> By valuing our offsprings' safety so highly we're effectively raising hatchlings in tubs, as opposed to wild fish gifted with a hardy stream upbringing.
How do you show this? The number of parameters leading to success is ludicrously high. Is there even a frailty in need of explaining? How about all the other environmental factors, like lack of the opportunity to invest in careers and cheap subsidized housing like our grandparents got? This sounds suspiciously like pop psych crap.
> It seems it's a much safer/cheaper/simpler/reliable option to purchase a vehicle designed from the ground up for an electric drivetrain and all of the nuances that go along with that.
Cheaper? Have you seen what electric cars retail for? How are you comparing this to the price of conversion?
I suspect they mean buying a used EV such as the last generation Nissan Leaf, which can be had for reasonable prices; I've seen pre 2013 ones for less than 6k.
I was under the impression the battery packs are where a LOT of the depreciation comes from, so that's not really a valid comparison unless it's used with a fresh battery pack.
Public transit has a great economic argument today for both reducing city emissions, monthly and repair costs, and having a great profile for harvesting brake energy. In many cases you can electrify via wire and save on battery costs. Consumer cars though? Still 100% a luxury. I imagine a lot of other parameters would factor into why you would electrify vs buying off the (still tiny) market other than price.
I bet you see these first used in bulk by people re-electrifying hobby cars + upgrading fleets of vans and taxis.
I think you are right. Looking at a new EV is probably going to set a Canadian back about 30,000$. That is a lot of money. But I do have a 2005 AWD Hyundai Tucson in my back yard with a blown engine but otherwise in really good shape. It would be a lot of fun to dump the engine and replace it with this. Something I could do in my spare time as it is just sitting in my back yard anyways. I don't think this will be huge that everyone will be doing it but I do think there will be a large enough market of backyard mechanics and the likes who find ways to use these.
Brick and mortar stores are going out of business left and right based on the market reality that people are more than willing to wait 2 days for their items if it's cheaper and is delivered to their door.
I think it's an extremely niche market, so I think it'll only be successful if you charge out the nose for the delivery.
They're going out of business because their inventory sucks. Every recession makes them suck more as MBAs optimize for lower quality and less selection.
Now would that be my neighbors who drive a dirtbike around their property for 6 hours a day, or the neighbors who tie their dog up outside at night and let it bark constantly at 2am?
It's the people who wake up saying "gosh my life would be so much better if I could just sell things faster", they're not really looking to improve your life, just the bottom line.
I have kids, and this isn't a problem for me - not really sure what the children angle is here?
I live in a small rural town in Scotland, yet Amazon and others can deliver stuff to my door the next day. In big cities, some companies even offer same-day delivery.
Honestly, I don't need my stuff any quicker than that.
I'm sure there are some genuinely useful niche uses for drones - for example, there was a recent HN post about a company in Africa doing drone delivery of medical supplies to remote and inaccessible locations.
But I don't think it's a good idea to fill our skies with noisy, flying lithium batteries, just so you can get a pizza in 16 minutes instead of 18.
Do you own a blender? How often do you use it? Do you not think that the economic and environmental cost of producing that blender is too large, considering how rarely you use it? It literally sits unused 99.99% of the time. Talk about inefficiency!
If a drone service could deliver a blender in 5 minutes when you had blending to do, and take it away again when you're done, the blender could get much better utilisation by being shared with the entire town, at a lower economic and environmental cost.
The same probably applies to nearly everything in your house.
While you might have a point for some items, I think there are diminishing returns for most; I obviously don't have numbers, but it would seem to be highly inefficient to fly a blender around with a drone. Your 5-minute figure is also pretty unrealistic.
I could see how drone delivery might work for high value items, but they could just as easily be delivered in an EV van/truck carrying hundreds of items instead of just one. One genuinely useful case might be quickly flying blood/organs to a hospital.
There is also the human cost to consider; the noise of a single drone is very irritating, I can't imagine the horror of having our skies filled with the things.
I know of course you were generalising, but in my particular case, I actually do use my mini-blender quite often (for making curry pastes) :)
Ah good, a response instead of an unhelpful downvote or 2.
I guess it's from experience, that when there's a bottleneck in my work and in many other areas I've seen it's down to lack of ram hitting VM.
Now lack of CPU is less crippling in a way, the CPU just divides n ways and things run proportionately slower. If paging happens, it can easily be far worse than lack of CPU as disk is so slow (ok, SSDs these days may ameliorate that; I've no experience there).
So why? Experience suggests lack of ram is more common than lack of cpu and the effect is worse. Of course the best thing to do is examine your system before you take anyone's advice, including mine.
I would take 64 gigs of memory/4 cores over 16gigs/12 cores any day. The idea of many core is simply less preposterous than it was even a few years ago.
Oh heck yes, at least IME. I work in DBs and in a company I worked for were renting 16GB machines for the hosted service for their clients. I almost literally armtwisted them into upgrading to a 64GB dev machine. When they saw how that ran, within 3 days they'd started rolling out 64GB machines to their clients. Perf difference was huuuge because the hot dataset could fit into ram at last.
As ever, it depends on one's needs, but most often that need is greater for memory. IME. YMMV. Measure first as always.
I suppose Tinder-style rapid decision apps might excel with a touch screen. Infinite scrollable timelines are certainly built for touchscreens, though I can’t think the last time I asked for one....
99% of the time the reason I put up with touch screens is so I don’t have to sit at my desk.
This isn't true for smartphones anymore. Touchscreen keyboards provide much more data that can be used for autocorrect. Also, you can't swipe type on a keyboard.
> Touchscreen keyboards provide much more data that can be used for autocorrect.
My spelling mistakes are either from muscle memory hitting an incorrect sequence of characters, transposing letters, or from me not knowing how to spell a word. How is a touchscreen going to improve any of those problems?
> There’s nothing wrong with this, by the way. You’re in the business of unemploying people.
Grow a damn backbone, man. Sprout some values. You’ll find life more worth living. Have some pride in your work.