SirDerpy

joined 4 months ago
[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

It's the before times, analog days, and the Internet was in it's infancy. Stephan Hawking, a theoretical physicist, cosmologist, and author, said the following:

For millions of years, mankind lived just like the animals. Then something happened which unleashed the power of our imagination. We learned to talk and we learned to listen. Speech has allowed the communication of ideas, enabling human beings to work together to build the impossible. Mankind's greatest achievements have come about by talking, and its greatest failures by not talking. It doesn't have to be like this. Our greatest hopes could become reality in the future. With the technology at our disposal, the possibilities are unbounded. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.

Computers have been very effective applied to vehicles. In my life I've seen the advent of the aluminum block, anti-lock brakes and stability control, variable ignition and valve timing, more aerodynamic body, paddle shift and continuously variable transmissions, drive by wire, now even hybrid and electric drives. This has allowed leaps forward in safety, efficiency, and performance.

Then, we enshitified. Today there's barely choice in the vehicle market. Toyota/Honda; Hyundai/Kia; Ford/Chevy/Chrysler and a trim package defines everything but trucks. 1/2 ton trucks as symbols of identity break repeatedly if regularly used for payload and towing. "Choice" is a 1/4 Ranger, 1/2 Chevy diesel, or 3/4 Ford/Chevy/Ram. They didn't make the first two for decades, still scarce and expensive for what they are. And, for all vehicles one now often needs to remove inaccessible bolts in tight spaces, for several parts, to get to the part that's broken.

Profit optimization through technology is why there's little choice in vehicles; Why you can envision a Walmart and Lowes strip mall and every American knows exactly what it looks like and where the closest couple copies are; Why we can't replace phone batteries and screens. An out-of-the-box idea from AI that's also conveniently practical for humans will probably cure cancer. AI is also what's analyzing all the data being collected, just as inhumanely. The vehicle manufacturers want their cut.

Did Herbert envision that the spice of prescience was computational cycles?

[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

seems to rotate around a central point is

No. These are different things. One's an illusion. One's real.

[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago

You're right. It's just cheap junk, boring and drab.

[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

so I skimmed

Okay.

[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago (8 children)

It looks like a twist because it does a twist.

No, it's an illusion at scale. You almost say so yourself in your next sentence.

There’s no angle where you realize the windows don’t actually change planes.

Discreet flat planes constitute an illusion of a curve at scale. There are no curved components. They used offsets and angles in the outer layer. All the windows are flat planes. You can see the rectangles yourself just as you can see the triangles in a geodesic structure's approximation of a complex curve.

A modern true curve is still often made from wood. If there's money it's laminated I-beam. But, curving or twisting structural steel is breaking all sorts of cardinal rules. Assuming safety is valued, cost rises exponentially from construction through build out and into maintenance and repair. An exception is large ships. That's why they're so expensive.

It’s very obvious you’re now trying to make a point

An artist and an engineer were given a modest budget and found a way to ask an obvious question to which the is answer is: It depends upon the perspective each of us chooses.

If you look closely you can see the flat planes and angles. There are no curves. You can see the truth of it yourself. It's right there.

They're obviously some intelligent people to be designing such things at all. Imagine how many times they've been talking about some subject or another and said, "Hey, friend, if you look more closely you can see (whatever truth) for yourself."

Then the other person says, "It twists."

Amazing piece of art, huh?

[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago (10 children)

So, it's an illusion made out of entirely untwisted components. Imagine that.

[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

It's truthful. I cared enough to tell them.

[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Neither is publicly traded. Neither of us know the numbers.

Does Steam make money on hosting indie games?

How does one research such a question?

I don't need answers. I had them before I made my second post above.

Good luck to you.

[–] SirDerpy@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

That's my roots. Maybe that's why it appeals to me.

21
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by SirDerpy@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
 

I'd guess my net environmental impact is just now lower than US average because, despite my fuel consumption when moving my home, it's tiny, energy independent, and it doesn't move far or frequently. I don't really know. I just don't want to be judged unfairly, particularly when seeking help trying to do it even better.

I want to downsize my truck for cost and fuel efficiency. I've had this truck, my first, for a year, 3.5k miles. I've towed the trailer a short thousand miles without incident and including city, highway, and interstate.

Current setup:

'19 Chevy 2500 6.0L 4WD

Hitch towing ~2.5 tons GVWR (14', enclosed, tandem, brakes)

Getting 8mpg @ 70-75mph

Next truck budget is $10-20k. I'll keep it probably until the frame rots. I'm planning on replacing shocks & wearable steering components, am not averse to some work.

Should I target a 1/2 ton gas (leaning Ford 5.0L 4WD), a different 3/4 ton gas (which and why), or a 3/4 ton diesel (leaning Dodge Cummins)?

The paper numbers say I should get a 1/2 ton gas. But, my more experienced friend thinks I'll be a lot happier spending more for a diesel because diesel engines can last a long time, it'll at least double my fuel efficiency, and it's a little extra overkill for an easier tow.

I'm open to all informed perspectives. What's my best plan and why?

Edit: I kept the Chevy 2500 6.0L because the local market didn't support transition on the sale side. I also bought a '98 Dodge Cummins 12v diesel that needs work. It'll eventually replace the other truck.

view more: next ›