There have been auto-scams before, just not as well funded by a corrupt government ...
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/videos/a31953/the-dale-1970s-three-wheel-gas-saver-scam/
Just hold each others hands, close your eyes and repeat ... I think it can, I think it can ...
Quote from: Baruch on November 20, 2017, 06:44:01 PM
There have been auto-scams before, just not as well funded by a corrupt government ...
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/videos/a31953/the-dale-1970s-three-wheel-gas-saver-scam/
Just hold each others hands, close your eyes and repeat ... I think it can, I think it can ...
I trust no AI cars...
Quote from: Cavebear on November 26, 2017, 05:06:55 AM
I trust no AI cars...
Do you read? It is about electric cars aka golf carts.
Quote from: Baruch on November 26, 2017, 11:43:45 AM
Do you read? It is about electric cars aka golf carts.
Did you read? There is nothing about electric cars in the link provided. It was to be a 3-wheeled motorcycle/car which was to a 2-cylinder gas motor.
And yes, it was a scam that ended up cheating investors out of a lot of money. And while I'm sure I'll regret asking, here goes. So are you implying that Tesla's don't exist?
Quote from: Johan on November 26, 2017, 03:28:49 PM
Did you read? There is nothing about electric cars in the link provided. It was to be a 3-wheeled motorcycle/car which was to a 2-cylinder gas motor.
And yes, it was a scam that ended up cheating investors out of a lot of money. And while I'm sure I'll regret asking, here goes. So are you implying that Tesla's don't exist?
Aircraft carriers exist, but I won't be driving one to work. Bicycles too ... but go ahead and ride one on the freeway to work. Yes, I am implying that electric cars, and to a degree, even hybrids, are messianic control frauds. That is how business is done today ... snake oil with government subsidy.
Not sure why you'd want to drive an aircraft carrier to work unless you work in the middle of the ocean and require lots of air support but whatever. Tesla delivered 73,000 units last year. Since we've agreed that its ok to use completely unrelated an irrelevant comparisons in this discussion how many new aircraft carriers were delivered last year?
I'm still not sure what your complaint is here but that's not surprising since you often speak in such a vague way that only you seem to really understand what you're saying at any given time. No matter though. If you don't like electric vehicles, don't buy one. If you're claiming that electric vehicles don't or won't exist, well you're going to have to do better than your normal oddball vague disregard for the english language if you want to make an actual point that anyone beside yourself can understand.
But on second thought, don't. Just don't. I clicked on the thread because of the title. Had I seen who actually wrote the post, I would've ignored it which is what I should have done in the first place. So forget I made the mistake of taking your bait and have a nice day.
OK ... suppose there is an all electric car? Where does the electricity come from? Mostly from petrochemicals and coal. Renewables won't even keep our houses and apartments lit. Not even with nuclear and hydro added in. Suppose I can find a place to recharge it (one could as a commuter car in a metro, but between metros much less likely). I won't pay much more than $10K for a vehicle, but suppose the base price is $35K. I will never be able to afford one, unless the government gives me a huge subsidy to buy one. Where do government subsidies come from? Taxpayers, but some people think that money grows on trees if you are the government. Mass production will reduce costs a little, but not so much as with computer chips. Can't drive a computer chip to work (except as telework). Too bad my job won't ever be allowed to be telework (military medical).
There are renewable forms of transportation. They are called my legs, and a horse. Both run on solar power indirectly. My problem isn't with technology, it is with magical thinking about costs, about energy density, about how the whole petrochemical transport came about in the first place, which makes it very hard to reproduce with new technology (that energy density aka gas trucks or pipelines distributing fuel to gas stations). And electric power, distributed long distance, is incredibly inefficient.
I know I'm going to regret this but I'm in the baruch vortex now so fuck it.
Quote from: Baruch on November 26, 2017, 11:06:17 PM
Where does the electricity come from? Mostly from petrochemicals and coal. Renewables won't even keep our houses and apartments lit.
They won't? My house has lights and its nice and warm. Are you saying yours isn't? Sucks being you.
QuoteSuppose I can find a place to recharge it (one could as a commuter car in a metro, but between metros much less likely).
I live in rural Michigan. I am not within reasonably daily commuting distance of any major city. There are close to 100 public charging stations within a 50 mile radius of me. Granted, that's still not enough but that network is also growing rapidly.
QuoteI won't pay much more than $10K for a vehicle, but suppose the base price is $35K. I will never be able to afford one, unless the government gives me a huge subsidy to buy one.
If your budget is $10k you're not buying a new car of any type these days. No one ever claimed the advent of electric vehicles would suddenly enable those who can't afford comparable gas vehicles to finally afford a new car.
QuoteThere are renewable forms of transportation. They are called my legs, and a horse. Both run on solar power indirectly. My problem isn't with technology, it is with magical thinking about costs, about energy density, about how the whole petrochemical transport came about in the first place, which makes it very hard to reproduce with new technology (that energy density aka gas trucks or pipelines distributing fuel to gas stations). And electric power, distributed long distance, is incredibly inefficient.
This may come as a shock to you but electric power is distributed nearly everywhere already. And the cost to 'fill the tank' on an electric vehicle is a fraction of the cost to fill a gas tank on a comparable vehicle.
If you can afford an expensive car ... good for you. Won't change the way the average person lives.
If your electricity is cheap in Michigan, maybe thank Niagara falls?
If electricity is cheaper than gasoline ... maybe there is a hidden subsidy you are unaware of? Or you aren't paying enough for your electricity, someone else is paying for it.
Electric car chargers in the Michigan woods? Weird ...
Quote from: Baruch on November 26, 2017, 11:06:17 PMWhere does the electricity come from? Mostly from petrochemicals and coal. Renewables won't even keep our houses and apartments lit.
Oh Really? (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/06/07/uk-sets-new-renewable-energy-record-wind-solar-surge/)
Quote from: Johan on November 27, 2017, 12:41:24 AMThis may come as a shock to you but electric power is distributed nearly everywhere already. And the cost to 'fill the tank' on an electric vehicle is a fraction of the cost to fill a gas tank on a comparable vehicle.
Barauch pulls this crap all the time. Renewables can't work this, too expensive that. Trying to convince more by arguments that sound plausible (superficially plausible, more accurately) than with arguments grounded in reality. I swear, I've posted the eGallon link (https://energy.gov/maps/egallon) at least twice already. Doesn't seem to phase him. It's almost as if he doesn't actually care about the facts of the matter.
Quote from: Hydra009 on November 27, 2017, 06:27:33 PM
Barauch pulls this crap all the time. Renewables can't work this, too expensive that. Trying to convince more by arguments that sound plausible (superficially plausible, more accurately) than with arguments grounded in reality. I swear, I've posted the eGallon link (https://energy.gov/maps/egallon) at least twice already. Doesn't seem to phase him. It's almost as if he doesn't actually care about the facts of the matter.
If I am Elron Musk, I can afford to hire engineers to ride stationary bicycles to provide electricity for my home ;-) Since it is good exercise, they would actually pay me for the privilege ;-) So ... you got a free lunch, miracle technology ... you are Iron Man? You can afford anything, if you are rich. But there is no miracle technology ... physics has no miracles.
So are you paying the "real" price for your electricity or not? Probably not, nobody is paying the real price for fossil fuels for example. If people paid forward for fossil fuels, from the beginning, it would never have been exploited ... we would have been stuck with renewable ... wood waste and cow chips ... same as the Third World.
Some actual numbers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_the_United_States
Currently in 2016, renewable produced 15% of electricity ... but of that only 1/5 is wind. All increase in capacity will come from wind. That is only 3% of total electricity in 2016, but it will increase. Call me back when it is 80% of electricity production. And you are still assuming that you can get a true electricity rate (not jimmied or subsidized) and will have money to pay for it (like that $35K car). As supplies of lithium batteries dwindle (lithium is a rare element) we shall see.
Hybrids are viable now, because they use gasoline, they use electric motors to drive the wheels. So they don't count in this discussion. There may still be a shortage of electrical components, again ... batteries.
Totally renewable technology already existed, and did 200 years ago. Walking and sailing ships. And by 100 years ago, we had practical bicycles. Bicycles didn't change the fundamentals, because you still use your legs. We can have electric bikes to take a load off, but this is a lesser version of the above. You can only go short distances, and you can't carry much load. Without trucks ... food can't get to people.
For what it's worth, I looked at a Tesla over Thanksgiving. I visited a viewing station in Chicago, where people get a chance to sit in a Tesla and talk to representatives. First, it was a beautiful car and gave no hint that aesthetics must take a back seat to technological advancement. It's shape and design competes with and flat outdoes most 2017 cars. Second, it is spacious, but not in a pretentious 1960s Cadillac kind of way, just functionally designed to comfortably carry passengers. Nothing in shape or comfort is compromised. Third, the trunk space is larger than a typical modern car, as the space normally devoted to the gas tank is added to the trunk area.
I don't know about how it drives. This was only a viewing station. The only draw back I could see was the price. The two on display were $85,000, and while the upcoming $35,000 vehicle is encouraging, it's still too much for me to consider when a gas powered vehicle is half the price. But then a 42inch flat screen TV used to cost $2,000, so unless Teslas become as in demand as iPhones, the price should eventually reflect the price of labor and materials. And of course, the other car manufacturers will have to go electric or die.
Concerns about recharging stations and other negatives will fall away. Filling station owners need to think about the future, because their days are numbered if they think gas power will still be popular 20 years from now.
Quote from: SGOS on November 28, 2017, 08:42:08 AMThe only draw back I could see was the price. The two on display were $85,000, and while the upcoming $35,000 vehicle is encouraging, it's still too much for me to consider when a gas powered vehicle is half the price. But then a 42inch flat screen TV used to cost $2,000, so unless Teslas become as in demand as iPhones, the price should eventually reflect the price of labor and materials. And of course, the other car manufacturers will have to go electric or die.
Yeah, the price is the main thing holding back mass adoption. As always, new technology has a steep initial cost. But as the price comes down to roughly on par with gasoline vehicles, they'll quickly take over the market. Given the option, who'd want a car with higher fuel costs and maintenance costs?
Quote from: Hydra009 on November 28, 2017, 12:50:21 PM
Yeah, the price is the main thing holding back mass adoption. As always, new technology has a steep initial cost. But as the price comes down to roughly on par with gasoline vehicles, they'll quickly take over the market. Given the option, who'd want a car with higher fuel costs and maintenance costs?
Also, I don't see a problem with lack of charging stations. It seems like it would be much easier to create a charging station than a fueling station, which requires buried tanks, pumps, and also requires constant maintenance from fuel trucks. It seems like fueling stations could be adapted to charging... maybe. The representative also talked about plans for restaurants, where people could eat a lunch while the car undergoes a 30 minute recharge, which as I recall, results in an 80% charge, while an overnight charge produces 100%. After a 300 mile drive, most people would enjoy a place to eat anyway, and I picture a lot of charging stations so people aren't waiting for their turn at the pump, so the layout of the fuel stops may be different from the traditional pump arrangement. It doesn't sound like a big compromise where major lifestyle and driving adjustments will be required, however. It will be different, but not an unreasonable adjustment.
Quote from: SGOS on November 28, 2017, 02:05:24 PMAlso, I don't see a problem with lack of charging stations.
Yeah, that's no problem. I mean, you can do it at home. That's the ultimate convenience right there. But assuming you're on a long trip and can't make it home before you have to recharge, there are already a lot of charging stations. About a dozen in my neck of the woods. And this before mass adoption when they are only a small fraction of the vehicles on the road. As demand for charging stations increases, you'd better believe a lot more of them will spring up. And yes, gas stations can easily host them. Some already do.
Long story short, the idea that electric car owners are likely to be stranded is nonsense.
In fact, as the country becomes less and less dependent on gasoline, the opposite might be more likely. Though by that time, most everyone will have already made the switch. It'll be like the analog-digital TV switchover. Everyone gets fair warning well in advance, but some people are surprised anyway.
Quote from: SGOS on November 28, 2017, 02:05:24 PM
Also, I don't see a problem with lack of charging stations. It seems like it would be much easier to create a charging station than a fueling station, which requires buried tanks, pumps, and also requires constant maintenance from fuel trucks. It seems like fueling stations could be adapted to charging... maybe. The representative also talked about plans for restaurants, where people could eat a lunch while the car undergoes a 30 minute recharge, which as I recall, results in an 80% charge, while an overnight charge produces 100%. After a 300 mile drive, most people would enjoy a place to eat anyway, and I picture a lot of charging stations so people aren't waiting for their turn at the pump, so the layout of the fuel stops may be different from the traditional pump arrangement. It doesn't sound like a big compromise where major lifestyle and driving adjustments will be required, however. It will be different, but not an unreasonable adjustment.
Lets see, recharge stations .. need to replace most gas stations ... is that 100,000 ... takes about $100K each, so that is about $10B ... not much money, not counting the actual electricity. Now get someone to build it. But it takes me 10 minutes to gas up at a gas station. Takes overnight at a recharge station. Oops. Apples vs Oranges comparison strikes again. Golf carts make sense at golf courses. You don't drive them home, and you can let them recharge overnight. So we have super golf carts, driven by the usual suspects (very rich golf players who are not in a hurry) ... but if that is all the people you have after nuclear war, then we are good to go. Perhaps as a recharge station caddy you can find a job at the local pro shop ;-) As for keeping a recharge station at home ... you are limited in distance, since a recharge at a distant location (in a daisy chain of recharging) takes too long to cross a long distance.
Quote from: Hydra009 on November 28, 2017, 02:35:18 PM
Yeah, that's no problem. I mean, you can do it at home. That's the ultimate convenience right there. But assuming you're on a long trip and can't make it home before you have to recharge, there are already a lot of charging stations. About a dozen in my neck of the woods. And this before mass adoption when they are only a small fraction of the vehicles on the road. As demand for charging stations increases, you'd better believe a lot more of them will spring up. And yes, gas stations can easily host them. Some already do.
Long story short, the idea that electric car owners are likely to be stranded is nonsense.
In fact, as the country becomes less and less dependent on gasoline, the opposite might be more likely. Though by that time, most everyone will have already made the switch. It'll be like the analog-digital TV switchover. Everyone gets fair warning well in advance, but some people are surprised anyway.
Actually the plan in Britain (and by analogy, the US) is to mandate it. If you can't do it by XXXX date, you will just have to walk. Post-modern communism. More like the forced move from VHS, to DVD to Streaming. I will never Stream ... I have books and watch YouTube. If the Internet rentier scam gets too expensive, then I will drop that. I have books. If the R-D dictatorship bans bucks, I will go Fahrenheit 454 on them. The constant attraction of dystopia ... is proof the human race, shouldn't survive.
Quote from: Baruch on November 28, 2017, 08:16:15 PM
Lets see, recharge stations .. need to replace most gas stations ... is that 100,000 ... takes about $100K each, so that is about $10B ... not much money, not counting the actual electricity. Now get someone to build it. But it takes me 10 minutes to gas up at a gas station. Takes overnight at a recharge station. Oops. Apples vs Oranges comparison strikes again. Golf carts make sense at golf courses. You don't drive them home, and you can let them recharge overnight. So we have super golf carts, driven by the usual suspects (very rich golf players who are not in a hurry) ... but if that is all the people you have after nuclear war, then we are good to go. Perhaps as a recharge station caddy you can find a job at the local pro shop ;-) As for keeping a recharge station at home ... you are limited in distance, since a recharge at a distant location (in a daisy chain of recharging) takes too long to cross a long distance.
The cost of the stations are business investments. They won't be built unless they can generate a profit, and they will depending on demand, depreciation write offs, and other considerations. I wouldn't worry about the owners of the stations. They will build them if they can make a profit. Construction stimulates the economy too, and building construction is one of the first indicators of a recovery. It's not a negative to build things. It's a good thing, and it creates jobs for coal miners and other out of work laborers.
It takes 30 minutes to charge at a station. I noticed you compared your 10 minute petroleum stop to the overnight charge which is done at home or a motel while you are sleeping and isn't really a time issue, and the difference between an overnight charge and a station charge only results in 70 extra miles with current battery technology.
So your charging time comparisons actually are apples to oranges, as is your comparison of golf carts to Teslas and Volts. But I know you are just doing your philosopher thing of questioning the change, and that's fine. But this thing is going to happen, with or without your apples, oranges, and cautionary warnings. Undoubtedly, there will be wrinkles along the way. Change usually involves wrinkles. And conservatives will want to stop it, but they won't have a clue how to do that, although the best minds in the oil industry are probably working on it as we speak.
We have been talking about lowering our dependence on fossil fuels and doing something about global warming for 30 years, and this should be right up your alley. It's a major step that goes beyond the political gamesmanship of our two party system, and it's not even happening because the government is involved, which I doubt it ever will be at a practical level. It is free enterprise doing it all by itself, although the government will want to take credit, I suppose.
Baruch, I think you have finally went so far off in to nonsense that you confused yourself.
Quote from: SGOS on November 29, 2017, 01:10:02 AM
The cost of the stations are business investments. They won't be built unless they can generate a profit, and they will depending on demand, depreciation write offs, and other considerations. I wouldn't worry about the owners of the stations. They will build them if they can make a profit. Construction stimulates the economy too, and building construction is one of the first indicators of a recovery. It's not a negative to build things. It's a good thing, and it creates jobs for coal miners and other out of work laborers.
It takes 30 minutes to charge at a station. I noticed you compared your 10 minute petroleum stop to the overnight charge which is done at home or a motel while you are sleeping and isn't really a time issue, and the difference between an overnight charge and a station charge only results in 70 extra miles with current battery technology.
So your charging time comparisons actually are apples to oranges, as is your comparison of golf carts to Teslas and Volts. But I know you are just doing your philosopher thing of questioning the change, and that's fine. But this thing is going to happen, with or without your apples, oranges, and cautionary warnings. Undoubtedly, there will be wrinkles along the way. Change usually involves wrinkles. And conservatives will want to stop it, but they won't have a clue how to do that, although the best minds in the oil industry are probably working on it as we speak.
We have been talking about lowering our dependence on fossil fuels and doing something about global warming for 30 years, and this should be right up your alley. It's a major step that goes beyond the political gamesmanship of our two party system, and it's not even happening because the government is involved, which I doubt it ever will be at a practical level. It is free enterprise doing it all by itself, although the government will want to take credit, I suppose.
Profit ... in a fake market? All our markets are fake, we do crony capitalism. Construction is good for the economy? Like rebuilding after NorK nukes hit? Yeah, war stimulates the economy ... just ask the R-D party. OK ... so quick charge is possible? I use smaller UPS at work, and they take longer than that to charge. With most batteries ... frequent shallow recharge reduces battery capacity ... full discharge is necessary to keep the battery healthy. Also high charge rate means higher amperage capacity required at the station ... that is surge capacity, not the same as steady state (think afternoon electric usage due to AC in Summer).
So this is just politics? Physics isn't involved? D-party ... warp drive along shortly, socialism across the Alpha Quadrant? Change is inevitable ... true, but not progress. Regress is even more likely (entropy). Techno-messiahs just ... make me laugh. I don't want to keep a hay burner, so if I lived long enough, I will be walking to the store ... not using a "transporter". X-Gen and Millennial group think ... and they think Baby Boomers are crazy ;-) Jumping off a building to demonstrate flight, isn't more real, if the group agrees.
Wind mill electricity is real, but if it takes 10 years to put in 3% capacity, that works out to 100 years to get to 30% capacity. So not in my lifetime. Fiction impacts how people think in normal situations. Y'all aren't freedom fighters with Princess Leia. Clones from the Clone Wars perhaps.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 29, 2017, 02:57:25 AM
Baruch, I think you have finally went so far off in to nonsense that you confused yourself.
Elon Musk is the Jim Jones of technology, drink the Kool-Aide if you dare. Earlier, some people claimed that natural gas stations (natural gas added to power gas (not gasoline) powered municipal vehicles and buses) were going to save us. Yes ... reduce petroleum use, oh you hypocrites. Walk to work. Welcome to the new Zimbabwe. It takes X amount of energy to move a one ton vehicle at Y mph Z distance. Classical physics. And QFT doesn't change that (contrary to scifi). And that energy isn't free, not matter how much the cronies jimmy the economy. Moore's Law saves your iPhone, but it won't save your car.
Quote from: Baruch on November 29, 2017, 07:04:33 AM
Elon Musk is the Jim Jones of technology, drink the Kool-Aide if you dare.
That is an extraordinary amount of thoughtless bullshit. That is assuming it isn't intentional hyperbole. Either way it is absurd.
Quote from: Baruch on November 29, 2017, 07:04:33 AM
Earlier, some people claimed that natural gas stations (natural gas added to power gas (not gasoline) powered municipal vehicles and buses) were going to save us. Yes ... reduce petroleum use, oh you hypocrites.
This isn't about NOT burning so many petroleum derivatives, although that IS one of the consequences. It's about moving away from an archaic technology that has run its course. People will drive electric cars for various reasons, some because they are environmental pussies worthy of conservative contempt, some just because they like electric cars better. Others will fight it because they can't spare the extra 20 minutes for a fill up at a charging station. No one is forcing this change. They will still make gas powered vehicles as long as people will buy them. I doubt you have anything to fear in your lifetime.
Quote from: Baruch on November 29, 2017, 07:04:33 AM
Walk to work. Welcome to the new Zimbabwe.
This is just absurd nonsense. I don't know why you would say that.
Quote from: Baruch on November 29, 2017, 07:04:33 AM
...energy isn't free, not matter how much the cronies jimmy the economy.
No one is saying that it is.
Quote from: Baruch on November 29, 2017, 07:04:33 AM
Moore's Law saves your iPhone, but it won't save your car.
Maybe, but we don't actually know that, so it seems rather premature.
Quote from: SGOS on November 29, 2017, 01:10:02 AMWe have been talking about lowering our dependence on fossil fuels and doing something about global warming for 30 years, and this should be right up your alley.
Iirc, he bemoaned global warming on a couple threads. So you'd think he'd be all for doing something to help solve the problem, right?
But apparently renewables and electric cars are too reminiscent of Elon Musk, who he inexplicably has a real hate boner for. Either that, or it sounds too liberal and triggered the "D and R are bad!" module, followed by the hypocrisy argument that we've already addressed, but when you're talking to a brick wall, what you say doesn't much matter.
(Renewables and electric cars actually shouldn't be a liberal VS conservative thing, but it unfortunately is in the US. The GOP missed a golden opportunity to support energy independence on nationalistic grounds - that the US should be self-reliant and not dependent on other countries for its energy. That could've played well with the base. Unfortunately, the GOP cozied up too much to the oil industry and apparently now does their bidding. So unfortunately, renewables are a political hot potato in the US.)
I don't believe techno-messiahs either, Baruch, but there's plenty of space between the overoptimistic dreams of fiction and the pessimism you are displaying. Physics doesn't care if you're having fun. I already showed a while back that there's a silly amount of energy falling on the earth already to satisfy our energy needs for centuries yet, if only we could harvest it. It doesn't even need to be from PV either; solar thermal is a fine way to get that energy. There's also plenty of options for storage, and not just the many species of electric batteries (which have a wide variety of charge/discharge characteristics), but also flywheels, molten salt storage, water reservoirs, and so on. There's plenty we can do even with the tried and true classical physics you claim to know to make energy much more available, and with that much energy available, our options increase by quite a bit, even if we restrict resource recovery to earthly sources.
So, yes, this is political, because nothing in physics stands in our way.
Quote from: SGOS on November 29, 2017, 11:04:08 AM
That is an extraordinary amount of thoughtless bullshit. That is assuming it isn't intentional hyperbole. Either way it is absurd.
This isn't about NOT burning so many petroleum derivatives, although that IS one of the consequences. It's about moving away from an archaic technology that has run its course. People will drive electric cars for various reasons, some because they are environmental pussies worthy of conservative contempt, some just because they like electric cars better. Others will fight it because they can't spare the extra 20 minutes for a fill up at a charging station. No one is forcing this change. They will still make gas powered vehicles as long as people will buy them. I doubt you have anything to fear in your lifetime.
This is just absurd nonsense. I don't know why you would say that.
No one is saying that it is.
Maybe, but we don't actually know that, so it seems rather premature.
If you like Elon Musk, as the new Edison, just say so. But then justify that.
https://thenextweb.com/distract/2017/07/31/elon-musks-tweets-about-his-own-mental-health-offer-a-refreshing-glimpse-inside-a-brilliant-mind/
Archaic technology? We are going back to the Middle Ages, with horses, but only for the Elite. Scifi is just agitprop. Yes, make gas cars $50K, and electric cars $30K ... but how to do that, other than crony capitalism? Also per Volt/Tesla ... if you lose money on each unit, how are you going to make it up on volume? But in Britain, they are already proposing outlawing gas/diesel vehicles. Guess Dr Who has given them superior technology. And of course, we will see in 20 or 40 years ... but not me. So far the last 60 years have been a downward spiral ... so I am not optimistic. Did nothing good happen? A few things, but that is cherry picking.
Quote from: Hydra009 on November 29, 2017, 11:10:40 AM
Iirc, he bemoaned global warming on a couple threads. So you'd think he'd be all for doing something to help solve the problem, right?
But apparently renewables and electric cars are too reminiscent of Elon Musk, who he inexplicably has a real hate boner for. Either that, or it sounds too liberal and triggered the "D and R are bad!" module, followed by the hypocrisy argument that we've already addressed, but when you're talking to a brick wall, what you say doesn't much matter.
(Renewables and electric cars actually shouldn't be a liberal VS conservative thing, but it unfortunately is in the US. The GOP missed a golden opportunity to support energy independence on nationalistic grounds - that the US should be self-reliant and not dependent on other countries for its energy. That could've played well with the base. Unfortunately, the GOP cozied up too much to the oil industry and apparently now does their bidding. So unfortunately, renewables are a political hot potato in the US.)
Yes, kill 7 billion people, no more global warming. Or do the Jim Jones version ... carbon trading, death by a thousand taxes. Elon himself admits .. he is bonkers a lot of the time. But please give him all your investment. You won't need the money back ;-) In fact, given the irrational nature of investment, anyone not putting 100% in BitCoin is a fool. Why waste your money on a productive investment, when high returns are guaranteed, for nothing? That was the original point of posting old car scams. He is politically connected, all the big scammers are. Enjoy Disneyland-Tomorrowland. I am still waiting to move into that nearly free plastic house I saw in 1965. That and cold fusion.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on November 29, 2017, 11:54:11 AM
I don't believe techno-messiahs either, Baruch, but there's plenty of space between the overoptimistic dreams of fiction and the pessimism you are displaying. Physics doesn't care if you're having fun. I already showed a while back that there's a silly amount of energy falling on the earth already to satisfy our energy needs for centuries yet, if only we could harvest it. It doesn't even need to be from PV either; solar thermal is a fine way to get that energy. There's also plenty of options for storage, and not just the many species of electric batteries (which have a wide variety of charge/discharge characteristics), but also flywheels, molten salt storage, water reservoirs, and so on. There's plenty we can do even with the tried and true classical physics you claim to know to make energy much more available, and with that much energy available, our options increase by quite a bit, even if we restrict resource recovery to earthly sources.
So, yes, this is political, because nothing in physics stands in our way.
"if only we could harvest it" ... energy density problem says ... you can't solve this. It takes power to condense energy into dense form, which defeats you. If I have infinite money, I can make a giant solar cell farm, big enough to take care of my household. But people in general believe, a Right-wing conspiracy theory, that if the millionaires weren't evil, we would already have free everything. On the other hand, if things aren't free, then you need infinite money ... please move to Zimbabwe. Example, I could use sea waves at the beach to make electricity ... but at what cost and quality? If it is a slam dunk, what conspiracy theory is preventing us from getting energy from every beach? And no folks, this isn't a liberal vs conservative thing. Reality has no such prejudice. But politically, on either wing, we believe propaganda .. "a car in every garage, a chicken in every pot" - Herbert Hoover.
Nobody here is trying to sell anything, so nobody here is a scammer. They are just in the slough of positive thinking. If you can get from point A to point B, then positive thinking is helpful. But if it is impossible, then positive thinking is a trap.
I can't tell if Baruch is for or against electric vehicles any more.
Quote from: Jason78 on November 29, 2017, 02:04:00 PM
I can't tell if Baruch is for or against electric vehicles any more.
I can't tell if he's sane anymore.
Quote from: Baruch on November 28, 2017, 08:16:15 PM
Lets see, recharge stations .. need to replace most gas stations ... is that 100,000 ... takes about $100K each, so that is about $10B ... not much money, not counting the actual electricity. Now get someone to build it. But it takes me 10 minutes to gas up at a gas station. Takes overnight at a recharge station. Oops. Apples vs Oranges comparison strikes again.
Your numbers are a little off there. When you buy a gas powered car, you need lots of gas stations available to keep it running. In most cases, when you buy an electric car, your house becomes a gas station. Kind of kicks the ass right out that 100,000 stations needed argument doesn't it?
Also it doesn't take overnight to charge them. Or at least it doesn't have to. Rapid charging stations will put a full charge on a car in about the time it takes to eat lunch. Nope its not nearly as fast as it takes to pump gas into a tank. But that just means the model will change and we will fuel our vehicles while we're doing other things.
Remember its just a matter of plugging in a cable. So there are hazardous storage issues, no need for an attendant of any sort, no need for constant maintenance. This means any business with parking capacity can opt to start making money from that parking area by putting in charging hardware and selling electric for charging vehicles. Wanna stop at Starbucks for a tripple frap pap smear or whatever the fuck they serve? Park your car, swipe your card and put 20 minutes of charge in it while you're there.
Quote from: Hydra009 on November 29, 2017, 11:10:40 AM
But apparently renewables and electric cars are too reminiscent of Elon Musk, who he inexplicably has a real hate boner for.
That is the impression I've picked up also. He hasn't owned that, and I don't expect that he will. I don't know enough about Musk to hate him or to put him on a pedestal. He might even have mental problems, but the bottom line is that an idea is neither good or bad because of its source (think Argumentum ad Hominem).
Ultimately, the worth of electric cars will be determined in the free market by people's willingness to part with their hard earned dollars. If electric cars provide no benefit, people won't buy them. Crony capitalism may come into play, but right now the oil industry is holding those cards, and Musk is up against a behemoth. If his endeavor changes society, it will be noteworthy.
But this may be the first really major step in weaning us off of what we all know is a finite and polluting resource. It's not enough, I don't think, but it will be a monumentally big step if it succeeds. I'd like to be around to see how this all shakes out, because there will be hurdles, many of them political.
Quote from: Baruch on November 29, 2017, 01:09:58 PM
"if only we could harvest it" ... energy density problem says ... you can't solve this. It takes power to condense energy into dense form, which defeats you.
Mirrors, son. There's no problem in energy condensation. You can raise the temperature of the place you focus sunlight onto to up to 6000 K (theoretical limit) and almost every conventional boiler design will melt long before that point, so it's a limit we can comfortably come under. That's going to give you pretty good thermal efficiency. This is yet more proof that you don't know your physics.
Quote from: Baruch on November 29, 2017, 01:09:58 PM
If I have infinite money, I can make a giant solar cell farm, big enough to take care of my household.
$4000 is hardly "infinite money." That's how much money you would need to shell out to to get a panel of sufficient size to service your home, assuming around 10,000 kWh/year average. My first used car was more expensive, and that fucker was old enough to vote when I bought it. And this is of course using PV; solar thermal will be much cheaper per MW. On the other hand, the panel is 70 m on a side, so it is a big fucker, and the real price figure may be an order of magnitude out.
Every time I look at renewables, the more attractive they look. It's not even conspiracy; it simply intellectually lazy bullshit. You never sat down to figure out even within an order of magnitude how much it would set you back. Reality is not the obstacle here. It's will.
Quote from: SGOS on November 29, 2017, 03:15:50 PM
That is the impression I've picked up also. He hasn't owned that, and I don't expect that he will. I don't know enough about Musk to hate him or to put him on a pedestal.
I vaguely know about him. I admire the audacity of his goals (Mars, space tourism, etc) and his resolve to innovate. Very forward-thinking guy. I respect that.
But here's the thing, he could get high on bath salts, burn Tesla to the ground, and jump off a bridge, and it wouldn't change our need to switch from gas-guzzlers to electric vehicles. Nor would it wipe out the technology we would need to make that transition.
Ultimately, Musk is irrelevant to this conversation.
QuoteUltimately, the worth of electric cars will be determined in the free market by people's willingness to part with their hard earned dollars. If electric cars provide no benefit, people won't buy them.
And of course, there are huge benefits beyond carbon emissions. Better fuel economy, lower fuel costs, lower maintenance costs, less noise and no exhaust smell. The free market would LOVE to get rid of gasoline.
QuoteBut this may be the first really major step in weaning us off of what we all know is a finite and polluting resource. It's not enough, I don't think, but it will be a monumentally big step if it succeeds. I'd like to be around to see how this all shakes out, because there will be hurdles, many of them political.
You're right that it's not enough. Transportation currently accounts for 27% of our carbon emissions. A 100% switchover to electric vehicles wouldn't even completely wipe that out, since the electric grid is still primarily powered by fossil fuels. But it's a step forward, and going forward is the only way to get anywhere.
If y'all want to really help CO2 emissions, plant some trees ... and stop breathing yourselves ;-) People have strange obsessions, like trying to stay alive. The really selfish want to live in something better than a mud hut. Those people are evil. We must all be Gandhi .. and spin our own cloth, and walk ... 200 miles to harvest our own salt.
I planned on being in renewables ... in 1980. If it is such an obvious thing, then put in your own housing mods, and buy a Volt etc. If you can in your city, do it. Just don't expect the majority to live your upper middle class fantasy. And no, there is no free market ... no free lunch either. Reagan and the oil industry made sure of that ... in 1981. People who live in the First World, just can't see how "owned" they are.
Elon Musk ... as soon as he said he was planning a retreat, for billionaires on Mars ... you know he is a loon. If you don't, then you are a loon too. People who think AI is just around the corner, or already here ... loons. Cold Fusion advertisements ... with taxpayer subsidy. Tesla was smart ... but wanted to deliver electricity by polarizing the ionosphere ... after inventing AC ... he was a loon.
You've been crowing about the "free lunch" for a while now. Who's speaking about a free lunch, Baruch? Other than the obvious crazies, that is?
Elon Musk is a loon and always has been. But â€"againâ€" there's a gulf of difference and a wide spectrum between Musk's techno-messiah lunacy and your doom and gloom.
Quote from: Baruch on November 29, 2017, 07:04:33 AM
Elon Musk is the Jim Jones of technology, drink the Kool-Aide if you dare. Earlier, some people claimed that natural gas stations (natural gas added to power gas (not gasoline) powered municipal vehicles and buses) were going to save us. Yes ... reduce petroleum use, oh you hypocrites. Walk to work. Welcome to the new Zimbabwe. It takes X amount of energy to move a one ton vehicle at Y mph Z distance. Classical physics. And QFT doesn't change that (contrary to scifi). And that energy isn't free, not matter how much the cronies jimmy the economy. Moore's Law saves your iPhone, but it won't save your car.
Does your tinfoil hat have the word "dunce" written on it?
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/061/664/1275937249093s.jpg)
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 30, 2017, 01:34:45 AM
Does your tinfoil hat have the word "dunce" written on it?
Go get your free lunch (socialism) and sail your free yacht to vacation with your Cayman Island fortune? There has been a little progress here and there ... but not enough, and too late. We continue to emulate Thelma & Louise. The US is a big country, and it is completely corrupt. So maybe RI can be saved ...
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on November 29, 2017, 08:49:46 PM
You've been crowing about the "free lunch" for a while now. Who's speaking about a free lunch, Baruch? Other than the obvious crazies, that is?
Elon Musk is a loon and always has been. But â€"againâ€" there's a gulf of difference and a wide spectrum between Musk's techno-messiah lunacy and your doom and gloom.
US techno-utopia is presently based on completely mis-priced goods and services of a crony capitalism (with fake socialism for the masses). That and move all engineering and manufacturing to China, and all software and services to India. Hope that works out for y'all. If the US, Europe etc weren't trying to commit suicide on multiple levels (crazy nut jobs) then I would be an optimist. I fail to be an optimist around drugged out Russian roulette fans.
Quote from: Baruch on November 30, 2017, 01:54:07 AM
Go get your free lunch (socialism) and sail your free yacht to vacation with your Cayman Island fortune? There has been a little progress here and there ... but not enough, and too late. We continue to emulate Thelma & Louise. The US is a big country, and it is completely corrupt. So maybe RI can be saved ...
What the actual fuck are you babbling about?
I've never said anything about free anything in here.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 30, 2017, 02:18:28 AM
What the actual fuck are you babbling about?
I've never said anything about free anything in here.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
My ambiguity ... sorry. I approach posts as meta-narratives. Unless I say PickelledEggs - XXX for example. It is hard to keep focus (in the text) without simply rewriting everything, with quotes and footnotes.
Quote from: Shiranu on November 30, 2017, 01:38:03 AM
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/061/664/1275937249093s.jpg)
The usual. Meta-conversation on multiple simultaneous levels. With associationist cross-overs and asides. Grok it?
Quote from: Shiranu on November 30, 2017, 06:51:45 AM
One of my favorite actors in a favorite role! Did Elon Musk try to embody this character?
Just found an interesting "fake economy" chart ...
https://www.statista.com/chart/4298/amazons-long-term-growth/
How does Amazon grow, yet has no profit? What about those CIA servers at Amazon? What about Bezos being the world's richest man, and owning the Washington media? Dark money by the Dark State. Applies to Facebook and Google as well.
When people bring out Adam Smith era economic arguments, in the 21st century, I laugh and laugh. Though back then, Bank of England was Dark State, and still is. But back then, the Bank of England only had "hard money" to work with, since 2000, with CDW etc ... anything can be treated as money, and increased at will. This causes inflation, which seems to be finally happening, but like toothpaste coming out of the tube, only in crypto-currencies .. an Elite money form, that is useful for money laundering and tax evasion. Dr Evil indeed .. his "real" name is Satoshi Nakamura.
Quote from: Baruch on November 30, 2017, 01:58:54 AM
US techno-utopia is presently based on completely mis-priced goods and services
The price of a good is whatever you will pay for it.
Quote from: Baruch on November 30, 2017, 01:58:54 AM
of a crony capitalism (with fake socialism for the masses).
BWAHAHAHA! There's barely any socialism for the masses. At all.
Quote from: Baruch on November 30, 2017, 01:58:54 AM
That and move all engineering and manufacturing to China, and all software and services to India.
While some has moved to those countries, it's hardly all of them.
Excuse me if I don't really buy your assessment.
Quote from: Baruch on November 30, 2017, 06:38:16 AM
My ambiguity ... sorry. I approach posts as meta-narratives. Unless I say PickelledEggs - XXX for example. It is hard to keep focus (in the text) without simply rewriting everything, with quotes and footnotes.
Or... Just maybe... And hear me out on this, you could try simply anchoring yourself in to reality a bit and also try getting rid of this ambiguous bullshit that you always do.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 30, 2017, 10:25:30 AM
Or... Just maybe... And hear me out on this, you could try simply anchoring yourself in to reality a bit and also try getting rid of this ambiguous bullshit that you always do.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
OK. Direct then ... but you won't like that either. But it does mean less brain work for me ... no jokes, not double entendres ... just straight shit posting. I will ask pr126 for lessons ;-)
What is reality? D party delusion, R party delusion, Middle Class delusion? The little guy or gal in the Mumbai ghetto, doing tricks and eating out of the garbage .. that is reality. First Worlders have no clue.
I must say, people living a middle class life is certainly a persistent delusion...
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on November 30, 2017, 06:07:58 PM
I must say, people living a middle class life is certainly a persistent delusion...
Only on the backs of exploitation ... and sucking up to the rich. Ever hear the term, bourgeois?
Marx was a pratt.
Quote from: Baruch on November 30, 2017, 12:24:40 PM
OK. Direct then ... but you won't like that either. But it does mean less brain work for me ... no jokes, not double entendres ... just straight shit posting. I will ask pr126 for lessons ;-)
What is reality? D party delusion, R party delusion, Middle Class delusion? The little guy or gal in the Mumbai ghetto, doing tricks and eating out of the garbage .. that is reality. First Worlders have no clue.
WHAT. THE FUCK. DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ELECTRIC CARS. WHAT. THE FUCK. DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE LINK YOU SHARED IN THE OP.
And just so you know. I have said that I agreed with that, that Ds and Rs both have their delusions, but WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING IN THIS POST.
I have you figured out. I have had you figured out for quite some time, in fact. You are so far removed, Baruch. You insist on doing this vague-talk. To kind of initiate and instigate disagreement. But it doesn't happen because no one knows what the hell you are talking about, so you insist it's because they disagree or they don't like what you are saying. God fucking damn, Baruch. I hate that crap.
To. The. Point, Baruch. Because contrary to your assertion, I agree with your point of Republicans and Democrats both having a lot of delusions... although I have no fucking clue how Tesla and electric cars, and the car illustrated and talked about in the Road and Track has anything to do with that.
GET TO THE POINT FOR FUCKS SAKE
"meta narratives"... go fuck yourself.
Sorry. I lost my temper and I could have said things a little more tactfully.
My point still stands, though. Get to the point Baruch.
Anyone that insists that they are so "enlightened" most likely isn't.... *cough cough Baruch cough cough COUGH COUGH COUGH BLARRRRRRGHHHHHHH COUGH COUGH cough......* *clears throat and wipes vomit from beard and mustache*
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on November 30, 2017, 08:16:11 PM
Marx was a pratt.
The Middle Class has been dying since 1980 ... good riddance.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 30, 2017, 09:16:53 PM
Sorry. I lost my temper and I could have said things a little more tactfully.
My point still stands, though. Get to the point Baruch.
The point? Tesla and Volt are partly matters of belief, they are a religion of techno-messiahship. That should have been clear so far. They involve a whole spectrum of wishful thinking. But I have been developing my point slowly, because I needed feedback to do so. I couldn't do it ... in the first post in this string.
Quote from: Baruch on November 30, 2017, 11:03:58 PM
The point? Tesla and Volt are partly matters of belief, they are a religion of techno-messiahship. That should have been clear so far. They involve a whole spectrum of wishful thinking. But I have been developing my point slowly, because I needed feedback to do so. I couldn't do it ... in the first post in this string.
So basically, what you are saying, is you are fucking with us; saying things in a certain way to cause us to think we're discussing something else/confusing us entirely, just so you can invoke a certain narrative that isn't even there from us that loosely suits your needs and biases and then you move the goalpost?
Yeah. Nah. Not a fan of that bullshit.
Quote from: Baruch on November 30, 2017, 11:03:58 PM
The point? Tesla and Volt are partly matters of belief, they are a religion of techno-messiahship.
No they are not. They are cars. Period. They are powered by different sources of energy than you might be used to. Big fucking deal. They are not pipe dreams. They are not vaporware. They are real and being bought and driven by real people as has been the case for several years now.
Will they be going away? Sure. Absolutely. So will gasoline powered cars, diesel powered trucks, lithium ion powered cellphones and nuclear powered warships. All them will go away eventually. But I'm sure you already knew that. So I still don't know what point you're trying to make and I'm beginning to suspect that you don't know either. Which means that this entire thread has been about as productive watching a couple of monkeys trying to fuck a football.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 30, 2017, 11:13:47 PM
So basically, what you are saying, is you are fucking with us; saying things in a certain way to cause us to think we're discussing something else/confusing us entirely, just so you can invoke a certain narrative that isn't even there from us that loosely suits your needs and biases and then you move the goalpost?
Yeah. Nah. Not a fan of that bullshit.
Seems like theistic bs strikes again.
Sendt fra min SM-G920F med Tapatalk
Quote from: PickelledEggs on November 30, 2017, 11:13:47 PM
So basically, what you are saying, is you are fucking with us; saying things in a certain way to cause us to think we're discussing something else/confusing us entirely, just so you can invoke a certain narrative that isn't even there from us that loosely suits your needs and biases and then you move the goalpost?
Yeah. Nah. Not a fan of that bullshit.
No ... that isn't what I said in my last post. Read more carefully. It took me awhile to develop my thesis, and I apologized for my ambiguity. Did you follow my restatement?
Quote from: Johan on November 30, 2017, 11:27:49 PM
No they are not. They are cars. Period. They are powered by different sources of energy than you might be used to. Big fucking deal. They are not pipe dreams. They are not vaporware. They are real and being bought and driven by real people as has been the case for several years now.
Will they be going away? Sure. Absolutely. So will gasoline powered cars, diesel powered trucks, lithium ion powered cellphones and nuclear powered warships. All them will go away eventually. But I'm sure you already knew that. So I still don't know what point you're trying to make and I'm beginning to suspect that you don't know either. Which means that this entire thread has been about as productive watching a couple of monkeys trying to fuck a football.
I didn't say they were vaporware (even self-driving cars are physically real, I just wouldn't ride in one, because I am not stupid). Yes, Lamborghinis are real, but most people can't buy one. Guess we need more Venezuela instead of more cow bell? And yes, eventually cars will go away, but not be replaced with Rombas that self-drive, and run on solar cells. Right now, Europe is saying ... outlaw the sale of petroleum fuel in 2040. I think they should do it today ... and join Venezuela right away. Techno=utopia isn't coming ... living now, as if it is coming, is theistic in a bad way, in the sense of "magical thinking". Popular Mechanics and Popular Science have been "selling" this Jetson BS since I got a butch at the local barber shop with my dad.
Yes, you can move to a more sustainable system, that was true in 1980. Do what you can, but use your own money, not the taxpayer's money ... don't subsidize well connected frauds. Knock down your house and replace it with a geodesic dome tent, put on your tie-died shirt and smoke some pot. Get an electrified bicycle, that you can recharge with a solar panel. Just don't expect your current standard of living (but it is a step up from a trash dumpster).
This is American technical know-how ...
https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/11/20/16679480/kfc-internet-escape-pod-release-faraday-cage
Too bad you are heavier than a cat ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SajTWY9a0e0
Reality isn't your friend. It sucks. You need actual non-fraud inventors, who aren't trying to defy existing physics.
Quote from: Baruch on December 01, 2017, 06:07:03 AM
I didn't say they were vaporware (even self-driving cars are physically real, I just wouldn't ride in one, because I am not stupid). Yes, Lamborghinis are real, but most people can't buy one.
You keep going back to this 'yeah but I can't afford one' point. When in history has it not been the case that the newest technology was too expensive for those on food stamps to afford? But then you yammer on about how 'that's not sustainable...' The newest technology has ALWAYS been expensive. It has ALWAYS gotten cheaper. But now suddenly that's not sustainable. Mmm'k thanks bye.
Quote from: Baruch on December 01, 2017, 06:00:51 AM
No ... that isn't what I said in my last post. Read more carefully. It took me awhile to develop my thesis, and I apologized for my ambiguity. Did you follow my restatement?
I reworded it to show you what you were doing.. clearly and explicitly.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Edited to take out the extra "show" for grammatical excellence
Fucking conspiracy theorists...
Quote from: Johan on December 01, 2017, 07:00:13 AM
You keep going back to this 'yeah but I can't afford one' point. When in history has it not been the case that the newest technology was too expensive for those on food stamps to afford? But then you yammer on about how 'that's not sustainable...' The newest technology has ALWAYS been expensive. It has ALWAYS gotten cheaper. But now suddenly that's not sustainable. Mmm'k thanks bye.
Through mass production, all products drop to zero unit cost ... bwhaha. That happens sometime. And diamond rings, aren't new technology, and we can even make artificial diamonds, and they are still expensive. Moore's Law of silicon chips ... apply to silicon chips.
No technology, beyond 1800, is sustainable .. if by that you mean environmentally friendly. That is how I mean it. And I am not sure that all the horse shit our horses put out back then, was environmentally friendly. I assume you don't mean "sustainable" in the idea that it will always cost X per unit, and that everyone not on food stamps will be able to afford one. Even 100 years ago, not everyone could afford a horse.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 01, 2017, 11:03:19 AM
Fucking conspiracy theorists...
A free lunch ... we can have it ... if only we kill the wealthy? Isn't that a Left conspiracy theory? They aren't just for Right kooks. Kind of like the old conspiracy theory, that Ford had a carburetor, that was invented by an independent inventor, and the oil industry paid Ford to buy it and bury it, because it would allow a regular car to get 100 miles per gallon. Also the idea that no medical appointment would cost more than $5 except for all the Republicans sabotaging our medical care.
Quote from: Baruch on December 01, 2017, 06:07:03 AM
Reality isn't your friend. It sucks. You need actual non-fraud inventors, who aren't trying to defy existing physics.
You have not done nearly enough to show that reality will not allow us to have a sustainable, comfortable living for everyone, especially if we're allowed to escape our planetary womb and colonize space. You have not demonstrated that existing physics does not allow for electric cars, nor the energy to run them or make them. It's all weasel words and FUD.
Quote from: Baruch on December 01, 2017, 06:59:25 PM
Through mass production, all products drop to zero unit cost ... bwhaha. That happens sometime. And diamond rings, aren't new technology, and we can even make artificial diamonds, and they are still expensive. Moore's Law of silicon chips ... apply to silicon chips.
What the fuck are trying to say? Each sentence in this quote seems to say the opposite of what the previous sentence is trying to say.
QuoteNo technology, beyond 1800, is sustainable .. if by that you mean environmentally friendly. That is how I mean it.
Indoor plumbing sure seems like an unsustainable technology doesn't it. Anyone with a toilet inside their house will probably die off by the time they reach the age of 14. So we best not even mention things like crop rotation, penicillin, condoms zippers radio or nylon. Zippers alone will drive our species to extinction in the next 6 months.
In case you missed it, that was all sarcasm intended to point out that you're talking out of your ass.
Quote from: Baruch on December 01, 2017, 07:02:29 PM
A free lunch ... we can have it ... if only we kill the wealthy? Isn't that a Left conspiracy theory? They aren't just for Right kooks. Kind of like the old conspiracy theory, that Ford had a carburetor, that was invented by an independent inventor, and the oil industry paid Ford to buy it and bury it, because it would allow a regular car to get 100 miles per gallon. Also the idea that no medical appointment would cost more than $5 except for all the Republicans sabotaging our medical care.
WHAT DOES A FUCKING FREE LUNCH HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING.
We're looking for better, more reliable travel and energy for those vehicles. This is new technology. So far it has proven to be very reliable (with of course some isolated incidents) and extremely efficient.
And not only is it efficient in using energy, it has also proven in utilizing energy. The tesla car has shown instant responsiveness in acceleration tests, where with fuel-based cars, they lag and the power isn't there for a while, until certain RPMs.
So blow it out your ass with this free lunch bullshit. This is about newer, more refined, more efficient, more effective, more reliable transport that can run off of a better, more reliable energy source. Electricity. because electricity can be obtained via water, air, sun, and of course fuel. It's flexible. Adaptive. And as the Tesla and other similar cars have shown, it fucking works.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 01, 2017, 11:02:29 PM
WHAT DOES A FUCKING FREE LUNCH HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING.
He imagines that liberals have naive fantasies about energy and health care. (Which is pitiable because his idea of liberals bears no resemblance to the actual liberals he interacts with)
Or pretends to believe that to garner attention. Either way, it's bullshit.
One thing's for sure, he's marshaling more brainpower in deciphering and rebutting these dubiously genuine claims than was ever put in creating them.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on December 01, 2017, 07:27:15 PM
You have not done nearly enough to show that reality will not allow us to have a sustainable, comfortable living for everyone, especially if we're allowed to escape our planetary womb and colonize space. You have not demonstrated that existing physics does not allow for electric cars, nor the energy to run them or make them. It's all weasel words and FUD.
Not comfortable. Unless you are in the castle with the rest of the nobility. Communist theory is wrong ... even if you aren't a communist. We aren't heading for an industrial or technical utopia, with or without political reform. What has happened is ... we came upon a vast treasure, a vast pool of petroleum, that we don't have to pay full price for. And like one would expect, we have fully exploited that, and lived like a drunk sailor burning both ends of the candle at once.
Yes, there may be a few electric cars ... in the feudal museum. Renewable means no modern society ... you can't run a modern society without that drug, the black gold. And yes, it takes a lot of energy to go into space. A few people have been, but only as government employees or a few millionaires. You or I are not going. No steerage in rocket ships.
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/if-you-could-9ayi3q.jpg)
I do not trust AI cars. Yet...
Every new tech has bugs, failures, and hackables. I do not want to be the rider in an AI car that gets confused by a reflection of sunlight or a deer running across the road. I do not want to be in an AI car that veers off the road because some hacker gets control of it.
But I also recognize that we already have many systems in our cars that are out of our control and we are happy with them. We don't have to adjust our gears by speed anymore (unless you really like a stick shift). We don't have to play with the carburator via a throttle. Our brakes self-control and to all wheels mostly.
Most of the operations of a car are already automated. Get it?
And it seems likely that AI cars, if everyone had them, would result in fewer accidents and deaths overall by a factor of at least 10.
And I still don't want one!
I'm not sure why not. Getting in a car and saying "drive me to the Safeway" sounds good. And I used to laugh at people driving "stick" as not trusting "auto".
Maybe I'm just not sure the car will open the garage door before driving into it. Or know what to do at the landfill while there are bulldozers driving close.
I'm not so much worried about an AI car navigating the NJ Turnpike so much as it failing on a tight country road when a tractor pulls out suddenly.
Quote from: Cavebear on December 02, 2017, 03:08:15 AM
I do not want to be the rider in an AI car that gets confused by a reflection of sunlight or a deer running across the road.
Would you rather be the rider in a car with a human that just had their puny human senses temporarily blinded, or trust their reactions when a deer ran across the road?
Been a programmer myself. Everything people do is shit. Don't let them program, don't let them drive either ;-)
Renewable housing is coming too ... grass & mud hut. Biodegradable with each rain storm. See, being an environmentalist is like being Gandhi. Left-minimalist.
I give up. Baruch is the independent version of pr. Equally detached from reality, but instead of being very racist and citing brietbart.... he is on some other type of next-level bullshit
Quote from: Cavebear on December 02, 2017, 03:08:15 AM
I do not trust AI cars. Yet...
For sure the technology still has several years worth of development that needs to happen before we an call it done. But regardless of if you trust them or not, you can't ignore the data. And the data shows that the technology we have today will is already better and safer at driving than we as humans have ever been and will ever be.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 02, 2017, 04:25:57 PM
I give up. Baruch is the independent version of pr. Equally detached from reality, but instead of being very racist and citing brietbart.... he is on some other type of next-level bullshit
You must live in a mansion, and have servants and a yacht ;-) Yes, the nobility have no problems, everything is just swell ... just ask the Great Gatsby.
!. One of the main reasons for all-electric cars is to avoid environmental catastrophe. Catastrophe is unavoidable, with 7+ billion people.
2. Environmentalism is VP Gore flying around in jet planes, complaining about chem-trails. The Upper Class version of reality is no reality at all.
3. Relative to most of humanity, almost all Americans are Upper Class. But are blissfully unaware of their state of privilege.
Quote from: Johan on December 02, 2017, 06:18:25 PM
For sure the technology still has several years worth of development that needs to happen before we an call it done. But regardless of if you trust them or not, you can't ignore the data. And the data shows that the technology we have today will is already better and safer at driving than we as humans have ever been and will ever be.
Bender would say that, but then he is a drunk pile of scrap metal, isn't he?
Quote from: Baruch on December 02, 2017, 08:08:47 PM
Bender would say that, but then he is a drunk pile of scrap metal, isn't he?
The data exists and its valid. Pretending it doesn't exist doesn't help win the debate, it just makes other people think you're an asshole.
Quote from: Baruch on December 02, 2017, 08:07:48 PMOne of the main reasons for all-electric cars is to avoid environmental catastrophe.
That wasn't the reason they were invented in the first place, way back in 1884. But it is true that the excessive use of fossil fuels and the serious environmental consequences of this is a big factor in the urgency of phasing out gasoline vehicles in favor of electric vehicles.
QuoteCatastrophe is unavoidable, with 7+ billion people.
It's unavoidable only if everyone adopts your attitude. Thankfully, they don't.
Quote2. Environmentalism is VP Gore flying around in jet planes, complaining about chem-trails.
*long sigh* Alex Jones would be an upgrade compared to the bullshit you're spewing.
QuoteThe Upper Class version of reality is no reality at all.
Predictable wild tangent.
Quote3. Relative to most of humanity, almost all Americans are Upper Class. But are blissfully unaware of their state of privilege.
Irrelevant.
So, I figured out Barauch's code.
It's one to two sentences of lucidity (the only part where he's actually on-topic), an incendiary comment designed to provoke an emotional reaction, then some irrelevant tangent for 3-4 sentences, usually historical or political. Optionally, the closer is some sort of insult or condemnation.
Quote from: Hydra009 on December 02, 2017, 09:18:33 PM
So, I figured out Barauch's code.
It's one to two sentences of lucidity (the only part where he's actually on-topic), an incendiary comment designed to provoke an emotional reaction, then some irrelevant tangent for 3-4 sentences, usually historical or political. Optionally, the closer is some sort of insult or condemnation.
Snowflakes gotta melt. I just add a little flame. Church Of Latter-Day Hippies. Except upper middle class attitudes (original Hippies were originally upper middle class spoiled brats). College in the 60s (before my time though) was 100x better than it is today, cost wise.
Alternatively, it can just be complete stream of consciousness (brown, sometimes green)
Quote from: Hydra009 on December 02, 2017, 10:09:22 PM
Alternatively, it can just be complete stream of consciousness (brown, sometimes green)
Better a stream of consciousness, than stream of unconsciousness ;-) Or stream of drug-of-choice intoxication ;-))
Quote from: Baruch on December 03, 2017, 09:26:47 AM
Better a stream of consciousness, than stream of unconsciousness ;-) Or stream of drug-of-choice intoxication ;-))
Yeah. I wish you had a stream of consciousness, rather than your stream of drunken unconsciousness.
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
Baruch, you are not enlightened, no matter how fucking hard you want to give us the impression that you think you are. ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
How're those winky faces? does it make me any more lucid? Does it make me any more enlightened? No? Didn't fucking think so.
Fine .. people who predict the future, are hung by their own Jean Luc Petards ;-) But I can predict that physical or economic impossibility ... is pushing a big rock up hill ... likely to be at least unrewarding, if not a failure.
Not that I don't want infinite power thru technology, and free lunches. I just don't smoke that kind of ganja. I am not enlightened, just not subject to marketing.
Cost = Unit cost (e.g. dollars per kilowatt-hour) * Power
Power = Energy (e.g. kilowatts)/Time (e.g. hours)
Energy = Force (e.g. resistance) * Distance (e.g. miles)
So ... more energy or delivery over shorter time ... increases cost. Unit cost isn't zero, and there is no manifest destiny (Moore's Law) that it is going to always get smaller, or be so small that every wino on skid row can afford a car. Cost is minimized by using your own body, but you have to feed it etc. And it is environmentally sustainable in principle. Using a car moving at high speed, maximizes the amount of energy required to get from point A to point B. The distance is invariable. A bicycle reduces resistance compared to walking. That is the only way to reduce the energy required, relative to cars or walking. A person on a bicycle is a little less sustainable than a person walking on their own. Secondly, if you take more time to get from point A to point B, you are minimizing the power.
See ... algebra is real, as is Newtonian physics, and neither are your friend.
Economics aka credit vs cash? These vehicles are losing money, per unit, unless the price is subsidized by the taxpayer (which obscures the true cost). Only if the cost is sufficiently subsidized, will there be a large scale replacement of petroleum based vehicles (aside from the other practical difficulties). And yes, you can just go buy a golf cart right now, that is much more affordable than a Volt or Tesla, that will get you to work. Please do. Or better yes, use a bicycle, or walk. Otherwise you are just a virtue signaling cool-flashing upper class geek, being subsidized by the poor.
...you realize one of your equations is dimensionally inconsistent, right?
Nobody's talking about infinite power. The energy cost for a comfortable life, or even an extravagant life, is strictly finite. Even multiplied over billions of people, it's still finite. There's still a finite value you can put on it, and a finite value that will satisfy everyone. Those who posit a post-scarcity society never suggest that the resources of such a society is actually infinite. They simply posit a society with energy harvesting and resource recovery at such a level that any human want is simply overwhelmed but the glut of resources and energy. Economics â€"the way in which a society manages scarce resourcesâ€" becomes meaningless in a post-scarcity society. There's no air economy, for instance, because air is literally only a breath away.
No technology ever developed without early adopters. They are people who see the promise of the new technology and buy early even though they know it's a losing proposition for those early models, because making the early models teaches you how to make better models.
Anyway, your grasp of physics is as dubious as your grasp of economics. Physics is not your friend, but it's also not your enemy. Nature doesn't care if you're having fun.
Carefully checked but ...
Power = Energy (e.g. kilowatts)/Time (e.g. hours) should read ...
Power = Energy (e.g. kilowatts) * Time (e.g. hours) hence kilowatt hours.
so therefore ... environmentally friendly, cheap transportation is just around the corner? Sorry, still not happening. Unless you mean foot power and bicycles.
But yes, we can tweak, with say hybrids, but doesn't get rid of the hydrocarbon problem, just makes it more efficient for city driving. Hybrids are not more efficient for long distance driving.
You can get rid of you hydrocarbons anytime .. I will buy all your gas for $1 per gallon, as I need to refill. Then you will have a clean conscience.
No amount of financial fraud can fix this energy problem .. if it takes 2 BTUs to extract 1 BTU of fuel, you are losing, not gaining. BitCoin or not. Eventually that will happen with hydrocarbons. Where is the breakeven on wind power? Giant windmills made by burning hydrocarbons ... have you taken that up-front cost into account? I hope we get a positive net of course.
PS - the ultimate fair test is new windmills created by using windmill energy alone. Then there is no cheating. Takes that "energy density" to melt steel, and yes, you can do small batches with a giant solar mirror ... but I have yet to see a steel mill run that way.
Quote from: Baruch on December 04, 2017, 10:45:31 PM
Carefully checked but ...
Power = Energy (e.g. kilowatts)/Time (e.g. hours) should read ...
Power = Energy (e.g. kilowatts) * Time (e.g. hours) hence kilowatt hours.
Dude, the kilowatt is a unit of
power, not
energy. And since power is energy/time, power*time is energy. Hence, the kilowatt-hour is a unit of
energy, not
power.How the hell did you pass
any engineering test without knowing that?
Quote from: Baruch on December 04, 2017, 10:45:31 PM
so therefore ... environmentally friendly, cheap transportation is just around the corner?
Strawman. Nobody is drawing this connection but you.
Quote from: Baruch on December 04, 2017, 10:45:31 PM
No amount of financial fraud can fix this energy problem .. if it takes 2 BTUs to extract 1 BTU of fuel, you are losing, not gaining. BitCoin or not. Eventually that will happen with hydrocarbons.
When that happens, the hydrocarbon fuel economy will end, but it hasn't happened yet. Even when that does happen, there'll still be hydrocarbons sold, just not as a primary fuel â€" it still has utility as secondary fuel and as the feedstock of synthetics, which have a buttload of useful properties. There's nothing to say that those 2 BTU's have to come from hydrocarbons. Plants have much worse conversion rates than 50%, but we're not giving up on farming anytime soon.
Quote from: Baruch on December 04, 2017, 10:45:31 PM
Where is the breakeven on wind power? Giant windmills made by burning hydrocarbons ... have you taken that up-front cost into account? I hope we get a positive net of course.
Current windmills are currently made by burning hydrocarbons because that's what's available. Actually, most of it is currently made by burning coal, because that's how you smelt iron and make steel, the primary components of windmills. But there's no physical law that says that the source of heat for smelting has to be coal, or that the machines driving the manufacturing and assembly has to be hydrocarbons. Electricity is the great equalizer here.
Quote from: Baruch on December 04, 2017, 10:45:31 PM
Takes that "energy density" to melt steel, and yes, you can do small batches with a giant solar mirror ... but I have yet to see a steel mill run that way.
Nobody is proposing to do the smelting with a solar furnace. A solar thermal plant will produce power (or a wind farm, equivalently) and suitably buffered would give a stable output of electrical power for manufacture. We have industrial electric furnaces today that are used in production. Right now, fossil fuels are cheap enough to make them not viable except in specialized applications (not steel making), but we do have the technology.
Yes, it will end ... while you are driving your $50k golf cart to the store or to work ... so you can look cool and virtue signal. Meanwhile the rest of us zombies will be looking to eat your brains ;-) But we will be on foot, and lurch a lot ;-))
I am an old man, going blind. Yes, kilowatt is power ... and power times time is energy. I stand corrected again. But doesn't change the actual physics/economics. No manifest destiny will make it cheap to move one or two tons of metal down the street .. at 40 mph. A golf cart is available now, but goes much slower. And is affordable. Better retire to a community like Prescott AZ, so you can easily get around on your golf cart. I will be walking, thanks. More healthy that way. Once we move the entire US population to nice golf club retirement communities, we won't produce any more carbon ;-))
Or you can hope that aliens will bring us transporter technology, per Earth Final Conflict.
Ignorance is bliss. Ignorance is arrogance. Stubborn ignorance is Baruch.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 05, 2017, 10:12:47 PM
Ignorance is bliss. Ignorance is arrogance. Stubborn ignorance is Baruch.
Rhetoric won't get you to work or the grocery store. Scoring "points" won't pay the rent. Reality is a bitch.
Quote from: Baruch on December 05, 2017, 07:03:58 PM
No manifest destiny will make it cheap to move one or two tons of metal down the street .. at 40 mph.
No one is saying that it is. What is being said is that that energy has to come from somewhere, and right now technology is available that avoids pumping more smog into the air.
I quite fancy upgrading to one of these in a year or two (http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/eu/zero-ds)
Look at the cost to fill the tank. The whole bike itself only costs a little more than a petrol bike of the same specs.
Quote from: Baruch on December 05, 2017, 07:03:58 PM
Yes, it will end ... while you are driving your $50k golf cart to the store or to work ... so you can look cool and virtue signal.
I don't virtue signal, Baruch, and I couldn't look cool in an igloo. Such things are meaningless to me. If I buy a $50k "golf cart," as you laughably refer electric cars to, it'll be because I think it would be a good buy.
Quote from: Baruch on December 05, 2017, 07:03:58 PM
I am an old man, going blind. Yes, kilowatt is power ... and power times time is energy. I stand corrected again. But doesn't change the actual physics/economics.
I don't believe you know enough about either to tell anyone what about the physics/economics doesn't change. I mean, for fuck's sake, Baruch, you
wrote that kilowatts were a unit of energy â€" you can't blame that on your poor vision.
Quote from: Baruch on December 05, 2017, 07:03:58 PM
No manifest destiny will make it cheap to move one or two tons of metal down the street .. at 40 mph.
It will cost the same amount of
energy, of course, to first approximation, but that doesn't translate to costing the same amount of
dollars. That's the point that seems to be escaping you. The dollar cost of that energy depends on the supply. Like I pointed out before, there is a
silly amount of energy raining down upon our heads from the sun each second. The fossil fuels we burn nowadays is a laughably vanishingly small fraction of the energy that fell upon the earth during the period of those fuels' formation. A suitably placed solar panel can easily gather ~6 Wh/day per watt of installed capacity, and at a cost of $2.87/W and a lifetime of around 20 years (actually better, but nevermind that), that nets you $0.0654/kWh produced.
This is at current solar PV prices. Solar thermal will be even cheaper. Furthermore, what you are really paying for here is human labor. Roughly speaking, the price of a product depends on how much human labor is needed to create it, on a per-unit basis for the complete manufacturing cycle. Automation has a habit of bringing unit costs down for precisely this reason.
While you may be right, you've given no compelling reason to believe that you are. So far, you've given every indication that your doom-and-gloom predictions are nothing more than your brain accumulating mold. Again, nature doesn't care if your having fun.
Quote from: Baruch on December 05, 2017, 07:03:58 PM
Or you can hope that aliens will bring us transporter technology, per Earth Final Conflict.
Says someone who sounds like all their engineering and physics knowledge came from
Star Trek. Color me unimpressed.
Quote from: Baruch on December 06, 2017, 07:32:48 AM
Rhetoric won't get you to work or the grocery store. Scoring "points" won't pay the rent.
Who said anything about scoring points? I've given up on trying to have a conversation with you about this topic. Now I'm just poking around. And are you criticizing rhetoric? Isn't that all you're good for anyway, Baruch?
QuoteReality is a bitch.
Yes. I am well aware. Is that why you're so detached from it, Baruch?
Quote from: Jason78 on December 06, 2017, 12:48:11 PM
No one is saying that it is. What is being said is that that energy has to come from somewhere, and right now technology is available that avoids pumping more smog into the air.
I quite fancy upgrading to one of these in a year or two (http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/eu/zero-ds)
Look at the cost to fill the tank. The whole bike itself only costs a little more than a petrol bike of the same specs.
There is technology ... for the few. Ask the peasants in the jungles of Biafra (much destroyed corner of Nigeria). So what? Unless you can provide transportation for 300+ million Americans, the game is over. Golf carts won't do it.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 06, 2017, 02:21:12 PM
Who said anything about scoring points? I've given up on trying to have a conversation with you about this topic. Now I'm just poking around. And are you criticizing rhetoric? Isn't that all you're good for anyway, Baruch?
Yes. I am well aware. Is that why you're so detached from it, Baruch?
I did not detach from reality ... it detached from me ;-)) I understand pr126 all to well. Same as what happened with the two failed major parties in the US. They could have taken advice from retarded children, rather than policy wonks, and done better these last 40 years. And I will continue to refrain from ad-hominems .. unlike some people.
Quote from: Baruch on December 06, 2017, 08:34:40 PM
There is technology ... for the few. Ask the peasants in the jungles of Biafra (much destroyed corner of Nigeria). So what? Unless you can provide transportation for 300+ million Americans, the game is over. Golf carts won't do it.
Like I said, it only costs a little more than a petrol bike. As the technology matures the price will come down.
Right now I can buy a computer the size of my thumb that twenty years ago would have cost a hundred times as much.
Quote from: Jason78 on December 07, 2017, 01:37:11 PM
Like I said, it only costs a little more than a petrol bike. As the technology matures the price will come down.
Right now I can buy a computer the size of my thumb that twenty years ago would have cost a hundred times as much.
Drive your computer to work then ;-) Technology doesn't equal ... it becomes affordable eventually. And yes, use an electric bicycle to go to work.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 02, 2017, 04:25:57 PM
I give up. Baruch is the independent version of pr. Equally detached from reality, but instead of being very racist and citing brietbart.... he is on some other type of next-level bullshit
Thank you. I keep trying to reason with him. But he is the craziest person I've ever stayed in contact with and can't escape if I stay here.
I wish he was gone.
Quote from: Cavebear on December 09, 2017, 06:14:11 AM
Thank you. I keep trying to reason with him. But he is the craziest person I've ever stayed in contact with and can't escape if I stay here.
I wish he was gone.
I am the anti-you ... in that I am so glad you stay. Because I like you. Think of me as a crazy girlfriend that you can't stop dating ;-))
Quote from: Cavebear on December 09, 2017, 06:14:11 AM
Thank you. I keep trying to reason with him. But he is the craziest person I've ever stayed in contact with and can't escape if I stay here.
I wish he was gone.
I am not going to ban him based on his incoherence in this thread, if that's what you are implying. Incoherence is not grounds for a ban
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
I keep him on ignore and that takes care most of the issues for me. He can spew his idiotic crazy all he likes and I never see it. Works great. This thread topic happens to be of interest to me so I allowed myself to get sucked into his vortex for bit. But I did that by choice so I'm not complaining.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 09, 2017, 12:48:47 PM
I am not going to ban him based on his incoherence in this thread, if that's what you are implying. Incoherence is not grounds for a ban
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Ban on ... did you vote for Hillary? Whatever y'all want ... echo chambers being what they are.
And like I said, if you want an electric bike or golf cart to get to work, be my guest. But it won't revolutionize transportation.
Quote from: Baruch on December 09, 2017, 03:08:26 PM
Ban on ... did you vote for Hillary? Whatever y'all want ... echo chambers being what they are.
And like I said, if you want an electric bike or golf cart to get to work, be my guest. But it won't revolutionize transportation.
Wtf does Hillary Clinton have to do with anything?
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
And wait. "Ban on..." are you literally asking me to ban you? Just want to make sure...
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Quote from: Johan on December 09, 2017, 02:29:42 PM
I keep him on ignore and that takes care most of the issues for me. He can spew his idiotic crazy all he likes and I never see it. Works great. This thread topic happens to be of interest to me so I allowed myself to get sucked into his vortex for bit. But I did that by choice so I'm not complaining.
I wish I could put people on ignore...
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 09, 2017, 03:21:07 PM
I wish I could put people on ignore...
That was always one of things I hated most about being a mod.
Quote from: Baruch on December 09, 2017, 10:00:26 AM
I am the anti-you ... in that I am so glad you stay. Because I like you. Think of me as a crazy girlfriend that you can't stop dating ;-))
No dropped the fantastic hot sex-crazed girlfriend long ago. I need to sleep at least once every couple of days...
And THIS is why I'll never enter politics. Humor this would NAIL me... :(
Quote from: Cavebear on December 18, 2017, 02:36:22 PM
No dropped the fantastic hot sex-crazed girlfriend long ago. I need to sleep at least once every couple of days...
And THIS is why I'll never enter politics. Humor this would NAIL me... :(
I had a marginally deranged sex crazed girlfriend a while back. It was the best sex I ever had. But I couldn't deal with the other crazy stuff. God, I miss that woman. :pullhair:
Quote from: SGOS on December 18, 2017, 02:46:20 PM
I had a marginally deranged sex crazed girlfriend a while back. It was the best sex I ever had. But I couldn't deal with the other crazy stuff. God, I miss that woman. :pullhair:
I'm torn between being socially correct (and intelligently thoughtfully so) and asking if you still have her phone number.
No, I'm kidding. "Hey, stop hitting me Sheri. And tell Trixie to get dressed. We have a softwre frrm to run" Ack... Help!
Quote from: Cavebear on December 18, 2017, 02:51:43 PM
I'm torn between being socially correct (and intelligently thoughtfully so) and asking if you still have her phone number.
No, I'm kidding. "Hey, stop hitting me Sheri. And tell Trixie to get dressed. We have a softwre frrm to run" Ack... Help!
I don't have her phone number as she moves around a lot trying to stay ahead of her creditors, but I did do some internet stalking and found her address. Then I used Google Earth to check further. The street view indicated a pretty shoddy looking neighborhood, but I'm still wondering how she pays the rent. I don't want to even think about that. But I could google her address again for you, assuming she is still there, but she's probably gone. I don't know if she has stalked me or not, but she called me right after we broke up, and let fly with some horribly nasty language and somewhat emasculating accusations, which are too embarrassing to pass on. So I'm not expecting her to show up on my doorstep. Even if I tried to put in a good word for you, it would probably do more harm than good. I don't think it would help to tell her you're a good chess player, but you could fax me a copy of your bank statements, and I could pass those on. That might help.
Quote from: SGOS on December 18, 2017, 03:16:44 PM
I don't have her phone number as she moves around a lot trying to stay ahead of her creditors, but I did do some internet stalking and found her address. Then I used Google Earth to check further. The street view indicated a pretty shoddy looking neighborhood, but I'm still wondering how she pays the rent. I don't want to even think about that. But I could google her address again for you, assuming she is still there, but she's probably gone. I don't know if she has stalked me or not, but she called me right after we broke up, and let fly with some horribly nasty language and somewhat emasculating accusations, which are too embarrassing to pass on. So I'm not expecting her to show up on my doorstep. Even if I tried to put in a good word for you, it would probably do more harm than good. I don't think it would help to tell her you're a good chess player, but you could fax me a copy of your bank statements, and I could pass those on. That might help.
OK, you win. I've run out of humor on this thread. LOL!
Quote from: Cavebear on December 18, 2017, 03:19:26 PM
OK, you win. I've run out of humor on this thread. LOL!
Yeah, we have probably hit the bottom of a pretty sorry barrel right now. I might even delete a few posts.
Quote from: SGOS on December 18, 2017, 03:23:23 PM
Yeah, we have probably hit the bottom of a pretty sorry barrel right now. I might even delete a few posts.
Oh no, please don't delete any posts. I actually only exist here when you po
Quote from: Baruch on December 09, 2017, 03:08:26 PM
Ban on ... did you vote for Hillary? Whatever y'all want ... echo chambers being what they are.
And like I said, if you want an electric bike or golf cart to get to work, be my guest. But it won't revolutionize transportation.
Sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "LA LA LA LA LA!" is not going to change reality.
It is currently revolutionising transportation. Hybrid vehicles are now ubiquitous. We've already got fully electric vehicles on our streets. As the technology improves they will get cheaper and more will appear.
Back when the motor car was first invented there were a lot of people like you that said it would never work and it would never catch on. Now we rarely see a horse on the city streets unless it's a mounted police officer.
Quote from: Jason78 on December 18, 2017, 04:21:15 PM
Sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "LA LA LA LA LA!" is not going to change reality.
It is currently revolutionising transportation. Hybrid vehicles are now ubiquitous. We've already got fully electric vehicles on our streets. As the technology improves they will get cheaper and more will appear.
Back when the motor car was first invented there were a lot of people like you that said it would never work and it would never catch on. Now we rarely see a horse on the city streets unless it's a mounted police officer.
I have a 2005 Toyota Highlander. Believe it or not, I only have 25K miles on it. The SUV is just for towing a boat.
I no longer have the boat.
I am dithering betwee an electric or waiting for a fuel cell vecicle. Keep in mind, dring an SUV only 2,000 miles per year is not much in gas, so I can wait.
What sounds good to you for me?
Quote from: Jason78 on December 18, 2017, 04:21:15 PM
Sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "LA LA LA LA LA!" is not going to change reality.
It is currently revolutionising transportation. Hybrid vehicles are now ubiquitous. We've already got fully electric vehicles on our streets. As the technology improves they will get cheaper and more will appear.
Back when the motor car was first invented there were a lot of people like you that said it would never work and it would never catch on. Now we rarely see a horse on the city streets unless it's a mounted police officer.
Marxist cars of the future, unite! We have only to lose our tires!
Quote from: Cavebear on December 18, 2017, 04:29:26 PM
I have a 2005 Toyota Highlander. Believe it or not, I only have 25K miles on it. The SUV is just for towing a boat.
I no longer have the boat.
I am dithering betwee an electric or waiting for a fuel cell vecicle. Keep in mind, dring an SUV only 2,000 miles per year is not much in gas, so I can wait.
What sounds good to you for me?
I'd wait to buy until you're going to need to new vehicle. One of the advantages of the new hybrids and electrics in the UK is a vastly reduced tax bill. Reduced or zero emissions means no vehicle tax, and no petrol or diesel means no fuel tax.
Quote from: Jason78 on December 19, 2017, 01:10:57 PM
I'd wait to buy until you're going to need to new vehicle. One of the advantages of the new hybrids and electrics in the UK is a vastly reduced tax bill. Reduced or zero emissions means no vehicle tax, and no petrol or diesel means no fuel tax.
Tax breaks to people who cut back on CO2 emissions? That's un-American. Well, we do it here too, but while that sounds practical, it's politically incorrect. What is British Petroleum saying about this? And the coal miners. What about the coal miners?
Quote from: SGOS on December 19, 2017, 02:29:54 PM
Tax breaks to people who cut back on CO2 emissions? That's un-American. Well, we do it here too, but while that sounds practical, it's politically incorrect. What is British Petroleum saying about this? And the coal miners. What about the coal miners?
Tax incentives is yet another market distortion. If it isn't for cash (no credit) at every stage and without any subsidy direct or indirect, then you don't know what you are paying for (short term or long term). But that is the point, FUD on everything, to control the sheeple.
I would abolish credit and taxes. If you want police protection, get your own gun and know how to use it. Yes, sometimes I am like an anarchist. I just want a government (head Mafia) to be in charge of the anarchy, and not abandon their responsibilities. Society itself is anarchic ... it isn't just about being anti-government ... as I am pro-government. Just pro-anarchy in private sector. Pro-order in the public sector.
Quote from: SGOS on December 19, 2017, 02:29:54 PM
Tax breaks to people who cut back on CO2 emissions? That's un-American. Well, we do it here too, but while that sounds practical, it's politically incorrect. What is British Petroleum saying about this? And the coal miners. What about the coal miners?
It's existing legislation mostly. And BP Amoco plc has been an american concern for quite some time. Margaret Thatcher made sure that we've got no coal mines, and therefore no coal miners to worry about.
Quote from: Baruch on December 19, 2017, 06:42:16 PM
Tax incentives is yet another market distortion. If it isn't for cash (no credit) at every stage and without any subsidy direct or indirect, then you don't know what you are paying for (short term or long term). But that is the point, FUD on everything, to control the sheeple.
I would abolish credit and taxes. If you want police protection, get your own gun and know how to use it. Yes, sometimes I am like an anarchist. I just want a government (head Mafia) to be in charge of the anarchy, and not abandon their responsibilities. Society itself is anarchic ... it isn't just about being anti-government ... as I am pro-government. Just pro-anarchy in private sector. Pro-order in the public sector.
So who enforces the pro-order in the public sector in your dream-world? The police you don't think you need? The militia you imagine will enforce rules? Oh but wait, who controls the militia? That nutcase down the road with the AK-47s...
Quote from: Cavebear on December 23, 2017, 04:24:36 AM
So who enforces the pro-order in the public sector in your dream-world? The police you don't think you need? The militia you imagine will enforce rules? Oh but wait, who controls the militia? That nutcase down the road with the AK-47s...
Make everyone into King Louis XIV ... "le etat ceste moi". That is real democracy. Can you think of anything more appropriate for individualism-mad Americans?
Yes, this is satire. The last thing I want is freedom. Only criminals want that.
Quote from: Baruch on December 23, 2017, 06:54:50 AM
Make everyone into King Louis XIV ... "le etat ceste moi". That is real democracy. Can you think of anything more appropriate for individualism-mad Americans?
Yes, this is satire. The last thing I want is freedom. Only criminals want that.
Yeah, I know the quote, DUH! I have some education. You just THINK you are the only one who got out of high school with passing grades, LOL!
And that is NOT "real democracy". Yes, I can think of many things more appropriate for Americans. You just really don't LIKE democracy, do you?
Quote from: Cavebear on December 23, 2017, 07:55:27 AM
Yeah, I know the quote, DUH! I have some education. You just THINK you are the only one who got out of high school with passing grades, LOL!
And that is NOT "real democracy". Yes, I can think of many things more appropriate for Americans. You just really don't LIKE democracy, do you?
I don't like humans (collectively) same as you. Only my misanthropy is more general, I don't limit it to Republicans. And no, I hate the abortion of ancient and modern democracy (aka leadership by people who don't know what they are doing ... per Socrates). There is no good solution, given ape people. The problem with The Republic is that Guardians are shit-heads.
Quote from: Baruch on December 23, 2017, 11:20:53 AM
I don't like humans (collectively) same as you. Only my misanthropy is more general, I don't limit it to Republicans. And no, I hate the abortion of ancient and modern democracy (aka leadership by people who don't know what they are doing ... per Socrates). There is no good solution, given ape people. The problem with The Republic is that Guardians are shit-heads.
So, is the John Birch Society too tame for you?
Quote from: Cavebear on December 23, 2017, 01:04:47 PM
So, is the John Birch Society too tame for you?
John Birch Society was a little nuts, about anti-Communism. Saw them under every bed, particularly in government. Saw government employees who didn't think right, as a Fifth Column. Turns out the real Fifth Column were the Clintons ... see how many Clinton/Obama friends have left, or are leaving the FBI and State Dept? Like Whittaker Chambers, I bet the Clinton's exchanged secret notes on Halloween in hollowed out pumpkins. Must have been a big pumpkin to hide Weiner's laptop of filth and treason.
Quote from: Baruch on December 24, 2017, 01:31:12 AM
John Birch Society was a little nuts, about anti-Communism. Saw them under every bed, particularly in government. Saw government employees who didn't think right, as a Fifth Column. Turns out the real Fifth Column were the Clintons ... see how many Clinton/Obama friends have left, or are leaving the FBI and State Dept? Like Whittaker Chambers, I bet the Clinton's exchanged secret notes on Halloween in hollowed out pumpkins. Must have been a big pumpkin to hide Weiner's laptop of filth and treason.
Oh call them now. You'll fit right in. You will hardly even know you weren't one of them from the start.
Quote from: Cavebear on December 26, 2017, 06:27:32 AM
Oh call them now. You'll fit right in. You will hardly even know you weren't one of them from the start.
You project your inner JBS and KKK ... you are White and male. Shame forever for you.
Quote from: Baruch on December 26, 2017, 09:00:57 AM
You project your inner JBS and KKK ... you are White and male. Shame forever for you.
LOL! My opinions about the JBS and KKK can't be posted even here. But I will consider wishing them an Early Christian Hell. For a few minutes. Even I can't be so cruel as most deities...
Quote from: Cavebear on December 26, 2017, 10:55:52 AM
LOL! My opinions about the JBS and KKK can't be posted even here. But I will consider wishing them an Early Christian Hell. For a few minutes. Even I can't be so cruel as most deities...
Careful you don't spontaneously combust. All the characters we project, reside in our Id. Just ask the Krell.
Quote from: Baruch on December 26, 2017, 03:17:21 PM
Careful you don't spontaneously combust. All the characters we project, reside in our Id. Just ask the Krell.
My Id, Ego, and Superego are quite well attuned, thankyouverymuch... We discuss me constantly.
The electric car as it is currently situated is a scam. It wouldn't exist if it weren't heavily subsidized by the government, and even then the price tag means it is being subsidized for the benefit of the rich. They have yet to build one that would be worthwhile for the average person - fast refill time, good distance, convenient refill locations.
Even then, the ones with the best mileage only achieve that if you don't use any accessories, such as radio or air conditioning.
If you need to go 10 miles into town and 10 miles back, then it could be good enough. If you need to go 30 miles to work like I do, the good ones can almost get you there.
The powers that be like it for several reasons. The first is because, as Baruch pointed out, the pollution cost is well hidden. They don't pollute at the tailpipe ... but the electricity does come from somewhere. Second, their distance is limited, keeping us serfs from having too much mobility. Third, they are expensive, forcing us serfs onto public transit.
Where are you getting your information from Jason?
Nissan Leaf (https://www.nissan.co.uk/vehicles/new-vehicles/leaf.html)
Eric Peters Autos.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on February 04, 2018, 10:15:18 PM
The electric car as it is currently situated is a scam. It wouldn't exist if it weren't heavily subsidized by the government, and even then the price tag means it is being subsidized for the benefit of the rich. They have yet to build one that would be worthwhile for the average person - fast refill time, good distance, convenient refill locations.
Even then, the ones with the best mileage only achieve that if you don't use any accessories, such as radio or air conditioning.
If you need to go 10 miles into town and 10 miles back, then it could be good enough. If you need to go 30 miles to work like I do, the good ones can almost get you there.
The powers that be like it for several reasons. The first is because, as Baruch pointed out, the pollution cost is well hidden. They don't pollute at the tailpipe ... but the electricity does come from somewhere. Second, their distance is limited, keeping us serfs from having too much mobility. Third, they are expensive, forcing us serfs onto public transit.
Successful socialism, including corporate socialism, relies on displaced income and expenses ... so that the balance sheet can be massaged. But then so does the Tragedy of the Commons. When you don't account for all cash and credit streams, it is easy to think that economics is magical.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on February 05, 2018, 10:08:17 AM
Eric Peters Autos.
Then may I suggest you might want to find a more reliable source.
Quote from: Baruch on December 26, 2017, 03:17:21 PM
Careful you don't spontaneously combust. All the characters we project, reside in our Id. Just ask the Krell.
Oh, no, monsters from the Id!
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-z0qaOC2ysng/V4FvEZxzANI/AAAAAAAAAe8/_UnHQXpvdXA9IELhyJyltxOij8i3xZKBwCK4B/s1600/ForbiddenPlanet-Id-Roar-sm.gif)
Where did you get the image of a typical triggered college student? ;-) Gotta use blasters (that is what they called them in 1954) to keep them from trashing the whole campus.
Quote from: Baruch on February 05, 2018, 06:30:16 PM
Where did you get the image of a typical triggered college student? ;-)
Just googled "monsters from the id" - it's from
Forbidden Planet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbidden_Planet), the precursor to Star Trek.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 05, 2018, 06:45:56 PM
Just googled "monsters from the id" - it's from Forbidden Planet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbidden_Planet), the precursor to Star Trek.
Rhetorical question .. no need to answer. Dr Morbius.
Okay, I exaggerated about the limited range of the electric car, but it does have a range/recharge issue. If I were to visit my in-laws, I have to drive 400 miles. I can refuel my gas car in less than 10 minutes as well.
Quote from: Baruch on February 05, 2018, 07:02:23 PM
Rhetorical question .. no need to answer. Dr Morbius.
Yes, I knew that, but there may be other readers who wanted to know about it.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on February 05, 2018, 07:53:28 PM
Okay, I exaggerated about the limited range of the electric car, but it does have a range/recharge issue. If I were to visit my in-laws, I have to drive 400 miles. I can refuel my gas car in less than 10 minutes as well.
They're working on that. Range is arguably a minor problem, since models with 100-200+ mile ranges are now fairly common. Granted, if you're regularly undertaking 400 mile journeys, that might be a problem, but the average person's daily needs are much less demanding.
Recharging can now take <30 minutes with quick charging systems. Then there's overnight residential charging (a several-hour recharge time doesn't matter if it occurs while you're sleeping) and potentially, wireless charging (recharge while you're parked) or simply swap out batteries.
I predict that both range and recharge times will only improve as new technologies come into play.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on February 05, 2018, 07:53:28 PM
Okay, I exaggerated about the limited range of the electric car, but it does have a range/recharge issue. If I were to visit my in-laws, I have to drive 400 miles. I can refuel my gas car in less than 10 minutes as well.
You just have to move into the same house as your in-laws and other relatives ;-) Then the travel distance is much shorter. You won't even need a bicycle, and you will look swell in your Mao jacket, proclaiming your fealty to Hillary Kim Un.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on February 05, 2018, 07:53:28 PM
Okay, I exaggerated about the limited range of the electric car, but it does have a range/recharge issue. If I were to visit my in-laws, I have to drive 400 miles. I can refuel my gas car in less than 10 minutes as well.
Electric cars have range limitations. So do gas ones. The difference is that electric car charging stations are not yet widespread. Someday they will be. And I suggest it will work this way:
1. The Federal Govt will support electrical recharging stations to support a growing fleet of State and Federal Govt vehicles like Mail cars, govt fleet cars, and diplomatic cars.
2. The Govt will open the stations to private vehicles for a slight fee to encourage their use.
3. The existence of some electrical recharging stations in cities will encourage highway rest stops to add fast-recharging stations among their gas and diesel ones.
4. The growing use of charging stations will cause tech companies to improve the technology.
If you think that seems unlikely, think of how the gasoline stations started...
Rechargables already work in dense urban settings, where driving ranges are short. Why not try there first? People who have to commute daily over 70 - 90 miles ... as I did once upon a time, are not candidates for this utopia.
Quote from: Baruch on February 06, 2018, 11:19:39 PM
Rechargables already work in dense urban settings, where driving ranges are short. Why not try there first? People who have to commute daily over 70 - 90 miles ... as I did once upon a time, are not candidates for this utopia.
Yes, that would be "cities", as I mentioned. Um, electrical car ranges are above 90 miles these days (https://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/electric-vehicles-with-the-longest-driving-range.html/?a=viewall)
But most commutes are far shorter than that around cities. The prob is that there aren't enough fast charge stations. There will be in a few years.
Quote from: Baruch on February 06, 2018, 11:19:39 PM
Rechargables already work in dense urban settings, where driving ranges are short. Why not try there first?
They are trying there first.
Quote from: Baruch on February 06, 2018, 11:19:39 PM
People who have to commute daily over 70 - 90 miles ... as I did once upon a time, are not candidates for this utopia.
That is well within the range of an electric car. Even if your shift was only 4 hours long, your car would be recharged by the time you left.
Quote from: Jason78 on February 07, 2018, 06:32:12 AM
They are trying there first.
That is well within the range of an electric car. Even if your shift was only 4 hours long, your car would be recharged by the time you left.
Agreed. But that's assuming you had recharging privileges at work.
Mao bicycles don't require charging and are good for your health ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on February 07, 2018, 07:43:39 AM
Mao bicycles don't require charging and are good for your health ;-)
Hurray. Pedal 20 miles to work every day. You will be the strongest-legged dead guy at 50.
If recharging stations were more common, it wouldn't help with the recharge issue - how long it takes to recharge. I can refuel my suv in less than 10 minutes.
The recharge issue is a technological problem. Theoretically, supercapacitors can fill up on a full charge in seconds. There are problems with them, though.
Also, a standardized battery could be made to be field-swappable. Then refueling an electric car is as fast as it takes to swap that battery.
Quote from: Cavebear on February 06, 2018, 08:04:27 PM
If you think that seems unlikely, think of how the gasoline stations started...
Indeed. The horse and buggy crowd were pointing out that cars run out of fuel, and you had to have fueling stations. The problem was quite easily solved by building fueling stations (duh!) bought and paid for by enterprising entrepreneurs, who could turn a profit, and in a short time billions of dollars were added to the economic infrastructure.
And look at the crappy cars people owned to create the boom. You can point out the flaws as you see them in current electric cars, but that doesn't mean they will never been fixed, just as the flaws of the Model T eventually led to the well designed more efficient Japanese style cars of today.
I know there is probably government funding being funneled into alternatives to fossil fuel, but I don't see this as a nefarious conspiracy. A large part of the population wants an alternative. Some don't of course, so there is going to be conflict either way.
It seems sensible to encourage experimentation. Sometimes the experiments will fail, but it's probably better to test and learn than wait for the free enterprise system to, out of nowhere, come up with a perfect vehicle that will send investors scrambling to buy into the new wave. But that's letting economics manage our lives. I'd prefer that we manage our economics, and our direction.
Gas stations happened over a long time, and due to free enterprise. All I see here is how a Solyndra solution should be pushed on us by the D-party or R-party government hacks. If it is economical, it will happen, no matter what Popular Mechanics says.
Why can't they just put car chargers in all the parking lots, or any place they can put a parking meter?
Quote from: Baruch on February 08, 2018, 12:59:47 PM
Gas stations happened over a long time, and due to free enterprise. All I see here is how a Solyndra solution should be pushed on us by the D-party or R-party government hacks. If it is economical, it will happen, no matter what Popular Mechanics says.
That's my point. If people need charging stations, businessmen will provide them for a profit. It should be right up your alley. It's the free enterprise part of the equation. The charging stations will be there if there is a need. The bigger the need the more services will arise and will do so either quickly or slowly in direct proportion to demand. Now if you want to talk about the insufficiency of electric cars, that matters of course, but I wasn't talking about that. You seem to be saying that electric cars can't be feasible, and your argument is based on the state of current technology remaining constant. This is not supported by past experience, however. Technology grows, and it's speeding up. Where's your old scientific spirit, Man?
Science? You mean Popular Science? I want my George Jetson flying car now!
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 08, 2018, 01:16:15 PM
Why can't they just put car chargers in all the parking lots, or any place they can put a parking meter?
They can. And the probably will. Target needs to have a parking lot and until now, there was little to no opportunity for them to realize any revenue on that real estate. They need a parking lot so they had to buy the land, build the lot on it and maintain it even though they make no money from it directly. Putting in banks of charging stations would change that. The moment there are enough electric vehicles on the road to make installation of charging stations worth while, they will pop up in parking lots everywhere.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 08, 2018, 01:16:15 PM
Why can't they just put car chargers in all the parking lots, or any place they can put a parking meter?
They could, but then the electric cars would work, and that would piss off the grumpy ole fuddy duddies.
Quote from: SGOS on February 08, 2018, 08:02:35 PM
They could, but then the electric cars would work, and that would piss off the grumpy ole fuddy duddies.
Easy fix. Take your money, and start a charging station business. That is capitalism for you.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 08, 2018, 01:16:15 PM
Why can't they just put car chargers in all the parking lots, or any place they can put a parking meter?
At marinas, you plug your boat into a electrical box on the dock, and the marina adds it to your bill. And every dock has it's own box. But the parking meter outlet concept is already available. At Hilo, I plugged my electrical cord up to a thing that looked just like a parking meter on the shore. Put in a quarter and turn the knob. You could put in several quarters and you got extra time, just like a parking meter. Run your electrical system, charge your battery, and watch a movie. I mean this isn't some big deal that a genius has to come along and create. You just buy the things and install them. You could probably order one tonight, and have it working by this weekend.
Then do it.
Quote from: Baruch on February 08, 2018, 08:20:53 PM
Then do it.
Why would I want to do that? You should get someone to explain this capitalism thing to you.
Quote from: SGOS on February 08, 2018, 10:11:39 PM
Why would I want to do that? You should get someone to explain this capitalism thing to you.
You are a socialist parasite then? Or are you hoping to be made a commissar for electric autos?
Quote from: Baruch on February 08, 2018, 10:46:22 PM
You are a socialist parasite then? Or are you hoping to be made a commissar for electric autos?
You do realize you're not making sense, right?
Quote from: Johan on February 08, 2018, 07:41:09 PM
They can. And the probably will. Target needs to have a parking lot and until now, there was little to no opportunity for them to realize any revenue on that real estate. They need a parking lot so they had to buy the land, build the lot on it and maintain it even though they make no money from it directly. Putting in banks of charging stations would change that. The moment there are enough electric vehicles on the road to make installation of charging stations worth while, they will pop up in parking lots everywhere.
I like the idea of recharging you electric car while shopping. Chargers aren't free to install, but merchants do loss-leaders to get people into the stores.
I saw an ad today for luggage that includes a phone charger. Tech will advance.