I worked on a small team that created a CPU in the late 1990s and we stacked DDR dies on top of the CPU die and ran vertical traces. It was cool to have the entire computer inside one package.
I had a C64 as well. My school had a programming class and we all shared a TRS80 (I think). I remember writing a program to find prime numbers and thinking about various optimizations. Mine was fastest, and I was proud. Then the boy that wrote directly in assembly ran his... That was the moment I decided to get good. :-)
As somebody who wants less cars and more public transportation, I think your messaging is way off.
This is an all-hands-on-deck situation where we need to pursue all options simultaneously. And there are huge swathes of our country that we will not be able to transition out of suburban sprawl into transit-friendly planning in the necessary amount of time.
So in 2050, there will still be cars, and we can not build enough public transportation in time to solve climate change (and in fact we won't transition to EVs fast enough to solve climate change, if we rely on EVs alone either...)
Co-signed. One really concept is the locked-in demand: every single internal combustion vehicle sold now means someone is buying gas for at least two decades, but even if you use entirely coal power an EV will generate fewer carbon emissions now and that will drop rapidly every time cleaner power is added to the grid.
No, wrong. Completely wrong. The US auto industry doesn't believe EVs will save them--they're certain it's going to kill them or almost, but the EV transition is being forced by CARB + ROW (Europe, China and Korea) which don't really give a shit whether the US auto companies like it or not. They will chase China and Korea or die. It's really that simple and has nothing to do with what they want and entirely what they're forced into by global competition and regulation.
For the express vs. local, sometimes it will ASK me what train I am on. When there are delays that cause trains to be closer together, it does this. I presume they are crowd-sourcing some data instead of trying to only use an algorithm.
I live in SF. I haven't owned a car in many years. I bicycle or take public transit when my destination is too far to walk. I still purchase auto insurance that costs me something like $15/month. It has been years since I've driven, but I do this because I might rent a car on holiday or might drive a friend's car on a roadtrip someday. If I ever needed to get a car again, a period without auto-insurance makes insurance VERY expensive. I did that when living abroad before. I never thought about it covering me as a cyclist or pedestrian. God willing, I'll never need it.
The last paragraphs of this article are brilliant...
> “It’s not going to cure cancer, it’s not going to bring world peace, two things that we desperately need right now,” she says.
“But I would argue that there is great value in understanding the world [and] how biodiversity works so that we can preserve it, which is an integral component of human health,” says Pringle.
She adds: “It’s not clear to me that the best way to repair the world isn’t sitting and watching lichens grow in a cemetery and telling the world about it.”
reply