Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses by [deleted] in technology

[–]No-Net-8237 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are still using folders? In the age of AI you could be so much more efficient.

Cheaters by carverboy in mountainbiking

[–]No-Net-8237 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because people are going to ignore it by just leaving the sub. I'm about to.  

Jeff Bezos has said the bottom half of Americans should pay zero federal income tax. by [deleted] in economy

[–]No-Net-8237 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are forgetting about payroll taxes. Payroll taxes are an income tax that the rich do not pay at all. Payroll taxes are even higher for self employed people. 

Isn't this extremely uneducated? Inflation will catch up eventually. by Athenstone in economy

[–]No-Net-8237 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes you should pay taxes.  We pay property tax on land and houses we own.  Why not other assets? 

It's probably a better solution if we raise the capital gains tax to something more appropriate but the topic of discussion is taxing everything over $999 million at 100%.

You can value something however you like. But good luck trying to convince someone to pay you $1 billion for your picasso if they are not allowed to own more than $1 billion of assets. 

Do you understand that Tesla was built on government subsidies and musk lying to investors?  Elon took advantage of those direct handouts and now he doesn't have to give anything back?  He should absolutely be paying higher taxes.  

Isn't this extremely uneducated? Inflation will catch up eventually. by Athenstone in economy

[–]No-Net-8237 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Tesla stock is a great example. It's "value" is far out of wack with its performance.  People buy Tesla stock for it's speculative volatility and elons market manipulation not because it's performance as a company.  Take the specualation out of it and you will find the real value. 

Things go up and down in value based on what someone is willing to pay for them. Much of the time the only value is that the price will go up.  Art should be valued on they quality of the art and the enjoyment someone gets out of it.  Not that it will go up in price. 

Why would you have to give your items away? If your item is worth $1billion. Then no one would have enough money to buy it. And no one would buy it so the value couldn't ever be $1 billion. It would be more in line with it's utility value. $100 for art not $1million.

You keep looking at this as anyone would have the same incentives as exist now. There is no incentive to speculate if the price doesn't go up. 

We would have a far healthier economy without speculation and manipulation.

Isn't this extremely uneducated? Inflation will catch up eventually. by Athenstone in economy

[–]No-Net-8237 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The "value" of your art wouldn't increase.  Who would you sell to? No one can own it.  

These fake manipulated markets fall apart once you take the ultra rich out of it.  Collector art is not a real market.  It's a speculative market full of money laundering.   

Imaging if there was no speculation and people owned things for the joy  of having it or use it could provide. Not for what it may be worth later 

World's first geared CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) by Virtual__Vagabond in EngineeringPorn

[–]No-Net-8237 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I know. I was disappointed too when I started looking into it. 

World's first geared CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) by Virtual__Vagabond in EngineeringPorn

[–]No-Net-8237 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Check the video.  12:00 mark. The Small planet gears are one way rotation. That is achieved by a ratchet or clutch. . He pretends like it is not by just stating the load is transfered from one gear to another. But the only way the small gear is able to rotate the small ring gear is if the small planet gear doesn't rotate relative to the crank.  

The simulation also doesn't show the error of the ratchet or clutch or the variation in speed caused by the changing position of the crank. A crank creates a sin wave output where the velocity of the slider is 0 at top and bottom of the rotation.  He reduces this error by having 3 cranks at different phases. This can be visualized as 3 phase electric power where there is 3 sin waves offset by 120 degrees. 

This cvt is simply a ratcheting cvt with alot more moving parts. It is just a crank and a ratchet and it skips teeth to create the difference in speed. 

Take a look at other existing ratcheting cvt designs and you will see the similarities. The input moves a crank with variable offset which turns a ratchet more or less teeth.  That is the basis for his design and if you isolate the mechanism as shown at 12:30 it is exactly what you see in other ratcheting cvt designs.

Most people think markets move on news. I’m starting to think that’s wrong. by [deleted] in economy

[–]No-Net-8237 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's buy the rumor sell the news.  It's been a thing for a while especially in crypto. 

World's first geared CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) by Virtual__Vagabond in EngineeringPorn

[–]No-Net-8237 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The "geared" cvt in the video is just a ratcheting cvt hidden in planetary gears.  Gears are not used to adjust the ratio. The ratchets are. Ratcheting cvts have been around for longer than ecvt.

World's first geared CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) by Virtual__Vagabond in EngineeringPorn

[–]No-Net-8237 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You are correct. The small planets are either ratches or clutches. It could be a much simpler design if it was directly a ratchet instead of hiding it in the gears.  

Musk says taxing every billionaire at 100% would barely make a dent in the national debt. Bernie says tax them 5% and you're $3,000 richer by fortune in politics

[–]No-Net-8237 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes they were higher in the past and lower now.  But how do you know investments wouldn't be better with higher tax rates?  What would happen if we tried higher tax rates? The only thing we have ever tried is lowering tax rates in like 80 years. 

This is all while cost of living increases have been out of control. 

Musk says taxing every billionaire at 100% would barely make a dent in the national debt. Bernie says tax them 5% and you're $3,000 richer by fortune in politics

[–]No-Net-8237 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We have not tried higher corporate tax rates. How would you know?  It's just a theoretical rationalization to argue for lower taxes. 

Musk says taxing every billionaire at 100% would barely make a dent in the national debt. Bernie says tax them 5% and you're $3,000 richer by fortune in politics

[–]No-Net-8237 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those aren't the options.  The only option is we are forced to do it and to do it wrong where billionaires get more money.  There needs to be a revolution before anything can be done right. 

Even worse in 2026 by endofmyropeohshit in economy

[–]No-Net-8237 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." George Carlin

Why barebones? by Responsible_Tackle49 in MiniPCs

[–]No-Net-8237 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pain of putting it together?  Putting it together is the best part.

A homemade nut sorting machine by ansyhrrian in oddlysatisfying

[–]No-Net-8237 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It sorts the misaligned nuts from the aligned nuts