It’s hard to imagine a world with no freedom of thought being better, somehow.

In practice, I doubt we’ll ever have to sacrifice much more than we already have. (Which is actually a significant amount. For example, until recent history living on a schedule was for ascetics and flagellants)

Okay, so it looks like nobody read your text. Sorry about that.

Edit: I suppose I should actually answer. The main thing is that you’re going to have to communicate with people who can taste. They’re going to notice things you don’t, and that can even be safety things if there’s an ingredient that has spoiled.

Looking at the responses, I’m guessing Lemmy isn’t a representative sample.

A lot of them don’t even go into it to teach, it seems. More just to be the smartest person in the room.

I’m guessing the derivation from first principles. I too learned the rules years before I was shown it, and it was just so cool to see where they came from.

To be fair, expression tend to be way, way smaller than a codebase. The math community was never forced to improve in the same way. Actually, the symbols were themselves an innovation; in ancient Greece they just had to try and explain that shit in long, tortured natural language sentences.

I really, really hope nobody feels like I’m trying to be unclear with them. I know I sometimes am, though.

As I understand it, ActivityPub-compliance basically requires that a vote is tied to an actor. Although, they could have made a dummy actor do it. Maybe they were worried about stopping vote manipulation?

It sounds like you’d know better than me, haha. Since they’re talking about being capital-lean I’m guessing they must outsource the frame pressing. Having a rare, super-specialty injection molding machine would not be lean.

IIRC they mentioned fibre reinforcement, but it couldn’t possibly be the aerospace-style precision product, exactly because that would cost a lot.

Edit: And I’m guessing cold-setting resin would be too expensive?

Hmm. Well, plastic can have a pretty good strength to weight ratio, if taking up more volume in the process. If sheet metal can do it maybe they went all-plastic.

If they’re including fibres too, that famously exceeds metal’s rigidity depending on to what precision it’s done.

Yeah, friction losses scale with angular velocity and not torque, and moving a ton of metal takes torque. Don’t forget the braking losses, though, unless it’s a hybrid of some kind. There’s no turning movement back into fuel the way you can turn it back into electricity.

The point is if you’re looking good range, there’s several dials that can be adjusted on an ICE car, related to the prime mover. On an EV, drag is the start and finish of the considerations (unless you’re going to move it onto rails, maybe). And of course range is a huge deal, because a liter of secondary cell can’t come close to the energy density of a liter of petrol and 38 liters of ambient air.

Are truck chassis usually stamped? I had assumed they were made from cast components.

Dope. I wonder if there’s a way to customise it into a sedan. I can speak less to the mechanical aspects of having a super-bespoke super-integrated manufacturing process, but I’m confident the electronics part needs to go back to basics like this.

Quite possibly. They’re gambling on a market for a no-frills car existing, but it might just be too small. That’s what killed economy cars the first time.

Volt or Bolt? Volt is a hybrid.

If Bolt, I’m guessing that was a very old one that will get like 50km of range.

As I understand it, the aerodynamics can be no joke on EVs. The acceleration is very efficient, there’s very efficient regenerative braking, and an object in motion just continues in motion until there’s a force. That means drag is pretty much where your whole battery charge goes. (I’m not sure how much tire flexing accounts for exactly)

For an example off the top of my head, the Arrow concept car manages 500km by not having side mirrors. Compare that to an ICE engine which wastes most of the fuel energy as heat, but to a widely varying degree depending on design and implemented energy recovery features.

Hmm. So are you thinking about the peer review part, primarily? Arxiv already exists and I’m guessing it’s easy to mirror.

I have a feeling, just based on how law works, that this will be highly subjective. I interpret your question as being about skill. If that’s not what you mean please correct me. (Sorry for the non-answer)

Even within criminal law, things like acquittal rate would very with the exact kind of practice - a guy that specialises in complex white-collar crime and takes easy cases might get a really good one without too much skill. Someone who takes anybody who will pay upfront will probably have a cruddy one. This could get even more extreme if you look at non-Western or historical systems where the result is almost guaranteed in advance. So, that’s not in the spirit of the question.

I seem to remember an XKCD What If where Randall Munroe mentions the highest paid (criminal?) attorney in the US, but there again, it was someone who sounded highly connected. Does that correspond to skill? (Edit: The late Ted Olson, who does appear to have defended criminal cases)

Somebody that actually knows a lot of names and legal history might be able to tell you something more useful, but just take it with a grain of salt.

I can’t think of a more reasonable definition of an evil person than a person who does a lot of evil.

Usually people have some kind of way of justifying an action to themselves, and there’s always a story that lead up to it. Everyone I’ve gotten to know well is part of one problem or another.

So, It’s not very interesting to ask where to draw the line, and even less useful. The important thing is what to do about it.

If you do, at least pick carefully. I can just picture some guy shooting a real estate agent because he looks fancy.

In more general spaces I find bringing it up instantly summons incels, unfortunately.