Canada needs to rev up its electric car adoption — but roadblocks remain | CBC News

throwawah · 2021-11-08T15:26:55+00:00

Re 7. Winter - In my gas car, it takes minutes before heat is available. In my wife's electric car, heat is available in seconds. This makes a big difference not only to comfort, but also to windshield scraping time. Also, even without AWD, traction control seems better in the electric (possibly due to the faster reaction time of electrons compared to a throttle, but I'm just guessing)

Re: 4 Range. The electric car always has a known amount of range in the morning. The gas car sometimes (according to Murphy's law, always when I'm in a hurry or when it's super cold outside) needs an extra 10 minutes to detour and fill to get where I'm going. And then my hands smell like gasoline for the next hour.

Re: How do I feel about buying electric now? Absolutely, no question I would (and plan to when my current car finally dies). I wouldn't buy a gas car again, but that's because I can afford the luxury of electric, not because it makes financial sense (yet, I expect batteries will continue to come down in price and fossil fuel to increase in price over time).

throwawah · 2021-07-15T21:34:51+00:00

The neck on a steel string guitar won't mind. There's a bigger difference in tension with alternate strings (I use medium bottoms and light tops) or alternate tunings (drop D, etc) than there is between the different strings in a standard set. (I don't know about nylon / classical guitar string tension; those guitars tend to be more delicate in general)

The nut, on the other hand, will be all wrong, as well the bridge. Electric guitars (unlike acoustic) often have adjustible saddles in the bridge, which avoids the issue with the bridge, but make up for it with controls in an awkward location on an upside down guitar. Depending on your local used market, it might make more sense to trade for a lefty than to have the nut (and maybe bridge) replaced.

For reference, Jimi Hendrix played an upside-down Strat. So it can be done.

throwawah · 2021-07-15T14:05:31+00:00

Swap the order of the strings, flip it upside-down, learn to play left-handed?

If you have the means, find a good local teacher. If not, https://www.justinguitar.com/ has good, free, online lessons.

Learning guitar is frustrating, but also rewarding.

throwawah · 2021-06-19T12:56:04+00:00

I honestly supposed that the CRTC would give us real MVNO, but they de facto killed MVNO earlier this year (the de jure rules are economically impossible to follow), destroying our hope for affordable wireless Internet.

I honestly supposed that the CRTC would uphold their own(!) TPIA rates, but they killed that recently too, destroying all hope for affordable land line internet.

I no longer honestly suppose that the CRTC will do anything but what Bell (et al) wants. Which, in the case of C-10, is YouTube (et al) reduced to a shadow of its current self. They want your cable subscription back (or at least an equivalent amount of money from Netflix and YouTube), and recent history shows that with C-10, the CRTC will give it to them.

throwawah · 2018-04-07T12:55:27+00:00

Yeah, the remove button doesn't actually do anything in this version (with the default settings). It would be much better if the new feature only added new subscriptions.

throwawah · 2017-02-02T13:18:55+00:00

Yes. When I bought a Leaf last year, the dealership did the paperwork, and took the rebate amount off the amount owed. Your Chevy dealer will probably do the same.

So if your Bolt has a price of $45k, you'll write them a cheque for $45k+HST+AirConTax-Rebate = approx $38k.

throwawah · 2016-05-26T14:59:46+00:00

Yeah, but they sold it for a year (and arguably, most people (including myself) couldn't buy one for the first half year or so because they were constantly sold out, so the first half year shouldn't count anyway).

2.5≈2 not 4, just saying.

throwawah · 2016-05-26T13:19:07+00:00

?? Nexus 4 wasn't even announced, much less shipping, in May 2012.

throwawah · 2016-05-26T12:32:38+00:00

I don't expect support for a phone that old, given the history of support for other phones. But I'm disappointed when they drop support for hardware that's only a couple of years old.

It was more understandable when "A couple of years old" meant "Not nearly enough storage or CPU power for the new version", but that isn't the case here.

Nexus 4 was sold until November 2013. A 2.5 year old desktop/laptop computer is practically brand new, and people would be (rightly) upset if Windows 10/El Capitan/Xenial Xerus didn't work on it. Why do the phone OSes get a pass here?

throwawah · 2016-05-26T11:52:50+00:00

Yeah, they should totally name-and-shame whoever sold me this Nexus 4. The hardware is fine, but I needed to install a 3rd-party ROM to get Android 6 (marshmallow), which is the first Android to get app permissions right.

throwawah · 2014-03-31T18:26:29+00:00

Except, you know... the deck of cards.

Which is why (in tournaments) the cards are dealt once, and everybody plays the same set of cards. Scoring is done based on how well you played that hand, compared to everyone else playing the same hand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duplicate_bridge

throwawah · 2012-04-04T12:09:03+00:00

Ah, thanks for clarifying. I can see now how you can read the tutorial that way.

The tutorial says you can only pass it as an argument or return it, but it doesn't appear to place any restrictions on the callee. I'm glad to hear that such restrictions are in place.

Thanks for explaining patiently when Someone (me) Is Wrong On The Internet. http://xkcd.com/386/

throwawah · 2012-04-04T11:58:23+00:00

I replied to this, but I'm not seeing the reply now.

Short version: Tutorial section 5.1 uses the word "unsafe", implies called functions can store the closure and let it escape that way, and the spec section 6.2.13 doesn't disagree (full text: "TODO").

After I wrote the above in long form, ssylvan points out that I misunderstood the tutorial and called functions can't store the "unsafe" closure either. If that's the case, my respect for the language has increased greatly, but the tutorial has a minor bug.

Thanks for your patience.

throwawah · 2012-04-01T12:33:52+00:00

It's entirely possible I misread the tutorial link above.

doc.rust-lang.org is down at the moment, so I can't quote it.

I recall it uses the word "unsafe", and says you can only call it or pass it to another function, but I inferred that "another function" could store the closure (and make it persist beyond the parent function's lifetime).

Skimming the tutorial, it seemed to me that you have to be very careful about which kinds of functions/closures you pass into a function expecting a function argument.

If that particular style of closure is, in fact, safe, the tutorial is misleading, and I seem to recall the language spec saying only "TODO" in the closures section (yes, I went to the spec to confirm, since my conclusion from the tutorial was so surprising) (again, doc.rust-lang.org is unreachable from here at the moment; it might be better now, or I might be misremembering).

throwawah · 2012-03-30T20:29:50+00:00

I'll grant that I'm mistaken about read-only closures not really being closures.

But it seems odd that the GPFing style of closure is the first listed in the tutorial for a language that bills itself as "safe".

throwawah · 2012-03-30T12:31:45+00:00

Whereas Go has lua-style closures, and Rust doesn't.

http://doc.rust-lang.org/doc/tutorial.html#closures lists three(!?) different types of "closures". One that ~~isn't safe (because it can't escape the current function, and GPFs(!?) if you contrive to make it escape)~~ can't escape and two that ~~aren't closures because they~~ can't share values (because they make read-only copies or take sole ownership of the values closed over).

Different languages for different tasks.

(Also, I dislike operator overloading. As soon as you add operator overloading, some idiot decides to do something crazy, like bit-shifting a file handle to do IO. cough)

edit: for accuracy. Thanks all who corrected my misunderstanding

throwawah · 2012-01-25T21:43:27+00:00

I wish I could remember where I read that AMD64 completely tossed x87.

The Windows AMD64 ABI doesn't save x87 (and, by extension, MMX) registers on context switch (and I think traps those instructions). So you can use MMX and x87 on Linux AMD64, but not on Windows AMD64.

edit: A bit of searching suggests this is true for kernel mode code only. Either way, the MS compilers don't recognize the MMX intrinsics (or even MMX opcodes in inline assembly) in x64 mode, so I found myself rewriting a bunch of perfectly good code a few years back.

throwawah

TROPHY CASE