vectorjohn

5 ms·

1.
by vectorjohn 6y ago
I've actually been using this since the year started, and it helps you have clear fitness goals more than anything else I've tried before.
2.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
Yes, that's exactly the point. It disarms people from fighting over patent nonsense. If you hate software patents you should love the bad + patents license.
3.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
What is it that makes solar panels cost what they do, ultimately? Not materials, right? Those are all basically sand and other not so special things. Labor? Isn't it mostly automated? Upkeep of the factories? Input energy? Maybe it&#x2
4.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
I think it would be much easier to use methane. Just as carbon neutral if you make it yourself, and doesn't have as many exotic engineering requirements. I didn't know that about fuel cells though, interesting.
5.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
Also, any doctor will tell you that.
6.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
Even buses don't take you door to door. I can't imagine a future where a streetcar is anywhere near as good as self driving cars (possibly paired with mass transit).
7.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
I really want to be in the business of writing the software that plans these things. The possibilities are crazy. Predicting where to have cars based on overall traffic flows, having cars ready for individuals who always leave at the same t
8.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
Cabs are expensive, relatively slow, and busses are just slow and don't take you to your destination. Really, this doesn't seem like much of a stretch.
9.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
Those aren't congesting city streets, at least that I've ever seen.
10.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
Uh, what? Cabs are already really popular. Why would a self driving car be "from hell"? You think they can't be cleaned?
11.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
I think car sharing even works in those cases. It's all a logistical problem. Not that there won't be some people who own cars. There just aren't that many problems that are hard to solve with car shares to outweigh the huge
12.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
Driverless cars can take you between train stations and destinations. No magical form of train will come to your house or go to your office. In fact, this is a perfect use case for driverless cars. The problem with trains everywhere is the
13.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
Wow, so for the short time you have kids in diapers this won't work for you personally. Big whoop. We still have typewriters around too, and some people ride horses. Old tech doesn't die, it just diminishes to a smaller niche.
14.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
Give it a rest. There is no possible way he can solve it right now, we don't have self driving cars yet.
15.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
"A teenager doesn't just "want a car." He wants that freedom that car gives him." Precisely, and this is why owning the car isn't that important. This teenager presumably still has to pay for the car and fuel,
16.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
You missed the point like the GP. None of those services are anything like what's coming. Car2go still has to be parked, has to be close, you have to live in the home zone. Zip car is just... Not even close. It's a rental service
17.
by vectorjohn 9y ago
The fear of battery degradation is way way overblown. You'll drive at least a few hundred thousand miles before you might "need" to replace it [1]. And even then, you could keep going. [1] https://electrek.co/
18.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
I like the response peer review or STFU. Maybe PRoSTFU. What is that technique the fake-reasonable argument makers use? It's like a Gish gallop but slower. Maybe that's the best description of it.
19.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
How is that your take? It seems that would completely contradict it. If it's just accumulation of errors how would that be impacted at all by what you eat? Especially the age of what you eat!
20.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
Privacy has literally no tangible value to most people. It's just a warm fuzzy to a few, and a practical value to even fewer. Convenience on the other hand has obvious value to almost everyone.
21.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
Well good for you, but you don't speak for everyone.
22.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
Doesn't seem like a problem. The fake outrage about it is laughable. This is no different than any other kind of personal interview. They want to see evidence that you're a normal ass person, this isn't some sort of action to
23.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
But again, why would it be bad if that "flagged" you? It's not like any of this sends you straight to jail or something. You should be investigated further if there is some signal that can help direct limited resources wher
24.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
Some of us don't see it as a problem if random people entering the country get their public tweets investigated. Why on earth wouldn't this be a good thing?
25.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
It's not like they have a time machine to go pick up old evidence. They had an old sheet, it's easy to imagine how there wouldn't be DNA left there.
26.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
Why do you call it a false confession?
27.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
DNA didn't "clear him." They just failed to find new evidence, although the DNA evidence that his friend was there corroborates the victim's story. I think they just let him go to save the money of another trial since he
28.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
Sounds like they're referring to hiccup.
29.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
No. There is no point where colonizing other planets is easier than fixing this one.
30.
by vectorjohn 10y ago
I don't think it does still stand when you were off by an order of magnitude.

More ›