GreyEyedGhost @ GreyEyedGhost @lemmy.ca

Posts

2

Comments

2,336

Joined

3 yr. ago

There are reasonable limits. Let's say his car takes 30 minutes. Is 31 minutes total connection time acceptable? I think everyone would say yes. How about 35 minutes? 45? An hour?

Where people draw the line is going to vary. I agree with the premise that you shouldn't have to wait by your car to charge, whether it's 30 minutes or 2 hours. That is wasted time, and drastically reduces the attraction of having an EV. For myself, having to wait an extra 15 minutes isn't too bad, and extra half hour or more is probably too much. I think context also really matters. If I'm parking at a station in a garage where most of the users are there for work, I expect to be there for at least 2 hours, possibly 4 (and would pick a charger I could use most of the time). At a mall, where people are in and out, if I was going to be there much more than 30 minutes I would probably plan to be back at my car to move it when it was charged. Especially since most of the chargers I've seen bill based on connection time and not electricity used.

And yet, I can use satellites to communicate on the other side of the world. I have a suspicion the same system would work for this.

The two biggest problems with observatories on the far side of the moon are being limited to only half of space (the same as planetary observatories) and the cost to build it. You can mitigate the first by having observatories on opposite edges of the far side, but that also costs twice as much as building one.

And simply due to physics, those will be the exception and not the rule, and so not enough to cause Kessler Syndrome.

And many of those activities include consumption. If you're doing more than casual hiking, you probably aren't using second-hand shoes from the thrift store.

While all of thos could be true, downloading on your PC should be possible to queue multiple games, and doesn't require you to leave your steam deck turned on. Go for that nostalgic overnight download vibe.

There is a hydrogen fusion reaction that releases beta particles, i.e., electrons. This could be used to produce electricity directly without boiling water, but I think the heat output would be such that you could also boil water for more electricity.

That's a terrible headline - it only makes sense if you understand the context. It's an interesting article, and has valid criticisms of the government.

I honestly agree, and said as much shortly after the invasion of Ukraine. Based on the world's assessment, they should have just steamrolled them, and didn't. I also said it would behoove the world powers to reassess their nuclear capability and got a lot of downvotes. The facts as they stand now, though, is the NK can't get a nuke to American territory, not even Alaska (let's not talk about Guam and Samoa, even America barely acknowledges they're part of America). Russia, on the other hand, might be able to, and we don't know for sure they can't. All they need is one good sub with working missiles. None of this really matters for Europe, and even 10% of their stockpile working would be devastating for the world, or at least the people living on it. I'd like to think that Putin put more effort into maintaining their status as a nuclear world power, but I would have thought the same of being a military world power, too.

It asks for the most recent bread purchase. Technically, it doesnt even have to be from the Loblaws family, although I don't know if putting anything else would disqualify you. It also doesn't say prior to 2022, so what you bought in the last week would also be correct. That makes it easier to answer, I suppose.

Yes, those things can be done, and they're good ideas. One key difference between the U.S. and North Korea thing is that Russia can, or at least is believed to be able to, use a nuclear response anywhere in the world. North Korea couldn't threaten the U.S. with nuclear reprisal. But, yes, removing the entrenched and uncompromising leader is the first step, and that is much harder against a nuclear power.

There is also Veronica Explains. One more reason to get off Lemmy and onto PieFed.

I would say about the same number of people are offended by profanity in public as they are religious acts in public. Moreover, I would estimate the number who are offended by sex acts in public is much higher than either of these. So, for the sake of other people's sensibilities, shall we ban public profanity?

Not having the expectations doesn't mean you don't have the ability. Not that that will stop things from being shitty when you grow up, intelligent or not.

Edit: missed the "still" part. Pretty spot on.

Well, it was also proven that the Shuttle was a generally unsafe design. That seems like a good reason to unilaterally decommission anything.

Of course, none of that is possible against a nuclear power, because it first relies on unconditional surrender. I also don't think any leaders in the world have to political will to do that, either.

I don't hate them because they're women, I hate them for what they eat! Which they do because they're female. 🤔

This article gives some information on why some have abandoned hope for Firefox and Mozilla. AI focus, changing its stance on selling user data, and the overall loss of focus. It's still better than most, IMO, but some of its forks better represent those who feel that way.

I'd say harming mosquitoes (females only, that feed on blood) is better than vegan!

Sorry to break it to you, but you might want to start looking at Firefox forks.