pipodeclown

Sure but that doesn't change the fact that they are charging s Ahead while the rest of us sit on our hands.

Plenty of countries have corporate laws that are less shareholder focussed than those of america. In the Netherlands for example boards are obligated to take into account broader sets of interest such as employee in their decisions and this is enforceable in court.

Sure but just for browsing, checking some e-mails, a bit of YouTube or other media consumption, you know what 90% of people use their macbook for 99% of the time, it would be fine.

Nobody is saying you should be able to render some 3d models on an iPhone..

Like what? A macbook is just a screen, connected keyboard and trackpad. This thing has the equivalent of all of that.

Man you see this crap pop up on here so many times I'm almost starting to wonder whether car industry shills are just trying so sow seeds of doubt with misinformation.. haven't we agreed by now that the only future we should strive for is one that can plausibly be made completely emmissionless...? All options you list either still have emmissions associated with them or are so hilariously inefficient that we would need to blanket half the globe with PV panels to power everything. All alternatives have been extensively explored and the only and most efficient way to power cars in an emmissionless way turned out to be a battery electric drivetrain. There is a reason all the options you list didn't take off.

Most of the Netherlands banks have switched to 4 dat workweeks, sure you don't get as much work done on 4 days but it sure is nice to have an extra day off:)

'Crew' implies that it is a group of people doing this and therefore they have 35 seconds. You can reconstitute the sentence to check what you should use. In this case you could say in your head:" the crew as a team check the video feed. They have 35 seconds to do this." If this was referring to an individual it would be: "Peter checks the video feed, he has 35 seconds to do this."

Sure but you should be comparing the goal end state, a world in which out energy consumption and generation is green, that's the whole point of our move to bev's and hydrogen. So you should be comparing energy generation by green means to power a BEV or using green energy to produce hydrogen to power a hydrogen car. In that world the whole energy production and consumption chain is about 3x as efficient for BEV, which in my mind means there is no way hydrogen is going to be competitive and we shouldn't waste valuable resources on persuing it.

That is completely incorrect, it is the opposite.

Efficiency doesn't matter when you're literally pumping energetic liquid from the ground. It does matter when you need to build 150% more solar panels to produce the energy to create your energetic liquid/gas.

Just basic customisation functionality is missing in MacOS. Recently bought a MacBook and am constantly amazed about the stuff you can't do. Oh you want do use normal scrolling on your external Bluetooth mouse (like everybody that uses a mouse does) and natural scrolling on the trackpad? Nah bro, choose one for both. You wanna just plug in some generic usb hub connected to multiple monitors like you did with your 500 euro laptop? No can't do. Want to specify the SDR content brightness on an external display separately from HDR content brightness when enabling HDR on the display? Nah bro we're just gonna blast full brightness at you all the time, and I can go on. Hardware is second to none but the software is really.holding the machine back

I really don't see how this is not obvious. Evolutionarily speaking our survival strategy involved high amounts of exercise (running after antilopes and gathering plants/fruits) so our bodies are optimised for high amounts of exercise. At the same time we needed to survive in unpredictable and sometimes low calories invironnements, our behavioural instincts are therefore to gather and consume as much calories as we can while expending as little calories as possible in the process (binge eating while loafing around if possible). Such optimisations and instincts can lead to unwanted outcomes in new environments such as those of modern sedentary lifestyles.

I really don't see how you subjectively not feeling a benefit to an active lifestyle conflicts with the above.

By simulation, scientists generally don't mean: we're all plugged into the matrix. What they mean is that this three dimensional reality we're experiencing is a projection of some sort of higher dimensional reality.

Standing stockpiles matter in a ever changing and destabilising world. We can't imagine it now but what if the US (or any other nuclear power) started to destabalise, maybe end up in a civil war, fracture up into smaller pieces, what ever. The less nuclear weapons you have lying around during and after that process the less opportunities for things to go terribly wrong.

Yes but what is prohibited in Europe is to hide the cost of the phone in the payments of the cell plan. They must make clear exactly what part of your monthly payment is to pay off the phone and what part is the cell plan. That has basically blown up subsidised phones in Europe..

Nah mate, overhead chargers above each busstop which automatically engage.

The explanation I have always been given is that we're quite large in very high value agricultural products such as flowers and that is what bumps up the export figures (measured in monetary value of the exports)

Why is that problematic? Doesn't the fact that is has very exceptions make it a rule? This basically means there is a wide set of confouding factors at play...

I find it bizarre that this is even a market in the US. I would think enabling people to do their taxes is a basic task of the government. Where I'm from the government provides a very simple click through filing system. Most information is auto filled from info the government already has or is manditorily shared with it such as my income as reported by my employer and any tax withholdings performed by them, securities holdings at brokers, houses registered on my name etc. I basically just have to click 'yep, that all sounds right', and I'm done. The tax authorities slogan over here is "we can't make doing your taxes fun, we can make it easy".

You clearly haven't been watching the notjustbikes YouTube channel..

Yet you do think of some people as a happy or jolly people and others as gloomy. This is the difference that is denoted here where your trying to describe a more general long term state of mind of a person.

Hehe that has nothing to do with having to watch the road because of stick shifting, that's the result of road safety design and setting very high demands on driver's permit. Where I'm from, it takes an average of 40 hours of driving lessons in which they drill you an driving safely, before you're able to pass the driver's license exam.

It doesn't imply that at all. That's like saying openai is creating a human level intelligence with chatgpt. Emulating a single function a human is able to perform really well is not the same as aiming for human level intelligence.

Sure but looking at the energy requirements of those systems it doesn't really start to make sense to deploy before you've seriously decorbanised your energy supply, which comes back to OP's remark. Why discuss these types of systems when we should be focusing on decorbanisation?

This is just conservatism, no actual argument is actually made for its preservation. This is what happens with the gradual march of technological progress, new better options replace the old when it is surpassed in every qualitative way. You always get groups of people that don't like change, hanging on to the old...

Or the Samsung s23

What he means is, having a proprietary connector means they can milk accessory makers with licensing fees.

I think you can sit all day on a shitty chair as long as you do some strenght training to ensure your spine is sufficiently stabilised. Only time I got some back aches was during Covid when the gyms were closed for half a year.

What does that even mean? Did you not get the whole, burning hydrocarbons is bad for the climate memo? We have to stop all net carbon emmissions in the next fifteen years or were screwed (propably already are) and twats like you keep going online spouting your 'i don't buy the climate argument' bullshit. We're literally talking about burning hydrocarbons to heat stuff, how the hell can you say that you don't buy the climate argument?!?

You gotta start somewhere mate, might as well start with a rule that says, if you're gonna build something new and put a new stove in, might as well make sure it's electric. Really don't see you're point here. So because the impact of a single measure is not that big it means we shouldn't do it? You could apply that reasoning that a shit load of individual measures, what you fail to point out is that all those individual measures add up to a Significant reduction, even if any single one doesn't by itself.