CrudeSausage wrote:

>> Those who think that we can "go electric", any time soon, are GD
>> *idiots*.
>
>Every one of us has had a moment where we woke up late AND happen to be
>low on gas to get to work. In such a situation, stopping at a gas
>station for a five-minute fill-up to then make it to work is still a
>reality; imagine doing that with an electric car after you find out that
>you're low and that there was a power outage overnight.

And what happens if, say, a hurricane is approching, and they advise
people to evacuate the city?

All the the public chargers would get immedately overwhelmed, leaving
*everyone* stranded.

On 2024-08-03 9:43 a.m., chrisv wrote:
> CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> I remember reading one article where a guy's Tesla spontaneously
>> combusted and when asked, he still said "I'd buy another one.
>
> It must not have caught fire in his garage and burned his house down.

That's probably why he wants to buy another one. Perhaps the next one
will be the jackpot car that finally kills his family and burns all of
their belongings down.

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

On 2024-08-03 11:45 a.m., chrisv wrote:
> CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>>> Those who think that we can "go electric", any time soon, are GD
>>> *idiots*.
>>
>> Every one of us has had a moment where we woke up late AND happen to be
>> low on gas to get to work. In such a situation, stopping at a gas
>> station for a five-minute fill-up to then make it to work is still a
>> reality; imagine doing that with an electric car after you find out that
>> you're low and that there was a power outage overnight.
>
> And what happens if, say, a hurricane is approching, and they advise
> people to evacuate the city?
>
> All the the public chargers would get immedately overwhelmed, leaving
> *everyone* stranded.

And the people lining up to charge at those stations would create
pockets of traffic which would block those whose cars are charged from
getting anywhere.

What most people don't seem to realize is that becoming the owner of an
electric vehicle is no different than becoming a welfare recipient. The
same way you rely on the government to give you taxpayer money every
month to pay your bills, you rely on the government to produce the
electricity that allows you to move from place to place. With a
gas-powered car, I can buy from Esso, Shell, Petro-Canada, Ultramar or
some tiny family gas station to fuel up my car. If I have a diesel
vehicle and there is some sort of oil crisis, I can produce fuel from
vegetable oil or even a mix of alcohol to get around. Other than
connecting to a charger which requires electricity that is produced by
the state, what choice do I have?

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

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 2024-08-03 11:45 a.m., chrisv wrote:
>> CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>>> Those who think that we can "go electric", any time soon, are GD
>>>> *idiots*.
>>>
>>> Every one of us has had a moment where we woke up late AND happen to be
>>> low on gas to get to work. In such a situation, stopping at a gas
>>> station for a five-minute fill-up to then make it to work is still a
>>> reality; imagine doing that with an electric car after you find out that
>>> you're low and that there was a power outage overnight.
>>
>> And what happens if, say, a hurricane is approching, and they advise
>> people to evacuate the city?
>>
>> All the the public chargers would get immedately overwhelmed, leaving
>> *everyone* stranded.

And after the storm, the power interruption means the gas stations can’t
pump.
BTDT.

> And the people lining up to charge at those stations would create
> pockets of traffic which would block those whose cars are charged from
> getting anywhere.
>
> What most people don't seem to realize is that becoming the owner of an
> electric vehicle is no different than becoming a welfare recipient. The
> same way you rely on the government to give you taxpayer money every
> month to pay your bills, you rely on the government to produce the
> electricity that allows you to move from place to place.

Utility companies in the US are privately owned.

> With a
> gas-powered car, I can buy from Esso, Shell, Petro-Canada, Ultramar or
> some tiny family gas station to fuel up my car. If I have a diesel
> vehicle and there is some sort of oil crisis, I can produce fuel from
> vegetable oil or even a mix of alcohol to get around.

But your old QX60 isn’t a diesel…

> Other than
> connecting to a charger which requires electricity that is produced by
> the state, what choice do I have?

Besides installing your own solar panels on your roof & having it be 100%
off-grid capable?

A colleague made up this setup before CoVid .. he’s not only clobbered his
electric bill, but he’s got extra panels for extra capacity, so he’s been
basically been charging his 3 from it too, so he’s been doing all of his
driving now for essentially free.

-hh

On 8/3/24 04:54, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> 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.

Really? Where do you live? Of course in San Francisco we see few
survivors of the 60s and 70s but around the nation there are people
who emigrated for lower rent and more chances to make money. One large
group with quasi-religious overtones went to the South-East and I think
they went under the title of the Farm.

>
>> 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

As Hippy approximation I never forget that batteries are all over the
place like it or not. My digital thermometer had to have its
AAA set replace recently. My battery opparated sphigomomanometer needs
it AA replaced but I have lost the Knack of getting them in.
On my laptop Dell 7450 the original battery was damaged and I bought two
replacements one of which worked. So I do not forget ever about
batteries and used to have my 12 volt charger for my late model Motorcycle.

>
> 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).

Batteries are expensive but are in most cases replaceable.
>
>> 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.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:18:56 +0100, -hh wrote:

> A colleague made up this setup before CoVid .. he’s not only clobbered
> his electric bill, but he’s got extra panels for extra capacity, so he’s
> been basically been charging his 3 from it too, so he’s been doing all
> of his driving now for essentially free.

How much did the panels, mounts, charge controllers, storage batteries,
and AC converters cost? TANSTAAFL. There is the recurring costs of the
batteries too. Even golf cart batteries don't last forever.

On 8/3/24 06:36, chrisv wrote:
> CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> 80% if they are following "charger etiquette". There will be those
> who want to stay on an extra hour so that they can get "topped up".
> "Charge rage" has already been coined to describe the conflicts that
> occur.
>
> I cannot imagine having to wait in a queue for *hours* to get a
> charge. Which *will* happen, and a *lot*. Anyone who doesn't think
> so is *stupid*.
>
>> 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.
>
> And the gas station actually works reliably. It's not broken down, or
> locked-up, or the hose cut off for its copper.
>
> Those who think that we can "go electric", any time soon, are GD
> *idiots*.
>

Not in urban or suburbam California are you? Soon needs to be defined
as by a relatively early date no more gasoline burners will
be sold in the State.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On 8/3/24 08:45, chrisv wrote:
> CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>>> Those who think that we can "go electric", any time soon, are GD
>>> *idiots*.
>>
>> Every one of us has had a moment where we woke up late AND happen to be
>> low on gas to get to work. In such a situation, stopping at a gas
>> station for a five-minute fill-up to then make it to work is still a
>> reality; imagine doing that with an electric car after you find out that
>> you're low and that there was a power outage overnight.
>
> And what happens if, say, a hurricane is approching, and they advise
> people to evacuate the city?
>
> All the the public chargers would get immedately overwhelmed, leaving
> *everyone* stranded.
>
"Get on a bus Gus."
"Get on a train Jane"
"Mount up on Shank's Mare and walk away Jack."

Some electric cars will be fully charged overnight at home and
some will have nearly full charges and you were not at gas stations
in the 1970s when it was every other day according to license plate
numbers with lines quite long because whether you are gassing up
or charging up it all takes time.
Of course when rough times come along the tough tighten up
and stick it out but California disasters are forest fires and
earthquakes and if you watch Video you will see lines of care evacuating
ahead of the fires but in quakes if you are not crushed beneath week
masonry you stick it out with your supplies until services return.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On 8/3/24 13:18, -hh wrote:
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 2024-08-03 11:45 a.m., chrisv wrote:
>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Those who think that we can "go electric", any time soon, are GD
>>>>> *idiots*.
>>>>
>>>> Every one of us has had a moment where we woke up late AND happen to be
>>>> low on gas to get to work. In such a situation, stopping at a gas
>>>> station for a five-minute fill-up to then make it to work is still a
>>>> reality; imagine doing that with an electric car after you find out that
>>>> you're low and that there was a power outage overnight.
>>>
>>> And what happens if, say, a hurricane is approching, and they advise
>>> people to evacuate the city?
>>>
>>> All the the public chargers would get immedately overwhelmed, leaving
>>> *everyone* stranded.
>
> And after the storm, the power interruption means the gas stations can’t
> pump.
> BTDT.
>
>> And the people lining up to charge at those stations would create
>> pockets of traffic which would block those whose cars are charged from
>> getting anywhere.
>>
>> What most people don't seem to realize is that becoming the owner of an
>> electric vehicle is no different than becoming a welfare recipient. The
>> same way you rely on the government to give you taxpayer money every
>> month to pay your bills, you rely on the government to produce the
>> electricity that allows you to move from place to place.
>
> Utility companies in the US are privately owned.

Not all of them but it hard once they are private to return
them to public owership. In Sacramento, California the power
company had its own nuclear reactor. I think they had some problems
with leakage though.

>
>> With a
>> gas-powered car, I can buy from Esso, Shell, Petro-Canada, Ultramar or
>> some tiny family gas station to fuel up my car. If I have a diesel
>> vehicle and there is some sort of oil crisis, I can produce fuel from
>> vegetable oil or even a mix of alcohol to get around.
>
> But your old QX60 isn’t a diesel…
>
>> Other than
>> connecting to a charger which requires electricity that is produced by
>> the state, what choice do I have?

Solar panels on your home with a battery support system and
if the sun should stop shining. It can be dicey for the purely solar
but we have a school district in Pittsburg, Californi with wind turbines
as well and that powers their smaller fleet of electical school buses.
Much of the power used in Urban and Suburban Californi comes from the
wind and a good deal of solar but we are on track to get fossil fuels
out of the electrical generation mix. We beside solar panels have
solar-powered steam generation plants. The boiler is the focus of
many movable mirrors. We also use water base power storage pumping it
uphill during high output times and then in lower solar output times
letting the water flow thru the turbines.

> Besides installing your own solar panels on your roof & having it be 100%
> off-grid capable?
>
> A colleague made up this setup before CoVid .. he’s not only clobbered his
> electric bill, but he’s got extra panels for extra capacity, so he’s been
> basically been charging his 3 from it too, so he’s been doing all of his
> driving now for essentially free.
>
>
> -hh
>
Oh sounds like sweet setup but not for the apartment-dwelling urban
resident. Some of the building in San Francisco were not built with
roofs capable of solar panel support but some are flaunting solar
panels and gardens.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On 8/3/24 06:43, chrisv wrote:
> CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> I remember reading one article where a guy's Tesla spontaneously
>> combusted and when asked, he still said "I'd buy another one.
>
> It must not have caught fire in his garage and burned his house down.
>

Well the accidents I read about with Tesla's catching fire
mostly happen on the highway for some reason. Other batteries as
in cell phones, tablets, electric bikes,etc. are the ones causing
problems and perhaps burning down houses. I haven't heard of a
Tesla wall battery burning any thing down yet.

Often these charging batteries have been badly situated
for charging such as in spaces or in materials that obstruct
the cooling of the battery. Right now I have 2 laptop charging
along with two wireless home phones and so far no problems with
setting fires at all.
bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On 8/3/24 05:17, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> 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.)
>

And if my creator is real it is still of no matter to present
humanity except to direct hymns of praise in that direction from
anywhere at all. We get to be for a very brief time in this universe
and we should be grateful for the chance and the brevity of the
experience. Or course I expect lots of folks to stand the idea on
its head and claim personal god of their choice and religious
experience but it is all in their heads after all. Maybe their
God is in there too.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On 8/3/24 8:08 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
From: "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net>
> 186282@ud0s4.net wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
Organization: vector apex
>> On 8/2/24 7:41 AM, D wrote:
>>>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:37:38 -0400
>>> 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
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
>>> company servers on openbsd in the end. It seems robust, small and well
Thunderbird/78.13.0
>>> thought out.
MIME-Version: 1.0
>>
In-Reply-To: <v8l6kp$3edug$4@dont-email.me>
>> For "serious" servers - this is my current rec.
>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>> Linux is, or can be, great but it's in too-rapid
Content-Language: en-US
>> flux at the moment - with eye-candy and such
>> becoming the major priorities.
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>>
>> Oh, and Linus isn't young anymore. He has been
Message-ID: <UDidneQk_4HOUDP7nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@earthlink.com>
>> the glue holding the system kernel intact and
Lines: 69
>> consistent. Before the last of the good Linux
>> mags disappeared there were columns from those
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
>> in his close orbit relating combat over many
NNTP-Posting-Host: 99.101.150.97
>> 'improvements' that would basically trash a
X-Trace: sv3-LIB9YBly7eVh2xScEmWKPpRlDqyb2/Nw+R09V2u955dMO2eGwYBn7aKaFElZg7Jm1Ff4QqIliEMg1mO!JeX2LGaxeXGy2vK9i++Ct2RuLQfhFZ04/cBg0WXrRZxZrBh+aRFgESUIKy3c6uSIv7tYRewG8/Qr!ep68YHGdgdU5SLV9HDUO
>> lot of what is, corrupt the logic of the system.
>>
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
>> Once Linus exits .....
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
>
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
> https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/torvalds-says-no-need-to-name-successor-as-that-will-happen-on-its-own.html
>
Xref: unconfigured comp.os.linux.advocacy:8539 comp.os.linux.misc:1659 alt.folklore.computers:398
> 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
On 8/3/24 8:08 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> somebody who gets anointed as such, they end up just doing the work and
> 186282@ud0s4.net wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> making themselves one that way. There's always been a few people around who
>
>> On 8/2/24 7:41 AM, D wrote:
> 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
>>> 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
> they work and trust them.
>>> company servers on openbsd in the end. It seems robust, small and well
>
>>> thought out.
>>
> <laharsnip>
>> 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.
The prob is that Linus was the one with "The Vision" - and
>>
has worked hard to keep that from going totally to shreds
>> Oh, and Linus isn't young anymore. He has been
>> the glue holding the system kernel intact and
so Linux doesn't just become a crappy Neo-Winders bowl of
>> consistent. Before the last of the good Linux
>> mags disappeared there were columns from those
spaghetti code.
>> in his close orbit relating combat over many

>> 'improvements' that would basically trash a
>> lot of what is, corrupt the logic of the system.
GUI environs ... well ... they can do those as they please
>>
(though some more under-the-hood consistency would please me)
>> Once Linus exits .....
>
but the kernel - that's the heart and soul.
> 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
In one of the old Linux mags there was a column by some
> successor – it will be fairly clear who it is. Not because this is some
kernel guy named 'Zac'. It was always some enthused twits
> 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
with some neato new trick that would ONLY require trashing
> 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
a lot of what's always been and works well. Linus had the
> are clearly just people who get relied on a lot. These are people who have
gravitas to tell 'em to fuck off ... find some other way
> been around for years, often decades, and people know them and know how
> they work and trust them.
that didn't break the system & utilities. Who else WILL
>
have that wisdom and gravitas ?
> <laharsnip>

I'm beginning to agree with 'D' ... that Linux has become
The prob is that Linus was the one with "The Vision" - and
too much of a 'business', that The Vision has been lost.
has worked hard to keep that from going totally to shreds
so Linux doesn't just become a crappy Neo-Winders bowl of
Soon the Foundation will find a way to just sell it to M$
and that's that.
spaghetti code.

GUI environs ... well ... they can do those as they please
The BSDs may be the last refuge - I think they're mostly
(though some more under-the-hood consistency would please me)
tended by more 'academic' cultured people.
but the kernel - that's the heart and soul.

In one of the old Linux mags there was a column by some
kernel guy named 'Zac'. It was always some enthused twits
And if any young gurus have envisioned some new OS with
with some neato new trick that would ONLY require trashing
much of the Linux goodness/solidity/simplicity - now's the
a lot of what's always been and works well. Linus had the
gravitas to tell 'em to fuck off ... find some other way
time to really get into writing it.
that didn't break the system & utilities. Who else WILL
. have that wisdom and gravitas ?

I'm beginning to agree with 'D' ... that Linux has become
too much of a 'business', that The Vision has been lost.
Soon the Foundation will find a way to just sell it to M$
and that's that.

The BSDs may be the last refuge - I think they're mostly
tended by more 'academic' cultured people.

And if any young gurus have envisioned some new OS with
much of the Linux goodness/solidity/simplicity - now's the
time to really get into writing it.

On 7/29/24 4:45 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2024-07-29, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>>
>>> Never said anything about being able to do EVERYTHING in a terminal.
>>> But you can create high-quality documents just using the terminal.
>>
>> Absolutely: At PPOE generating documents was our job and we did everything
>> with XEDIT and Script. At one point someone demoed a WYSIWYG word
>> processing system, and the editors decided it would take them several times
>> as long.
>
> "But it's so _pretty!_" says the manager who overrides the editors.

Look ... GUI doc editors ARE great ... WYSIWYG and more.
I'm not gonna piss on them. Still like WordPerfect, whomps
the shit out of Word.

The thing is more "crude" systems still DO have their
place. Pure terminal apps still have their place. The
trick is matching the system to the de-facto NEED.

For a 'server' - you're probably not gonna be doing
biz docs on it. THERE a pure terminal is surely the
best, most secure, thing. A minimal, like LXDE, GUI
on top maybe - best if it doesn't auto-start.

But for 'work-stations' - well, in real life they're
probably gonna be Winders for better, or (surely) worse.

This is the reality. Win boxes are cheap and pretty and
lots of "IT" people more or less know the tricks. They
are not likely to go away as the "work-horse" systems
for biz or private use anytime soon DESPITE all the
ongoing debacles. People DO stick to the devils
they know.

Anyway, LibreOffice is probably everyone's best bet
at the moment - Win/Lin or whatever. It'll do nice
stuff and you don't need to become an M$ slave.

On 7/26/24 22:46, Joel wrote:
> "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>> On 7/26/24 8:55 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-26 3:32 a.m., 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>    Gnome SUCKS anyway.
>>>
>>> KDE sucks more though.
>>
>> KDE is much more "usable" ... however at this
>> point it's become insanely fat, drags down the
>> CPU unacceptably and far MORE places where it
>> can go wrong. Seems to want to be Winders.
>>
>> LXDE/XFCE *much* better.
>
>
> Anyone clueful would be running Mint Cinnamon.
>
I have been using the KDE Desktop environment since
I started using Linux on a 2.4 GHz Pentium 4 GB laptop in the
2006 Mandriva. It is versatile enough to provide any
interface the user has previously used. I had been using
the Amiga OS on a 50 MHz 32 MG enhanced Amiga A2000b with
3.4 GB of SCSI disk onboard. With KDE and now KDE Plasma
I have essentially recreated my Amiga OS desktop.
KDE is heavy on disk space but runs lightly
on either of my current machines. one is Dell Latitude 7450
with a 14" display and the Dell Precision 7730 with respectively
a TB of SSD storage and a 17" display and 512 GB SSD.

Now excuse me I have to write a letter to a friend admitting
I was wrong about the place and manner of death of an historical character.

bliss- Dell Precision 7730- PCLOS 2024.07- Linux 6.6.43- Plasma 5.27.11

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:38:55 -0700
Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> On 8/3/24 06:43, chrisv wrote:
> > CrudeSausage wrote:
> >
> >> I remember reading one article where a guy's Tesla spontaneously
> >> combusted and when asked, he still said "I'd buy another one.
> >
> > It must not have caught fire in his garage and burned his house down.
> >
>
> Well the accidents I read about with Tesla's catching fire
> mostly happen on the highway for some reason. Other batteries as

Lithium battery fires are spectacular and *very* hard to put out
but there are enough battery cars on the road for solid statistics,
they're a good deal less likely to catch fire than petrol (gasoline) cars.

No I don't have a cite handy - google it!

--
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 15:30:28 -0700
Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> Oh sounds like sweet setup but not for the apartment-dwelling urban
> resident. Some of the building in San Francisco were not built with
> roofs capable of solar panel support but some are flaunting solar
> panels and gardens.

A common trend in Europe for apartments is to hang some panels
(usually two or four) over the balcony attached to a grid-tie microinverter
that simply plugs in. There are any number of outfits selling balcony solar
kits the cheap ones hang the panels vertically the more expensive have
angled sluminium brackets. Either way it's a dead easy DIY job.

--
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 Sun, 4 Aug 2024 00:14:54 -0700
Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> I have been using the KDE Desktop environment since
> I started using Linux on a 2.4 GHz Pentium 4 GB laptop in the
> 2006 Mandriva. It is versatile enough to provide any
> interface the user has previously used.

I think not - there's no wasy it can imitate my preferred flwm with
it's side mounted title bars, independent X/Y maximise buttons, unlimited
desktops and idiosyncratic menu system. It can't match the MacOS GUI's
approach to multiple monitors and virtual desktops either.

--
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, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> 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.

Ah, you're an agnostic. That makes more sense. Yes, I live in a material
world. No, it is not based on belief, it is based on experience and
empiricism. Yes, I have updated my world view when we went from atoms,
to quarks, that does not mean we do not live in the real world, but in
fact, is another excelletn proof.

>>>> 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.

Nope. I am open to proof. You have not disproven the material world, nor
have you proposed another solution and proven it. I have provided G.E.
Moores proof, I also (although it is not proof, but an indication)
provided a paper that analyzed the beliefs of philosophy ph.d. and
professors, and the majority hold my view.

In Morres excellent essay "A Defence of Common Sense", he argued against idealism and
scepticism toward the external world, on the grounds that they could not
give reasons to accept that their metaphysical premises were more
plausible than the reasons we have for accepting the common sense claims
about our knowledge of the world, which sceptics and idealists must
deny.

>> 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.

Nope, see above.

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

I no longer believe you are a solipsist, although you did sound like
one. Based on your previous message, I now categorize you as agnostic.

>> 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.

I disagree. Based on my experience with hobby philosophers, usually they
are stuck in the past regurgitating the same old puzzles, being
completely unaware of the discussion of modern philosophers. It
therefore becomes very tedious to take them through X hundred years or
thousand years of history of philosophy to show them that "no" they were
not clever having discovered what no one else did, but in fact what they
"discovered" has already been covered and discussed by 100s of people it
not more.

> 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.

There is no metaphysics. There is science, hypothesis, proof and
disproof. I have showed you proof of the external, material world, and
you do not accept it. I can do nothing more. I can only find comfort in
the fact that the majority do accept the proofs, and we continue our
lives in the real world, not bothering with metaphysics which is more or
less dead. Absent grounding in the material world, it will jsut lead to
idle speculation and in some sad cases, it can even grow into religion
such as when quantum physics theories such as the multiple worlds
interpretation starts to take on religious overtones and notes.

>> 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.

No... you made your point. You are agnostic, perhaps some form of
agnostic moinism? Maybe even that is too much of a position.

> 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.

I have read Kant, Schopenhauer and Putnam but I disagree with them.
Based on this calm message from you and the fact that you (and I) on
longer keep calling each other retards, I have now decided that I enjoy
your posts and I will not block you. ;)

I will accept that we are of different opinions and that you have a very
good engineering training, but that we have not convinced each other.
Neither of us is alone in his view.

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> 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.
>

Another interesting question is... _if_ as climate hysterics love to
say, it is so easy to just store all the worlds electricity needs from
solar and wind, in a few batteries, why haven't we done so?

Surely we would no longer bother with nuclear, but just throw a few
batteries here and there and the problem is solved.

Or could it be that it is actually financially and physically impossible
with current technology?

Or is it that climate rationalists like the Philosopher and myself are
somehow engaged in a conspiracy to keep this technology off the market?

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:

> 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.

Can't you let a man troll in peace? ;)

> 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

Last time I did the calculation, electric didn't even come close to the
economy of a gasoline car. Hyrbid was much closer.

I think today (many years later) the I could probably make a financial
case for a hybrid over gasoline, but would have to run the excel
spreadsheet again if I can find it.

> 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

It's marketing and virtue signalling. I find it hilarious when I debate
climate hysterics that they have an iphone worth 1000 USD and I have a
button phone worth 50 USD. In addition, I keep mine until it breaks, while
they somehow find the money to buy a new smart phone every 2-3 years.

Isn't consumption supposed to damage the planet? ;)

Marketing and virtue signalling. Creating a need where there is none.

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:

> 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.
>

Fear not! Let yourselves be inspired by swedens unregulated and
unrestricted immigration! ;) This created many new millionaires among the
socialist party, because the government would pay for the immigrants to
live somewhere, so crafty socialists started immigration housing companies
extracting millions and millions of dollars from the government for
something which should not have happened in the first place.

But this is very common in sweden.

When they privatized schools (which was a wise decision) over night,
plenty of socialist politicians popped up in school company boards getting
nice extra salaries on top of their party salaries, and on top of the
parliament salary (which is corruption and should have landed them in
prison).

When it comes to the housing situation in Stockholm, a new graduate from
univeristy would not be able to afford a small 1 room apartment á 25 m^2
in the city center without parents helping out with the cash needed and
with the security for loans.

I think, if you work hard, that it should be possible to save for a
1 room apartment in about 4-5 years or so if you don't live too freely.

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:

> 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.
>
>

Add to that the fact that the whole in the public budget, when people are
no longer getting taxed by the gas pump, is going to shift to EV charging.

I think the gasoline tax in sweden is 50%. I would expect this to shift
over to electricity once enough people switch, which will hopefully only
happen in 20-30 years or so.

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 03/08/2024 12:43, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> 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.
>>
> And has not made any difference to anything. Only the grid stabilisers work
>
> Stop hand waving and come up with an authoritative source as to how much
> electrical storage the iron and vanadium *redox* (not redux) batteries
> have, and how much is needed for one hour of total grid support in any
> country. In my country _240GWh_ is a minimum for a dark cold windless winter
> night.
>
> And then sell you shares in those companys
>
> "Rongke Power deployed the largest VRFB system to date, a 100 MW / 400 MWh
> system in Dalian, China. There are plans to increase the capacity of this
> plant to 800 MWh.
(many examples cut)
> All pissing in the wind. They are shouting about MWh installations when we
> need GWh
>
> Now bugger off and learn to Do Sums

I have to say, I only see figured and specific examples from the climate
rationalists in this debate. So far I have seen nothing from the climate
hysterics.

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:

> On 2024-08-03 11:45 a.m., chrisv wrote:
>> CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>>> Those who think that we can "go electric", any time soon, are GD
>>>> *idiots*.
>>>
>>> Every one of us has had a moment where we woke up late AND happen to be
>>> low on gas to get to work. In such a situation, stopping at a gas
>>> station for a five-minute fill-up to then make it to work is still a
>>> reality; imagine doing that with an electric car after you find out that
>>> you're low and that there was a power outage overnight.
>>
>> And what happens if, say, a hurricane is approching, and they advise
>> people to evacuate the city?
>>
>> All the the public chargers would get immedately overwhelmed, leaving
>> *everyone* stranded.
>
> And the people lining up to charge at those stations would create pockets of
> traffic which would block those whose cars are charged from getting anywhere.
>
> What most people don't seem to realize is that becoming the owner of an
> electric vehicle is no different than becoming a welfare recipient. The same
> way you rely on the government to give you taxpayer money every month to pay
> your bills, you rely on the government to produce the electricity that allows
> you to move from place to place. With a gas-powered car, I can buy from Esso,
> Shell, Petro-Canada, Ultramar or some tiny family gas station to fuel up my
> car. If I have a diesel vehicle and there is some sort of oil crisis, I can
> produce fuel from vegetable oil or even a mix of alcohol to get around. Other
> than connecting to a charger which requires electricity that is produced by
> the state, what choice do I have?
>

This is an interesting question from a survivalist point of view. Is it
possible to hook up your EV to solar panels? Given the right equipment I'd
say yes. That still leaves the problem of what to do during winter in the
northern hemisphere, so I imagine that wind or your own built hydro might
be necessary there.

But...

Those solutions are all based on components which you cannot manufacture
yourself.

Now... let's look at the other side, producing fuel from vegetable oil or
mix of alcohol. What would be needed in terms of raw materials and in
terms of technology to make that happen?

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

> I'm beginning to agree with 'D' ... that Linux has become
> too much of a 'business', that The Vision has been lost.
> Soon the Foundation will find a way to just sell it to M$
> and that's that.

I would imagine a first step is to limit participation based on
ideological grouns. I could imagine license requirements, more rules
etc, and attempts to bend the foundation to the will of one or two
bigger manufacturers at the expense of the rest.

I think everyone here also remembers disasters such as the linux
foundations goals during corona, as another example of it going to
pieces.

> The BSDs may be the last refuge - I think they're mostly
> tended by more 'academic' cultured people.
>
> And if any young gurus have envisioned some new OS with
> much of the Linux goodness/solidity/simplicity - now's the
> time to really get into writing it.

I often wonder if a new genius will emerge for an OS reboot? Was Linus a
one time thing, or would it be possible for it to happen again?

Lacking that, I think perhaps that the people who do not like the
direction of linux might rally behind one of the BSDs. The problem there
is the HW support, but that could in theory be improved with more money
and more funded developers.