Skip Navigation

Posts
5
Comments
38
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Not quite. EVs can still do door to door transport, are faster portal to portal, and have a vastly more diverse infrastructure, including the ability to (at least in a limited extent) traverse areas without track or road infrastructure. Public transit is still better, especially for rail, in reducing energy losses due to wheel deformation, reduction of human fatigue and dependence on attentiveness, and in some cases station to station speed and net air resistance per passenger mile. Since this is technology instead of fuckcars, it seems reasonable not to circlejerk too much.

  • In traffic, the largest reduction of efficiency comes from accelerating and the braking. You use energy to start moving (proportional to m V^2) and then you dump that energy into heat in your brakes to stop. The second comes from idling where you use energy to keep the engine rotating. As others have mentioned, EVs use regenerative braking so a substantial portion of the energy used to slow and stop the car is used to recharge the battery. EVs have no need to keep an engine running so unless you’re running the a/c there are minimal demands on a stopped/idling EV.

    On the highway, you have the internal friction in the drivetrain to overcome, the constant deformation of the tires, and - most importantly - wind resistance, which is proportional to cd x rho x V2.

    Cd (drag) and rho (air density) are low, but that V (speed) squared means driving at 75mph incurs 25x the energy use as driving at 15 mph. An EV gets no sage harbor here - plowing through a fluid (air) is essentially the same work.

    To give you a sense of numbers, my vehicle (F150) gets less than 10mpg the 5 miles to my local pool/gym. The speed limit is 25 mph but there are stop signs every block or two. Lots of braking loss. On back roads with gentle curves and a 45 mph limit I get close to 30 mpg. That’s the sweet spot between overcoming transmission friction and air resistance. On the highway at 60 mph I get 22-23 mpg. At 78-79 mph I get 19 mpg. These are all generally on flat stretches using the 6 min average on my dashboard.

    (Sorry for the long post…I’m an engineer and mechanical efficiency and aerodynamics are my happy place)

  • Nearly all of the basic research is already taxpayer funded through research grants. There are still development costs (especially trials and such), but most of the money spent my large pharmaceutical companies goes into marketing. (it's been a few years, but last time I looked in the mid-teens it was more than 50% of their overall budget iirc)

  • No it will be more expensive. The pricing would be based on how much it currently costs, priced competitively (95% of, say, $500,000) and then they'd add $500,000 to account for the fact that you would recover more of your life and avoid suffering, so $950k total. Of course they may simply price is based on the value of your life. Say the average value of a human is $1.5M in a typical wrongful death suit; they might price it at $1.25M - a bargain!.

    Before you laugh at my logic, I'll point out that Luxturna priced their retinal degeneration drug based on how much value courts placed on lost eyesight. They found that to be around the million-dollar range. The price of treatment was then set at $850,000, because that's clearly providing value over the monetary equivalent of loss of eyesight (Jeffrey Marrazzo, CEO, was quoted in an interview that this was the basis). Of course, there's an evilly fun MBA discussion to be had, as well, as your pricing could also be how much it's worth to a parent not to have to watch their children slowly and unavoidably go blind as they become teenagers. Other drugs are often based on the cost avoidance or value of human life of 100-150k per year, and I'm sure they will argue that a cure should account for the entire life amortization of such a cost. Maybe it will be $5M for someone in their 20s, but only $500k for someone in their 70s.

  • Which is why the Moderna vaccine will be priced at just 95% of the cost of the repeat treatments and hospitalization plus the value of the time saved and pain and suffering avoidance by the patient. Say, an extra half a million. I mean, what price would you put on avoiding seeing your parent or child subjected to round after round of chemotherapy?

  • Back in my day there were just two orientations. All these variations are…unnatural. Your screen came out of the box in landscape or portrait, and I don’t believe in any of this “diagonal” nonsense.

  • I still wish it could render rich text and pdfs/attachments in the composition window, but other than that (and lack of native ocr) it's been a perfect EN replacement for my uses.

    1. No matter how small a project is, always purchase new wood stock first. You can then save the rest for a future project.
    2. to make your trip to the lumber yard more efficient, pick up a few extra interesting pieces while you’re there. Don’t worry about taking a list of what is back at the shop - you can always use the extra on a small project
    3. When considering if it’s worth using the stock you have, realize that you might need it for something later (also see rule 1)
  • No, no - they're not raising the price; they're rebalancing it to reflect the value it delivers!!1!

    And since they've reduced the free version functionality significantly, I believe I'm due a substantial rebate.

  • I love piracy like I love electricity - it makes my life easier, and I will extoll the virtues when asked. It doesn't rise to a core political belief for me, though.

  • Huh, my page is empty.

    Put one in the win column for Surfshark. (and a tip of the hat to TopCashBack, who is rebating me 80-90% of my recent 2 year renewal)

  • Steel ( including stainless) is up to twice as stiff as titanium - meaning it flexes half as much under load for the same thickness/shape. It’s also almost twice as heavy. To get a rigid material that is also lightweight, you need to look at exotic alloys like beryllium-aluminum, but the trade off I’d often poor toughness (fracture resistance) and difficult manufacture.

  • kinda neat

    Climate debate over folks. "Kinda neat" trumps destroying the environment every day of the week. If they were just "sorta neat" or "not really neat" we could ban them, but putting a few hundre metric tons of plastics into the waste stream is a reasonable tradeoff when you're at the level of "kinda neat".

    I kid, of course...kinda.

  • Well, that and every time you touch a DOC/DOCX file it reformats itself to your local settings, fucking up the entire layout. PDF is a terrible, inefficient, poorly (or at least variably) implemented format which was proprietary for two decades but is now about the best option we have for a document to look the same at the recipient end as the sender and still include text, vector, bitmapped, semi-interactive, and certifiable/traceable contents.

  • people who can’t even do 13+24 without having to use a calculator

    More importantly, you end up with people who don't recognize that 13+24=87 is incorrect. Math->calculator is not about knowing the math, per se, but knowing enough to recognize when it's wrong.

    I don't envy professors/teachers who are hacing to figure out novel ways of determining the level of mastery of a class of 30, 40, or 100 students in the era of online assistance. Because, really, we still need people who can turn out top level, accurate, well researched documentation. If we lose them, who will we train the next gen LLM on? ;-)

  • They’re wrong, of course.

    You don’t have to enter a license key.

  • Oh, the high seas are very, very busy these days. Still a bit difficult for the non technical user, but there is buried treasure out there.

  • What OP didn't tell you is that, due to its age, it's running on an unpatched WinXP SP2 install and patching, upgrading to SP3, or to any newer Windows OS will break the software calls that version of Pascal relies upon.

  • Except for you Adobe. That's a cost issue.

    AutoDesk had entered the chat