They do have a manual way of opening the car door if memory serves. It's just in a hard to find place where a toddler wouldn't think to look. Either way it's a bad design. Nothing wrong with manual door handles imo.
When the car isn't driving I believe the main battery isn't connected for safety reasons. It's a high voltage battery, and having it connected all the time even when the car is being serviced is an unnecessary safety risk.
Yeah they could and probably should use a different battery technology than lead acid. Preferably something with a wide temperature range. Lithium Titanate Oxide anyone?
I believe they also have a jump port for exactly that purpose. If that doesn't work you are stuffed though, as I believe has happened to some cyber truck owners.
That's fine for opening the front doors in the model 3, but have you seen how to open the rear doors in the cyber truck? That's what I was referring too.
I did manage to switch to Linux. I can understand though why people are hesitant, there are still things that are tough in Linux, or near impossible in some cases. That's despite having used Linux on and off for years.
I don't think something needs to be identical to Windows to be a good replacement for it. I think there should be a replacement for Windows, and distributions like Linux Mint are that replacement for some people.
I also think that parts of the Linux ecosystem have major problems. Not necessarily problems with the kernel itself, but problems with the surrounding software like programs and user interfaces. Wider application support would be a start. Some distributions and parts of modern Linux systems can be unnecessarily complex or downright esoteric. Some features like HDR have very poor support, and are difficult to enable/setup where they are supported. It's also difficult for developers to publish to Linux because of the wide variety of different Linux systems. Flatpaks and snaps help with this obviously but have divisive in the Linux community for one reason or another.
No organization is willing to pay companies to support Linux
Well that's a lie. Lots of companies use Linux servers, Linux embedded devices, even Linux desktops for programmers or engineers. Android devices are everywhere too.
That's because organizations like the Linux foundation primarily serve enterprise and server customers, they only need a good enough UI so that's what desktop users get. Nobody is paying money for Linux and few people donate.
One of the most common uses of Linux is smartphones. Chromebooks are also fairly popular. It's more that the kind of people that use Linux desktops aren't happy with smartphone like functionality and customisation.
The better question is why aren't people supporting desktop Linux? We have increasing market share after all. My guess is a combination of fragmentation and the fact that the user base aren't the kind of people they want to sell too. It's hard to sell MS Office for Linux to your average Linux enthusiast who might even be an Open Source purist. They are also more likely to jailbreak or pirate your product.
It's a combination of a few factors, developers are pressured into not asking for donations (users need to actively find their website to donate), the vast majority of Linux software is free of price, and people don't want to pay money for their operating system.
I am talking about businesses supporting the Linux desktop with software, not about the OS devs themselves.
They make money because they're proprietary, sell peoples info, and because of that they represent everything the free software movement fights against. I use Linux because it supports the free software movement, not the other way around.
This is the reason why most businesses don't want to support Linux.
Given there are quite a lot more people using Linux than there used to be I imagine a fair bit. That's only going to increase as Linux users keep increasing. Linux users still buy things like Video Games, Spotify subscriptions, and potentially other software products too like Jetbrains IDEs.
I have been talking about application support this whole time, not the Linux infrastructure itself. You keep carrying on as if I am talking about the distributions or the kernel, that's why my comments aren't making sense to you.
For someone who uses Linux you are awfully negative about it.
I was born in 2001. I didn't use a smartphone until I was like 16. We grew up with regular computers too. I also grew up with Windows XP and 7, as well as playing Doom using DosBox. Then again I am a computer science graduate, so maybe not the best example.
Usenet seems to work really well, and can be surprisingly cheap. Try FrugalUsenet. If you want both VPN and Usenet then try something like Eweka. They do deals where you get both Usenet access and a cheap VPN. It's about €105 for 15 months or €6.99 per month.
Weirdly enough I have never used that feature. Only found out about it after I started using Usenet and the *arr stack. Now if I want to search for something manually I use Prowlarr that allows me to search both Usenet and Bittorrent at the same time.
The rest of the time Radarr or Sonarr finds it for me.
You don't get it. We are saying that the same people who want to close down libraries are also the ones causing more people to become homeless and/or closing down homeless shelters.
No they probably shouldn't be jerking off at a library, but they don't have anywhere else to do it. Maybe if you had been homeless you might understand.
It's not just a separate product line. It's a different architecture. Not made by the same companies either, so ARM aren't involved at all. It's actually a competitor to ARM64.
The CISC vs RISC thing is dead. Also modern ARM ISAs aren't even RISC anymore even if that's what they started out as. People have no idea what's going on with modern technology.
X86 can actually be quite low power (see LPE cores and Intel Atom). The producers of x86 don't specialize in that though, unlike a lot of RISC-V and ARM producers. It's not that it's impossible, just that it isn't typically done that way.
ARM is load-store and has a relaxed ordering. Whereas x86 has instructions that can read straight from memory, and has Total Store Ordering. ARM also is fixed instruction width, where x86/AMD64 is variable instruction width.
Outside of that the difference is mostly licensing.
Except modern ARM chips are actually CISC too. Also microcode isn't strictly RISC either. It's a lot more complex than you are thinking.
There are some RISC characteristics ARM has kept like load-store architecture and fixed width instructions. However it's actually more complex in terms of capabilities and instructions than pretty much all earlier CISC systems, as early CISC systems did not have vector units and instructions for example.
Since when did AMD make ARM chips? Also they aren't as different as a motorcycle and a car. It's more like compression ignition vs spark ignition. They are largely used in the same applications (or might be in the future), although some specific use cases work better with one or the other. Much like how cars can use either petrol or diesel, but say a large ship is better to use compression ignition and a motorcycle to use spark ignition.
If you were comparing x86 vs RISC-V you might not be far off. But with ARM vs x86 they have basically the same use cases. Namely desktops, laptops, servers, networking equipment, game consoles, set top boxes, and so on. x86 even used to be used in mobile phones or even as a microcontroller. It's not used in those applications as much now obviously, but it's very much possible. Originally ARM was developed for the desktop too, and was designed for high performance. Lookup the Acorn Archimedes. When people say ARM is coming to the desktop they really should be saying ARM is coming back to the desktop, since that's where it started from.
You're also not correct on the clock speed and IPC front. For a long time Apple's ARM implementation had better IPC than x86 chips. The whole point of RISC is that you can get better clock speeds and execute more instructions vs CISC having more complex instructions being executed more slowly. The only really correct part is that x86 chips are more pipelined. This is due to them being CISC essentially and needing more stages to hit the same clockspeed. Apple's ARM makes up for this by having more superscalar units than x86 chips, allowing for greater IPC.
Putting graphics and video compression stuff on x86 chips isn't new either. That's a question of system design, not of x86 vs ARM. In the server market you get ARM chips that are CPU only. Both also come paired with FPGAs. So it's not even fair to say ARM has more accelerators on chip. Also any ARM chip with PCIe (such as the server ones) can take advantage of the same co-processors that x86 can, the only limitations being drivers and software.
But generally speaking, ARM pushes for going wide, and X86 pushes for more IPC on fewer cores (pipelining, out of order execution, etc).
Going wide also means having more superscalar units and therefore getting better IPC. You also don't really understand what pipelining does. Using pipeling increases IPC versus not pipe-lining sure, but adding more stages actually can reduce IPC as with the Pentium 4. This is because it increases the penalty for misprediction and branching. Excessive pipeline stages in a time before modern branch predictors is what made the pentium 4 suck. The reason to add more stages is to increase clockspeed (pentium 4) or to bring in more complicated instructions. The way you talk about this stuff tells me you don't actually understand what's going on or why.
Also x86 has had memory controllers on CPUs for well over a decade now. Likewise PCIe, USB, and various other things have also been moved to the CPU - north-bridges don't even exist anymore. Some even integrate the southbridge too to make an SoC much like a smartphone. None of this is actually relevant to the architecture though, they are entirely down to form factor, engineering decisions, and changes in technology which are relevant to the specific chip or product. If x86 had succeeded more in smartphones and ARM had taken the desktop (as was there original intention) then you would be stood here talking about x86 chips including more functions and ARM chips having separate chipsets. So this isn't a fair thing to use to compare x86 and ARM.
It's also not really true that x86 has fewer cores. A modern Ryzen in even a laptop form factor can have up to 16. That's more than Apple put in their mobile chips. I get why people think this way. It's because phones had 8 cores long before PCs, and because it made sense at the time. When ARM cores were smaller and narrower and had much less per-core performance and IPC increasing their number made sense. Likewise more smaller cores is more energy efficient than fewer bigger cores, and this makes sense for something like a smartphone. However nowadays when big, wide, power hungry ARM cores exist and are used in higher power form factors than a smartphone there isn't really the need to have so many. At the same time x86 have efficient small cores these days that in some cases get better performance per watt than their ARM equivalents, and x86 core count has skyrocketed. Both of these platforms were originally focused on per core performance too, as multi-core consumer devices simply weren't a thing. All of this "ARM has more cores and x86 has more single core performance" malarkey was only true for a certain window of time. It wasn't where this all started and it's not where we are going now. Instead what we are seeing is convergent design where ARM and X86 are being used in the same use cases, using the same design concepts, and maybe eventually one will replace the other. Only time will tell.
What it seems you're describing is how nymphomania manifests in people without a partner. Nymphomania and porn addiction are two different things. Likewise I don't think nymphomania necessarily has the same underlying causes as say a drug addiction, it might be something like a hormonal issue. Hard to know without doing more research.
A large data centre can use over 100 MW at the high end. Certainly enough to power a swimming pool or three. In fact swimming pools are normally measured in kW not MW.
Pretty much all artificial neural nets I have seen don't do all or nothing activation. They all seem to have activation states encoded as some kind of binary number. I think this is to mimic the effects of variable firing rates.
The idea of a neural network doing stuff in the background is interesting though.
We invented one of the world's most popular cheese, Cheddar, which is actually named after an English village. Also our national dish is Chicken Tikka Masala. I dare you to say we don't use spices. We invented several varieties of spiced sausage, spiced cakes and fruit bread, even some kinds of spices rum.
Don't get me wrong, lots of British cuisine is lackluster for sure, and I don't think we can compete with the likes of Thailand or Italy. That doesn't apply to everything we do though, and some of our deserts and cheeses are top tier. Thailand is literally known for diplomacy through food as well, so hardly a fair comparison.
What if charging your phone took less time than brushing your teeth? A new study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences could very well hold the key to a next-gen charger capable of recharging your phone in just 60 seconds....
Depending on what battery protection modes are in play, many have smart charging or other features designed to prolong life. Also a fair few batteries come out with greater than design capacity from the factory. It's called a design capacity and not an absolute capacity for a reason. A phone battery that left the factory at 110% could conceivably still be at or above 100%.
Fyi it's not overnight charging that's the issue either, it's charging to 100%. What one device consider 100% varies and devices will essentially lie to you about it. 4.2V is normally considered 100% full for Lithium Cobalt Oxide batteries yet some devices push higher than this while others skirt under to pad capacity and cycle life respectively. It's about tradeoffs.
Why not hybrid or plain ICE vehicles powered by biofuels? Even things like waste vegetable oil can be turned into viable fuel, and it can actually be less environmentally destructive than getting rid of it in other ways. ICE technology is very mature, and we currently produce more food than we need and waste much of it. Why not put it all to some use?
Pretty much any fat could be used in compression ignition engines with the right treatment, any carbohydrates turned into ethanol for spark ignition engines, and all waste wood burned for electric power and domestic heating.
You're forgetting things like used vegetable oil which is waste that would be thrown away otherwise. Same for the stuff wood pellets are made from, they are typically mostly saw dust and other waste products. This should hopefully cover airplanes and maybe diesel trains and some cars for when electric isn't practical.
Even if you were to start planting crops for biofuels, how much less efficient than solar plus batteries would it be? The problem with solar and especially battery storage is that the materials used to make them are not renewable, and cause all kinds of issues in their mining and manufacturing. We've grown plants sustainably for thousands of years now. I've yet to see anyone make a solar panel from sustainable or recycled materials.
Right, let's start with old oil. How much do you think is generated world wide? It's about 1/20th of the amount of oil we use currently and that created not recycled so that number is far lower so really that's a niche. Likewise wood pellets. Unless you're actively chopping trees down to make into pellets you're not going to have any real volume there. Plus as I said previously, all of that takes energy to be made into usable fuel. Where does that energy come from and also why not just use that energy directly?
5% of our current oil demand is still a big improvement. That's probably enough to move a significant portion or even all of aviation to sustainable fuels. Aviation is one of the places where batteries don't work yet, and probably not anytime soon either.
As for the last paragraph, no, sorry you're just misunderstanding that whole arena. Batteries are more than 90% recyclable and that number is going up as we design them to be easier to recycle. Plus that's most likely 20 years from now on average. As for solar panels they're aluminium (easily recycled) glass (easily recycled) metals (easily recycled) and silicon (mostly recyclable) and again they're being designed to be recycled better than they were. Ontop of that they now last up to 40 years with greater than 90% of their original capacity left so basically they'll outlive most of us on here.
Can you give me some evidence?
We've grown plants sustainable for thousands of years except for in the last 150 where we have systematically wrecked the ecology at the same time as massively increasing our population. The average westerner uses 32 times more resources than the average Kenyan. Do you want to have the same lifestyle as they have? Because they want what westerners have so that means we can't keep going as we are and have to change.
So you're saying sustainable agriculture is impossible? If so then climate change is inevitable and there is nothing we can do.
Sustainable agriculture for food is one thing, to make fuel is something completely different and I think you know that but are being obstuse on purpose.
No I am not being obtuse. You talk about agriculture as if it's impossible to make sustainable. How much extra agriculture would it require compared to what's needed to feed the world? It's not something I have looked at, and I would be interested to see if you have statistics on this.
This is nonsense. Like someone else said we will need some kind of nuclear power for future space exploration. There are parts of the world that are dark for six months of the year, and plenty of places that don't get enough light for solar to be practical.
Most renewable sources are not consistent enough to be used by themselves, and battery storage isn't practical with current technology. Then there are the concerns with hydro power and biomass and how that affects the environment. I have even been told by leftists that biomass shouldn't be installed as it destroys too many native forests.
Of course the actual best solution is one we don't have the technology for yet: things like nuclear fusion or neutrino capture.
What do you disagree with me? I was trying to back you up up here saying that yes we need nuclear in addition to all the other technologies. I am not saying that you shouldn't use solar, just that it isn't applicable everywhere on earth.
Screw the futurism and longermism of “we need nuclear power for space exploration”. We’re not talking about that.
You should be talking about that. After all climate change is also a future problem. Staying on a single planet isn't safe even if you eradicate climate change, war, disease, and just about everything else. There is pretty much nothing stopping a gamma ray burst or stray blackhole, or any number of other things from killing everyone on this planet. Like yeah climate change is a high priority, but it doesn't make all other issues go away.
Windows 11 is now automatically enabling OneDrive folder backup without asking permission ( www.neowin.net )
Arizona toddler rescued after getting trapped in a Tesla with a dead battery | The Model Y’s 12-volt battery, which powers things like the doors and windows, died ( www.theverge.com )
Microsoft really wants Local accounts gone after it erases its guide on how to create them ( www.xda-developers.com )
Microsoft removes guide on converting Microsoft accounts to Local, pushing for Microsoft sign-ins....
Fly, you fools! ( lemmy.world )
Pity, really.
The dying gasps of NY Public Library Social Media ( lemmy.world )
You got the cheese, the ham, the... wait ( lemmy.world )
The Framework Laptop 13 is about to become one of the world’s first RISC-V laptops ( www.theverge.com )
Because it takes slightly less mental energy to sit and stress than to do the thing. ( lemmy.world )
Why isn't jerking off more valorized as an easy dopamine hit that's also literally good for you?
people have been demonizing it for most of the AD years i think but it's quite pleasant really. are there any proven negative effects?
Does it make sense to get an ADHD diagnosis if I already have an ASD diagnosis?
First off I am in England in the UK, so that's the medical system I would probably be using....
What a time to be alive
i have plans beyond your comprehension ( lemmy.cafe )
Google can keep your phone if you send it in for repair with non-OEM parts ( www.androidauthority.com )
"please don't buy our phones"
New breakthrough may let us charge smartphones in 60 seconds ( bgr.com )
What if charging your phone took less time than brushing your teeth? A new study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences could very well hold the key to a next-gen charger capable of recharging your phone in just 60 seconds....
Why Toyota Is Intentionally "Falling Behind" On EVs | Morning Brew (10:10) ( www.youtube.com )
Small modular nuclear reactors get a reality check in new report ( newatlas.com )
[T]he report's executive summary certainly gets to the heart of their findings....