anti- science political climate alarmist Marxists,
>>> not from scientists
>>
>> As long as the term Climate denier persists, we have a clear signal
>> that the green camp has no intention to listen to facts and science.
>> It is a cheap shot aimed at connecting rational beings who are not
>> hysterics, with holocaust deniers. I find the term revolting, and it
>> does not make for good discussion.
>
>     When you deny the negative effects of Global Heating which is
> already killing many people, coral reefs which are ecosystem bases for
> the things we take from the Oceans to eat.

I dont deny anything. You are the one in denial. Of the real facts and
the real science.

>>
>> Eco-fascism is a control tool, which is built like the medieval church
>> with the intent of making the population hand over all power to
>> eco-priests (politicians and corrupt scientists). Only they will allow
>> you to attone for your sins by higher taxes and a medieval lifestyle,
>> while they still travel with private jet.
>
>     I don't know about the people you describe.  They may or may
> not exist but I think you are pimping for the Fossil Fuel industry.
>
>>
>>> The civilization that takes over the world will do it using nuclear
>>> power and hydrocarbon fuels, and all the 'Green' nations will be
>>> colonised and enslaved by them
>
>     What a paranoid dream.

I am sure that nice Mr Putin is having it right now.

Ostrich
>>
>> Let's hope for this result. When ideology and reality clash, sooner or
>> later (hopefully sooner) reality wins as all marxist and socialist
>> countries eventually find out.
>
>     Funny that Norway, Sweden and Denmark seem to be doing Ok.  Of
> course, those social regimes ,making sure citizens have access to good
> health care and education have not been around very long but they seem
> to be keeping up with and ahead of most Capitalist nations where poor
> folks have to struggle to survive.
>
They are too small to be targets for Marxistrs

>     Tell me how many hours a day do you spend standing on your
> head to see the World from such a backward perspective.
>
I guess you must be australian.

--
When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over
the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that
authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.

Frédéric Bastiat

On 02/08/2024 15:51, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 8/1/24 18:48, geodandw wrote:

>> What makes you think there is a creator?
>
>     The universe and its subte connection at the level of
> sub-nuclear particles which happen to play out in the chemistry
> of everything including life and consciousness.

You cannot prove that to be true, and in fact esoteric religion claims
otherwise.

Was it planned
> or was it Chance? If it was planned then good if not then
> Bona Fortuna.
>     bliss
>

The short answer is 'no one knows' so go and finish your cornflakes and
be a good little boy.

--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, chrisv wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> The civilisation that takes over the world will do it using nuclear
>> power and hydrocarbon fuels, and all the 'Green' nations will be
>> colonised and enslaved by them
>
> That's China's plan. Once they have Taiwan back, we'll be completely
> at their mercy.
>

I don't think so. Things will be worse, of course, but europe and the US
has the financial muscle and the brain muscle to suvive that. But that is
on the condition that the west abandons woke ideology. If that does not
happen, then it's "good night".

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:

> You mean cars that run on batteries whose production leaves a massive carbon
> footprint
> <https://www.industryweek.com/technology-and-iiot/article/22026518/lithium-batteries-dirty-secret-manufacturing-them-leaves-massive-carbon-footprint>,
> which are only recycled at a rate of 1%
> <https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/04/lithium-costs-a-lot-of-money-so-why-arent-we-recycling-lithium-batteries/>,
> which spontaneous combust "rarely"
> <https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lithium-ion-battery-fires-electric-cars-bikes-scooters-firefighters/>
> and which are 79% less reliable than gas cars
> <https://www.consumerreports.org/media-room/press-releases/2023/11/electric-vehicles-are-improving-but-charging-and-battery-issues-persist-in-consumer-reports-2023-annual-auto-reliability-survey/?msockid=287d4f79ae8b60c3236c5bb1afb0613d>.
>
> Once again, you are a ridiculous cretin.
>

Sorry Bobby, I have analyzed the thread and it does in fact seem like
you are a ridiculous cretin. CrudeSausage is the clear winner here.

On 02/08/2024 16:06, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:47:52 -0700
> Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>> On 8/2/24 04:48, D wrote:
>>>
>>>> No. as a true engineer I am aware that electric cars will not reduce
>>>> emissions one iota, *overall* and that carbon dioxide emissions are a
>>>> minor problem compared with trying to run a civilisation off windmills
>>>> and solar panels, as people like you will see if they continue to try
>>>> and do it.
>>
>> Why do you deniers leave out batteries. I do not mean the little
>> ones in flashlites and so forth but the ones as big as
>> boxcars lined up in rows to number in the 100s.
>
> To say nothing of Vanadium and Iron chemistry flow batteries which
> are good for long term energy storage (zero self discharge). These things
> *only* exist at grid scale.
>

Sure. I can see then littered everywhere round the world

/sarc/.

The UK alone needs about 3 hiroshima sized bombs worth of energy storage
to cover just one dark night of no wind. With the grid it already has.
Never mind all the EVs etc.

You really want to live near a battery with that much energy? That is,
for efficiency, able to let it all go pretty much instantly?

The reason we havent got 'batteries' is because although eco-hippies can
dream about them its all cat belling. We dont know how to build grid
scale energy storage or we would have done it decades ago. And in fact
did, in the case of pumped storage.

Ti the unscientific, the assumption that engineers who have studied
their craft are as ignorant as they are when it comes to scoping out
solutions to problems, is deeply insulting.

They latch on to every PR puff piece that claims to have The Answer, and
regurgitate the same spew on Usenet.

Dont insult my intelligence or training .

If any given technology was a safe reliable and low cost way to store
enormous amounts of electricity, don't you think someone would already
have done it?

Electro chemistry is old technology.
As are windmills and solar panels,
Lipstick on a pig wont make it Taylor Swift.
The safest lowest cost storage of energy that we have technology to
access us Uranium 235.

Accept it, and accept that the carefully crafted bullshit of the
renewable lobbies is there to make profit, not save the planet, because
if they really cared we would be 100% nuclear by now.

And they wouldn't be flying from one beach house to the nexct in private
jets.

--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>>> Again its trite and misses the actual point.
>>>
>>> You are hung up on the classic idealism/realism debate. Things moved on
>>> with Kant.
>>>
>>> The problem is neither the scientists or the woke crowd moved in with him.
>>
>> No. You are the one stuck in the idealist camp. Do note that a vast
>> majority of philosophy ph.d. support the fact that an external world
>> exist and that science is the best way to obtain knowledge about it.
>>
>
> No, the support the hypothesis.
> Again you innate stupidity has prevented you from grasping the fine
> distinction between and ad hoc theory, and fact, and between 'it works' and
> 'its true'

No, actually it is your innate retardedness that prevents you from
grasping that we live in a material world. You are stuck in the old
idealism from the 18th century. Please update yourself, and I'll gladly
meet you in the real world.

>> I will not stop this conversation, since it is meaningless to talk about
>> this with you.
>>
>> The paper if you are interested is What Do Philosophers Believe? by David
>> Bourget and David J. Chalmers.
>
> The problem is that you are just stuck in the materialists camp and are in
> denial that it might not be the be all and end all of everything

Nope. The material is all there is, and you cannot provide proof of
anything else, or you would have gotten the nobel prize.

I therefore conclude that you have fallen into the solipsist trap, and I
will not further talk philosophy with you, since you're argument is on
the level of a child.

You are an engineer I think, but I have studied philosophy at university
level, and it does show that you are an engineer and not a philosopher.

> Philosophers - real philosophers - don't do 'believe'

Exactly. Welcome to the real, material world.

> The examine other peoples , dispassionately
> The fact that you think they have 'beliefs' tells me all I need to know about
> the mature of your mind

You are retarded, and you will be blocked at the next message talking
about this subject. It is sad, because you do seem to have quite well
reasoned views, but I do understand at the same time, that I have touch
your religion, and that makes you revolting and defensive and closed
minded.

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:

> On 2024-08-02 1:50 p.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:57:36 -0400
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>
>>> Power lines aren't the problem, you ridiculous cretin. Power
>>> _production_ is the problem. There is no shortage of videos of electric
>>> cars owners lined up to the few charging stations that work because not
>>> only is there not enough electricity being produced there (because we
>>> had to close coal factories after all), the stations themselves cease to
>>> work and nobody is ever around to fix them.
>>
>> I'm trying to keep out of this but Oh boy that is priceless
>> garbage! Most EV owners charge at home overnight taking advantage of the
>> times when the grid is underutiliosed and electricity is cheap.
>
> And what do you do when you're on a road trip, pray tell? Do you drive as
> many kilometres you can, come back home to charge, drive the same kilometres
> and come back home to charge? Or do you use a charging station?
>

Let's also add that it is very entitled to assume that everyone just have
a house so they can charge overnight. Many people in the world live in
apartments, which makes this impossible.

On 02/08/2024 22:49, CrudeSausage wrote:
> On 2024-08-02 1:50 p.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:57:36 -0400
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>
>>> Power lines aren't the problem, you ridiculous cretin. Power
>>> _production_ is the problem. There is no shortage of videos of electric
>>> cars owners lined up to the few charging stations that work because not
>>> only is there not enough electricity being produced there (because we
>>> had to close coal factories after all), the stations themselves cease to
>>> work and nobody is ever around to fix them.
>>
>>     I'm trying to keep out of this but Oh boy that is priceless
>> garbage! Most EV owners charge at home overnight taking advantage of the
>> times when the grid is underutiliosed and electricity is cheap.
>
> And what do you do when you're on a road trip, pray tell? Do you drive
> as many kilometres you can, come back home to charge, drive the same
> kilometres and come back home to charge? Or do you use a charging station?
>
In the New Hope World, you dont take long car trips. You have virtual
sex with an internet connected robot.

--
“It is not the truth of Marxism that explains the willingness of
intellectuals to believe it, but the power that it confers on
intellectuals, in their attempts to control the world. And since...it is
futile to reason someone out of a thing that he was not reasoned into,
we can conclude that Marxism owes its remarkable power to survive every
criticism to the fact that it is not a truth-directed but a
power-directed system of thought.”
Sir Roger Scruton

On 03/08/2024 08:11, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:49:30 -0400
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-08-02 1:50 p.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:57:36 -0400
>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Power lines aren't the problem, you ridiculous cretin. Power
>>>> _production_ is the problem. There is no shortage of videos of electric
>>>> cars owners lined up to the few charging stations that work because not
>>>> only is there not enough electricity being produced there (because we
>>>> had to close coal factories after all), the stations themselves cease
>>>> to work and nobody is ever around to fix them.
>>>
>>> I'm trying to keep out of this but Oh boy that is priceless
>>> garbage! Most EV owners charge at home overnight taking advantage of the
>>> times when the grid is underutilised and electricity is cheap.
>>
>> And what do you do when you're on a road trip, pray tell? Do you drive
>
> I don't go on road trips, that's a peculiarly American thing. The
> longest journey I make (rarely) is about 350km of driving, most current EVs
> can easily do that on a charge. I wouldn't want to drive more than that
> in a day and then only for one day but if I was going to I'd be planning
> rest stops at places with chargers thus recharging self and car at the same
> time.
>
>> as many kilometres you can, come back home to charge, drive the same
>> kilometres and come back home to charge? Or do you use a charging station?
>
> Obviously when away from home it is usually necessary to depend
> on the charging network (unless you're staying somewhere with a charger or
> can use a "granny cable") but "charging station" not so much. I see
> chargers in supermarket, shopping centre, hotel and municipal car parks as
> well as motorway service stations. I rarely see all of the chargers in use
> anywhere.
>
> The thing is that long journets are the exception not the norm,
> most of the time most cars travel less than 100 miles per day which means
> that overnight charging easily keeps them full and even quite small
> batteries suffice. A great many people were happy with the original Nissan
> Leaf with its 24kWh battery and 120km range (on a good day) - with an EV
> that limited I'd hire a car for long journeys and still come out way ahead
> on driving costs - 2c/km instead of 10c/km in fuel costs and much cheaper
> services (there's usually nothing to do but check everything in an EV
> service).
>
> EVs have only two serious downsides - they're expensive to buy and
> they depreciate quickly at first because the new models are always much
> better every year. These are good reasons not to buy a *new* EV, second
> hand ones are getting interesting.
>
Evs have no upsides at all. Not really.
Even fuel cost will be forced to rise on account of them not paying fuel
duty

The answer is in the sales figures of tthe major EV manufacturers.
People are stinging away on droves.

--
“It is not the truth of Marxism that explains the willingness of
intellectuals to believe it, but the power that it confers on
intellectuals, in their attempts to control the world. And since...it is
futile to reason someone out of a thing that he was not reasoned into,
we can conclude that Marxism owes its remarkable power to survive every
criticism to the fact that it is not a truth-directed but a
power-directed system of thought.”
Sir Roger Scruton

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

>>>  But, for a terminal/ssh-only file/mail/whatever server,
>>>  OpenBSD is probably your safest option at the moment.
>>
>> Yes... the more crazy the linux world is becoming, the more I am leaning
>> towards OpenBSD. I wouldn't be surprised if I actually did base my
>> company servers on openbsd in the end. It seems robust, small and well
>> thought out.
>
> For "serious" servers - this is my current rec.
>
> Linux is, or can be, great but it's in too-rapid
> flux at the moment - with eye-candy and such
> becoming the major priorities.

Yes, I go with releases and not rolling-releases for my production
stuff. I would never even dream of basing anything serious on linux
rolling releases.

> Oh, and Linus isn't young anymore. He has been
> the glue holding the system kernel intact and
> consistent. Before the last of the good Linux
> mags disappeared there were columns from those
> in his close orbit relating combat over many
> 'improvements' that would basically trash a
> lot of what is, corrupt the logic of the system.
>
> Once Linus exits .....

This is the truth! Linus has already weakened given the foundations code
of condudct and having to go to class to learn to become more woke.
These are signs of the demise. I think that once he is completely gone
it will just be a corporate entity controlled by the corporations who
contribute the most money.

My very brief collaboration with the linux foundation confirms this, and
it was completely lined with middle managers looking to line their CV:s
trying to become upper level managers. Also, needless to say, their
concerns was with their corporations and the concerns of regular users
was non-existent.

But who knows? Maybe it is not yet too late for any of the BSDs to
actualy step up and become a more popular alternative, and attract the
funding and attention necessary to actually develop hardware support
that is very up to date? It would be nice on the open source side, to
end the linux hegemony.

>>>>>> Then you have debian and free and netbsd, I think they are kind of
>>>>>> alright.
>>>>>
>>>>>  Deb WAS great - until WORM. I think they hired some
>>>>>  Canonical rejects ... now POINTLESS complications and
>>>>>  changes and abandonment of LONG-standing Linux norms
>>>>>  for a lot of stuff. Went to Manjaro because of it.
>>>>
>>>> What happened? I use bookworm on my kodi tv computer and haven't noticed
>>>> anything out of the ordinary. On the other hand, it is not my work
>>>> platform, so I haven't looked that closely.
>>>
>>>  Let's see ... I do a lot with security cams, but the
>>>  /dev/video devices constantly switch all around. That
>>>  was just the start. The networking setup went all
>>>  wonky too ... I actually had to post where the new
>>>  files were and some ez templates for those who used
>>>  it without a GUI. The CLI utility SUCKS. A surprising
>>>  number of people here do NOT add a GUI, esp for Pi
>>>  implementations. Anyway, a bunch of very annoying
>>>  little things - so I've just DUMPED Deb. Hoping for
>>>  an "original fork" distro - kinda Devuian+ - soon.
>>>  Just NOT gonna waste any more time with it.
>>
>> Interesting. Thank you very much for the review.
>
> This was MY experience with OS aspects *I* tend to
> use a lot. Other people with other aims may not see
> much in the way of problems.
>
> But I see serious problems ... and I'm too old now
> to waste lots of time trying to find sneaky ways
> around them that will disappear with the next
> update, or reboot.
>
> A longstanding goodness of Linux was its relative
> simplicity - straight-up code and structure for
> common needs. This seems to be disappearing in
> favor of trying to become Winders.

This is the truth! That is the beauty of the BSDs. They are quite
compact, streamlined and the components fit well together. For a simple
and robust platform I think they are great.

>>>>>> Slackware and Artix I think are also distributions without too much CoC
>>>>>> bullsh*t.
>>>>>
>>>>>  'Artix' or 'Antix" ??? Antix is super-simple - which
>>>>>  CAN be good. Antix IS writ by very depressive communist
>>>>>  Greeks alas ...... MX is an improvement.
>>>>
>>>> Artix. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artix_Linux .
>>>>
>>>>>> You probably also have seen that Lunduke wants to start his own
>>>>>> distribution with CoC b.s. so that could be promising as well! =)
>>>>>
>>>>>  What's that gonna do - "correct" your pronouns by
>>>>>  default/mandate or something ? Wouldn't put it
>>>>>  past 'em .....
>>>>
>>>> YES!
>>>>
>>>>>  Operating systems are SUPPOSED to be about pure
>>>>>  function. No politics or neo-sociology.
>>>>
>>>> Jokes aside, that is his idea as far as I understand it. A distribution
>>>> that focuses on the technology and not the woke B.S.
>>>
>>>  Let us hope.
>>
>> We can only pray!
>
> Oh Great And Terrible Lord Siliconus .... :-)

Amen!

>>>  Though that all might be banned if Harris and
>>>  friends gain control ... thou SHALL adhere to
>>>  the approved groupthink .....
>>
>> That could definitely be true. In europe, many socialist countries like
>> sweden, are using nudgeing to teach people to become more socialist and
>> companies too. For instance, there are legal requirements that you must
>> have a gender plan, a "green" plan etc. and if you do not have it, you
>> are banned from doing business with the public sector.
>
> Much of the EU is decidedly more into enforced
> official groupthink. You can see that in the
> news almost every day. Anyone a centimeter
> outside the 'official' reality is a 'terrorist'
> or 'far-right extremist' or 'thug'. Oddly it
> was the far-LEFT extemists who sabotaged French
> systems last week .........

Oh yes, tell me about it! I've done a bit of management consulting for
startups, and a huge part of my time was spent on blocking woke
initiatives the naive founders and their feminist diversity flower came
with every week. It seemed like they really wanted to destroy their
company.

After fighting for 3 years I left for other projects, and 6 months after
I left they had to let go about 30% of the company due to financial
difficulties. I love it when I'm right! ;)

On 03/08/2024 07:44, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
> A longstanding goodness of Linux was its relative
>   simplicity - straight-up code and structure for
>   common needs. This seems to be disappearing in
>   favor of trying to become Winders.

If you are happy to have no interface to it beyond a terminal it is
remarkably simple.
Its the eye candy that takes the space

--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:16:55 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Can you DO Sums?

Yes.

> Can you calculate how much 'battery' is needed, and how much actually

Yes done that - with a generous overhead.

> exists in the real world?

There's plenty of iron and chlorine easily available everywhere. If
we wanted to build enough tanks we could hold a year's supply of electricity
for the planet without impacting the availability of raw materials - but we
only need about ten days (that's still about a competition sized swimming
pool of tanks per 100k poeople - that's the answer I got when I did the
sums). I'm not so sure about Vanadium but it's not in short supply. Now if
we had to depend on Lithium for storage we'd be in trouble.

> Can you calculate how many Hiroshima sized nuclear explosions the
> energy in the battery would need to be to keep just a small country
> going overnight?

The Battery ??? You call yourself an engineer ? Reminds me of the
time when people thought there would be *a* computer. District scale (and
downwards) batteries make a lot more sense.

There are already a *lot* of batteries distributed around the
world's power grids and there will be more as fast as they can be built
because they make money for their owners. On top of all the grid scale
batteries many homes now have some battery storage (usually only about a
day's worth but larger flow batteries are appearing) which lets them buy
cheap night rate electricity and use it in the day time or ignore an outage
of a few hours. Some EVs and chargers support V2L and can power the house
from the car.

It all adds up - but we do need to build a *lot* of batteries
(swimming pool per 100k with current commercial offerings) before we can
depend on intermittent sources alone, rather fewer batteries if we bring
some nuclear into the mix but even with 100% nuclear we need enough
batteries to handle the fast peaks and troughs.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On 03/08/2024 11:33, D wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>>> Again its trite and misses the actual point.
>>>>
>>>> You are hung up on the classic idealism/realism debate. Things moved
>>>> on with Kant.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is neither the scientists or the woke crowd moved in
>>>> with him.
>>>
>>> No. You are the one stuck in the idealist camp. Do note that a vast
>>> majority of philosophy ph.d. support the fact that an external world
>>> exist and that science is the best way to obtain knowledge about it.
>>>
>>
>> No, the support the hypothesis.
>> Again you innate stupidity has prevented you from grasping the fine
>> distinction between and ad hoc theory, and fact, and between 'it
>> works' and 'its true'
>
> No, actually it is your innate retardedness that prevents you from
> grasping that we live in a material world. You are stuck in the old
> idealism from the 18th century. Please update yourself, and I'll gladly
> meet you in the real world.
>

You may live in a material world. I just live in whatever it is I live
in. I dont have a strong beliefe about its nature.

>>> I will not stop this conversation, since it is meaningless to talk about
>>> this with you.
>>>
>>> The paper if you are interested is What Do Philosophers Believe? by
>>> David
>>> Bourget and David J. Chalmers.
>>
>> The problem is that you are just stuck in the materialists camp and
>> are in denial that it might not be the be all and end all of everything
>
> Nope. The material is all there is, and you cannot provide proof of
> anything else, or you would have gotten the nobel prize.
>
There you go again! Dogma! An statement of faith. You cannot know that.

> I therefore conclude that you have fallen into the solipsist trap, and I
> will not further talk philosophy with you, since you're argument is on
> the level of a child.
>
You have fallen into the,materialist trap and its an article of
unhsakeable faith.

You clearly do not know what solipsism is, and nothing I have said
supports thge veiw that I 'beleive' it to be true.

> You are an engineer I think, but I have studied philosophy at university
> level, and it does show that you are an engineer and not a philosopher.
>
>> Philosophers - real philosophers - don't do 'believe'
>
> Exactly. Welcome to the real, material world.

The problem with neatly all philsophers who have studied it, at school,
rather than as a private investigation, is that they all want to arrived
at definite conclusions. And very very few of them actually understand
the subject at all.

Only the best come to understand there is no truth to be found, and that
metaphysics is ultmately the study of the belief systems that people
adghere to - like the belief that the world is material and that's all
there is.

>
>> The examine other peoples , dispassionately
>> The fact that you think they have 'beliefs' tells me all I need to
>> know about the mature of your mind
>
> You are retarded, and you will be blocked at the next message talking
> about this subject. It is sad, because you do seem to have quite well
> reasoned views, but I do understand at the same time, that I have touch
> your religion, and that makes you revolting and defensive and closed
> minded.

I have no religion. You are projecting your closed mind in which there
is no space for what I really am or think.
To you there are only Realists, who have access to the Truth, and
solipsists, who are deluded.

You say you have studied philosophy, and yet you have apparently no
knowledge of say Kant, or Schopenhauer or even Karl Popper. Or Hilary
Putnam.

--
"An intellectual is a person knowledgeable in one field who speaks out
only in others...”

Tom Wolfe

On 03/08/2024 11:56, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:16:55 +0100
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Can you DO Sums?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Can you calculate how much 'battery' is needed, and how much actually
>
> Yes done that - with a generous overhead.
>
>> exists in the real world?
>
> There's plenty of iron and chlorine easily available everywhere. If
> we wanted to build enough tanks we could hold a year's supply of electricity
> for the planet without impacting the availability of raw materials - but we
> only need about ten days (that's still about a competition sized swimming
> pool of tanks per 100k poeople - that's the answer I got when I did the
> sums). I'm not so sure about Vanadium but it's not in short supply. Now if
> we had to depend on Lithium for storage we'd be in trouble.
>
>> Can you calculate how many Hiroshima sized nuclear explosions the
>> energy in the battery would need to be to keep just a small country
>> going overnight?
>
> The Battery ??? You call yourself an engineer ? Reminds me of the
> time when people thought there would be *a* computer. District scale (and
> downwards) batteries make a lot more sense.
>

So no mathematical refutation, just an ad hominem attack?

> There are already a *lot* of batteries distributed around the
> world's power grids and there will be more as fast as they can be built
> because they make money for their owners. On top of all the grid scale
> batteries many homes now have some battery storage (usually only about a
> day's worth but larger flow batteries are appearing) which lets them buy
> cheap night rate electricity and use it in the day time or ignore an outage
> of a few hours. Some EVs and chargers support V2L and can power the house
> from the car.
>

Yes. I calculated we have enough energy storage to keep the worlds grid
up for nearly three minutes

You havent done the sums. You use words like 'a lot' . Yiu even think
an 'outage pf a few gpurs is acceptable'
Try telling that to a patient on a life support machine.

> It all adds up - but we do need to build a *lot* of batteries
> (swimming pool per 100k with current commercial offerings) before we can
> depend on intermittent sources alone, rather fewer batteries if we bring
> some nuclear into the mix but even with 100% nuclear we need enough
> batteries to handle the fast peaks and troughs.
>

Oh dear. We need to build 'a lot' of batteries.
Or nuclear power stations.
Oh Nuclear power stations are *cheaper* than renewables plus batteries.,
Whoda thunk it?

Not you, apparently.

Your post contains not one quantity. It is full of *qualitative*
statements.

"Yes done that - with a generous overhead." I know you havent. Because I
*have* That's simply bullshit.

Never confuse carefully crafted bullshit with carefully calculated
engineering solutions.

--
It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
Mark Twain

On 2024-08-03 3:11 a.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:49:30 -0400
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-08-02 1:50 p.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:57:36 -0400
>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Power lines aren't the problem, you ridiculous cretin. Power
>>>> _production_ is the problem. There is no shortage of videos of electric
>>>> cars owners lined up to the few charging stations that work because not
>>>> only is there not enough electricity being produced there (because we
>>>> had to close coal factories after all), the stations themselves cease
>>>> to work and nobody is ever around to fix them.
>>>
>>> I'm trying to keep out of this but Oh boy that is priceless
>>> garbage! Most EV owners charge at home overnight taking advantage of the
>>> times when the grid is underutilised and electricity is cheap.
>>
>> And what do you do when you're on a road trip, pray tell? Do you drive
>
> I don't go on road trips, that's a peculiarly American thing.

Then EVs are for you. Anyone who _does_ do a road trip is poorly served
by an EV. My mere trip from Montreal to Montebello this summer might
have been a disaster because while I could have easily gotten there,
there were no chargers with which to get back. If something had gone
wrong with my car, there was also no way to get it fixed.

> The
> longest journey I make (rarely) is about 350km of driving, most current EVs
> can easily do that on a charge. I wouldn't want to drive more than that
> in a day and then only for one day but if I was going to I'd be planning
> rest stops at places with chargers thus recharging self and car at the same
> time.

Which is what other people do too. The problem is that other people make
such plans too. Not only do you have to wait for them to be done with
their 30-minute charge to 80%, you have to wait after the person who is
waiting after them. I wonder how this is more convenient than stopping
at _any_ gas station and filling up in the time it takes for your wife
to get in the station and get everyone a chocolate bar.

>> as many kilometres you can, come back home to charge, drive the same
>> kilometres and come back home to charge? Or do you use a charging station?
>
> Obviously when away from home it is usually necessary to depend
> on the charging network (unless you're staying somewhere with a charger or
> can use a "granny cable") but "charging station" not so much. I see
> chargers in supermarket, shopping centre, hotel and municipal car parks as
> well as motorway service stations. I rarely see all of the chargers in use
> anywhere.

Because not everyone has an EV yet. Once everyone is forced to have an
EV, not only will those charges all get used, but your grid is going to
go down repeatedly because not enough electricity will be produced for
people's computers, video games, televisions, laptops and electric
vehicles. In Quebec, where electricity production is not supposed to be
an issue as a result of the many strong rivers allowing for
hydroelectric production, they're already planning on raising prices 3%
every year because of the increased demand. They already know that they
need to build a few more plants for what will come but the Aboriginals
don't want to sacrifice the rivers they fish in to allow us all to have
more power.

With that in mind, what would happen if all people had EVs but there
wasn't enough electricity to go around? You'd be stuck at home, wouldn't
you?

> The thing is that long journets are the exception not the norm,
> most of the time most cars travel less than 100 miles per day which means
> that overnight charging easily keeps them full and even quite small
> batteries suffice. A great many people were happy with the original Nissan
> Leaf with its 24kWh battery and 120km range (on a good day) - with an EV
> that limited I'd hire a car for long journeys and still come out way ahead
> on driving costs - 2c/km instead of 10c/km in fuel costs and much cheaper
> services (there's usually nothing to do but check everything in an EV
> service).
>
> EVs have only two serious downsides - they're expensive to buy and
> they depreciate quickly at first because the new models are always much
> better every year. These are good reasons not to buy a *new* EV, second
> hand ones are getting interesting.

Hippies tend to forget that lithium batteries are not only in EVs but
laptops and cell phones as well. How long does the battery in your
laptop last before you need to replace it if you charge it all the way
to 100%? What about your cell phone? If they offer you a long warranty
on the battery when you buy the vehicle new, that's fantastic. I would
worry for whoever bought a car used and no longer has a warranty.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king
Progressives are brain-damaged demonic groomers

On 2024-08-03 6:28 a.m., D wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> You mean cars that run on batteries whose production leaves a massive
>> carbon footprint
>> <https://www.industryweek.com/technology-and-iiot/article/22026518/lithium-batteries-dirty-secret-manufacturing-them-leaves-massive-carbon-footprint>, which are only recycled at a rate of 1% <https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/04/lithium-costs-a-lot-of-money-so-why-arent-we-recycling-lithium-batteries/>, which spontaneous combust "rarely" <https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lithium-ion-battery-fires-electric-cars-bikes-scooters-firefighters/> and which are 79% less reliable than gas cars <https://www.consumerreports.org/media-room/press-releases/2023/11/electric-vehicles-are-improving-but-charging-and-battery-issues-persist-in-consumer-reports-2023-annual-auto-reliability-survey/?msockid=287d4f79ae8b60c3236c5bb1afb0613d>.
>>
>> Once again, you are a ridiculous cretin.
>>
>
> Sorry Bobby, I have analyzed the thread and it does in fact seem like
> you are a ridiculous cretin. CrudeSausage is the clear winner here.

Truth is the clear winner, not me.

When I was buying my first car in 2004 (late bloomer, I had a train
station nearby that always brought me straight to university and work),
I actually wanted a Prius. I had no interest in paying for gas because,
at the time, I didn't want to enrich Arabs. That's when I started doing
a lot of research on hybrid and electric cars and started realizing the
pitfalls of having one.

A lot of people love their electric cars, but a lot of people love their
unreliable Jeeps too. I remember reading one article where a guy's Tesla
spontaneously combusted and when asked, he still said "I'd buy another
one." It's no different than talking to a guy whose Wrangler just cost
him $10,000 in repairs. Another example is Mac users. In the 90s, they
wanted a Mac because it made them feel like they were unique or
different. As time progressed, the machines all started looking alike
and forcing them into a walled garden where there was no difference
between them (a skinny purple-haired Communist in a coffee shop) and the
tranny they wanted to get sodomized by (a fat green-haired Communist
sitting at the corner of the coffee shop), but they all continued to
feel "different." They would continue to buy a Mac for that feeling
they've deluded themselves into.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king
Progressives are brain-damaged demonic groomers

On 2024-08-03 6:36 a.m., D wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> On 2024-08-02 1:50 p.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:57:36 -0400
>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Power lines aren't the problem, you ridiculous cretin. Power
>>>> _production_ is the problem. There is no shortage of videos of electric
>>>> cars owners lined up to the few charging stations that work because not
>>>> only is there not enough electricity being produced there (because we
>>>> had to close coal factories after all), the stations themselves
>>>> cease to
>>>> work and nobody is ever around to fix them.
>>>
>>>     I'm trying to keep out of this but Oh boy that is priceless
>>> garbage! Most EV owners charge at home overnight taking advantage of the
>>> times when the grid is underutiliosed and electricity is cheap.
>>
>> And what do you do when you're on a road trip, pray tell? Do you drive
>> as many kilometres you can, come back home to charge, drive the same
>> kilometres and come back home to charge? Or do you use a charging
>> station?
>>
>
> Let's also add that it is very entitled to assume that everyone just
> have a house so they can charge overnight. Many people in the world live
> in apartments, which makes this impossible.

Great point. The time when housing was still affordable has passed. Here
in Quebec, a person coming out university and landing a job with a
starter salary might have been able to afford a house in some distant
suburb a few years ago, but even those distant homes now have
unreasonable prices. It wouldn't be a problem if our government wasn't
trying to convince us that there is a labour shortage (there isn't) and
that we need a ton of immigrants (legal or illegal) to solve it.
Instead, we have lots of useless people coming in who need to live
somewhere, the government expects them to help build homes but they are
wholly incapable of even hitting a nail into a plank of wood. Even if
they were capable of doing something other than sticking their hand out
for money, stabbing or raping people, the construction companies which
would have been willing to build these homes aren't willing to do it
with the restrictive costs of materials today. If they build, it will be
homes for the rich where they can make a profit, but the government
needs homes for the wretched where there is no money to be made. The
result is that more parasites come in looking for a handout, they get
money from the taxpayer merely for existing, and they band together with
other cockroaches to buy whatever shithole they can in whatever distant
municipality that will have them. They'll put twenty families into a
small home if they have to as long as they can stay and prevent a
_working_ couple from getting that modest home.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king
Progressives are brain-damaged demonic groomers

On 2024-08-03 6:40 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/08/2024 08:11, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:49:30 -0400
>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-08-02 1:50 p.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:57:36 -0400
>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Power lines aren't the problem, you ridiculous cretin. Power
>>>>> _production_ is the problem. There is no shortage of videos of
>>>>> electric
>>>>> cars owners lined up to the few charging stations that work because
>>>>> not
>>>>> only is there not enough electricity being produced there (because we
>>>>> had to close coal factories after all), the stations themselves cease
>>>>> to work and nobody is ever around to fix them.
>>>>
>>>>     I'm trying to keep out of this but Oh boy that is priceless
>>>> garbage! Most EV owners charge at home overnight taking advantage of
>>>> the
>>>> times when the grid is underutilised and electricity is cheap.
>>>
>>> And what do you do when you're on a road trip, pray tell? Do you drive
>>
>>     I don't go on road trips, that's a peculiarly American thing. The
>> longest journey I make (rarely) is about 350km of driving, most
>> current EVs
>> can easily do that on a charge. I wouldn't want to drive more than that
>> in a day and then only for one day but if I was going to I'd be planning
>> rest stops at places with chargers thus recharging self and car at the
>> same
>> time.
>>
>>> as many kilometres you can, come back home to charge, drive the same
>>> kilometres and come back home to charge? Or do you use a charging
>>> station?
>>
>>     Obviously when away from home it is usually necessary to depend
>> on the charging network (unless you're staying somewhere with a
>> charger or
>> can use a "granny cable") but "charging station" not so much. I see
>> chargers in supermarket, shopping centre, hotel and municipal car
>> parks as
>> well as motorway service stations. I rarely see all of the chargers in
>> use
>> anywhere.
>>
>>     The thing is that long journets are the exception not the norm,
>> most of the time most cars travel less than 100 miles per day which means
>> that overnight charging easily keeps them full and even quite small
>> batteries suffice. A great many people were happy with the original
>> Nissan
>> Leaf with its 24kWh battery and 120km range (on a good day) - with an EV
>> that limited I'd hire a car for long journeys and still come out way
>> ahead
>> on driving costs - 2c/km instead of 10c/km in fuel costs and much cheaper
>> services (there's usually nothing to do but check everything in an EV
>> service).
>>
>>     EVs have only two serious downsides - they're expensive to buy and
>> they depreciate quickly at first because the new models are always much
>> better every year. These are good reasons not to buy a *new* EV, second
>> hand ones are getting interesting.
>>
> Evs have no upsides at all. Not really.
> Even fuel cost will be forced to rise on account of them not paying fuel
> duty
>
> The answer is in the sales figures of tthe major EV manufacturers.
> People are stinging away on droves.

The local news just announced that our rates are going to increase 3%
every year to make up for demand. The 3% seems low until you realize
that is the maximum legal amount they can charge since our production is
owned by the state. If they could raise prices by 10 or 20%, they would.

It's just a matter of time before charging your EV will cost more than
gassing your car. To hippies, this won't matter because they will still
be "saving the planet" even though they never consider where that
battery goes after it is depleted (it's never recycled), where the CAR
goes after it is obsolete (its parts are never recycled because doing so
is lethal), and how much they polluted the environment simply building
the car in the first place.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king
Progressives are brain-damaged demonic groomers

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:32:56 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> The reason we havent got 'batteries' is because although eco-hippies can
> dream about them its all cat belling. We dont know how to build grid
> scale energy storage

Building grid scale storage is a fast growing business - there are
three distinct types of batteries being sold and installed as fast as they
can be made. Big lithium batteries - mostly used for short term storage aka
grid stabilisation but they also make their owners good money working the
spot energy market. Iron and Vanadium redux flow batteries - for longer
term energy storage - typical small installation is four 40 foot
containers, large installations are usually measured in acres.

This has only been going on for a decade or so.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:19:43 -0400
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

> Hippies tend to forget that lithium batteries are not only in EVs but

I haven't seen a hippy in decades.

> laptops and cell phones as well. How long does the battery in your
> laptop last before you need to replace it if you charge it all the way
> to 100%? What about your cell phone? If they offer you a long warranty

Vehicle batteries and laptop/cellphone batteries are made to
different standards - specifically vehicle batteries are optimised for fast
charging. They still last a lot longer if they don't get too many fast
charges.

Experience with the oldest EVs around is that the batteries last
longer than was originally expected and the batteries don't die they just
take steadily less charge until they don't hold enough to be useful.

All that being said for all practical purposes an EV *is* the
battery and when it dies the EV is scrap. The current crop of 400-500km
range EVs can take a lot of battery degredation before they reach the level
of an original Leaf (which sold very well).

> on the battery when you buy the vehicle new, that's fantastic. I would
> worry for whoever bought a car used and no longer has a warranty.

The manufacturers warranty is transferable - at least here.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

186282@ud0s4.net wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 8/2/24 7:41 AM, D wrote:
>>
>> Yes... the more crazy the linux world is becoming, the more I am leaning
>> towards OpenBSD. I wouldn't be surprised if I actually did base my
>> company servers on openbsd in the end. It seems robust, small and well
>> thought out.
>
> For "serious" servers - this is my current rec.
>
> Linux is, or can be, great but it's in too-rapid
> flux at the moment - with eye-candy and such
> becoming the major priorities.
>
> Oh, and Linus isn't young anymore. He has been
> the glue holding the system kernel intact and
> consistent. Before the last of the good Linux
> mags disappeared there were columns from those
> in his close orbit relating combat over many
> 'improvements' that would basically trash a
> lot of what is, corrupt the logic of the system.
>
> Once Linus exits .....

https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/torvalds-says-no-need-to-name-successor-as-that-will-happen-on-its-own.html

I don't think I'll ever be in the situation where I need to really "name" a
successor – it will be fairly clear who it is. Not because this is some
democracy and people would vote on it and there's a clear winner, but
because these things really happen on their own: a "successor" isn't
somebody who gets anointed as such, they end up just doing the work and
making themselves one that way. There's always been a few people around who
are clearly just people who get relied on a lot. These are people who have
been around for years, often decades, and people know them and know how
they work and trust them.
<laharsnip>

--
Your present plans will be successful.

The Natural Philosopher wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 03/08/2024 07:44, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>> A longstanding goodness of Linux was its relative
>>   simplicity - straight-up code and structure for
>>   common needs. This seems to be disappearing in
>>   favor of trying to become Winders.
>
> If you are happy to have no interface to it beyond a terminal it is
> remarkably simple.
> Its the eye candy that takes the space

Of course, once can configure one's Linux system at many many levels.

No need to accept whatever your distro forcefeeds you.

--
They spell it "da Vinci" and pronounce it "da Vinchy". Foreigners
always spell better than they pronounce.
-- Mark Twain

The Natural Philosopher wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 02/08/2024 15:51, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>> On 8/1/24 18:48, geodandw wrote:
>
>>> What makes you think there is a creator?
>>
>>     The universe and its subte connection at the level of
>> sub-nuclear particles which happen to play out in the chemistry
>> of everything including life and consciousness.
>
> You cannot prove that to be true, and in fact esoteric religion claims
> otherwise.

Already well proven, good sir.

It's physics all the way down.

Preserve your software. The rest is meat. (Kudos to Rudy Rucker, the
mathematical fucker.)

--
Don't relax! It's only your tension that's holding you together.