trailee

joined 1 year ago
[–] trailee 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Sure, that can help, although I think it mostly counts as public charging infrastructure since it’s out of the control of the EV owner.

It also doesn’t help for the many units in my city that rely on street parking. And it’s an extra feeling of uncertainty if you’re thinking about buying an EV but you change apartment leases every year or three - it’s like getting a dog and thereby limiting the available pool of apartments that you might consider in the future.

All of that is to say that true public charging is really critical for a lot of people to feel secure enough to invest new car dollars into an EV, so presidential headwinds against it are devastating.

[–] trailee 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That’s a very single-family-home perspective. Lots of people live in apartments, only some of which provide assigned off-street parking at all, but there’s generally no way to install your own charger. Public charging infrastructure is absolutely critical for all apartment dwellers to be able to consider EVs.

[–] trailee 36 points 3 days ago

In a funny coincidence, April 19 also happens to be the day that officially started the American revolutionary war exactly 250 years ago.

[–] trailee 1 points 1 week ago

Ubiquiti is a pretty good answer, but the airMax line is better for this sort of thing than UniFi. A pair of Nanobeams would be perfect, and standalone without need of an additional controller.

[–] trailee 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Cool experiment! Do you expect silver awards only for posts newer than April 1, or can I go back and award favorite past content as well? Obviously the idea is to stimulate new content, but it would be nice to have intent spelled out clearly, and with the bot checking. I like the idea either way, and also that you’re limiting to only accounts older than today.

[–] trailee 2 points 1 month ago

I’ve already been creating a unique email address for nearly every service, for many years. That probably complicates something like Incogni, which is a good point, thanks. It’s also amusing and telling when the phishing emails start coming into equifax@mydomain (true story).

[–] trailee 2 points 1 month ago

This is a very helpful anecdote, thanks!

 

Incogni has great advertising claims, but it feels pretty expensive as an ongoing subscription. Have you used it or do you currently use it? Please tell me about it.

[–] trailee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes! Read a book out loud, preferably to your kids, recording each chapter as a file. Then use m4b-tool to combine all the chapter files into a full audiobook.

[–] trailee 8 points 1 month ago

They have updated it so that you don’t need to use your phone number as the identifier you share with other people so that they can message you. You can now give out a username and your new contact will not be able to learn your phone number.

As for Signal itself knowing what your phone number is, I don’t see that as much of a problem, because they intentionally don’t know anything useful about you. They publish redacted subpoenas and their responses so you can see just how little data they can provide. They don’t know who your contacts are so there’s no social graph to be drawn.

[–] trailee 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Signal is actually trying very diligently to pioneer a novel financial model for a sustaining long term. Here’s a lemmy post from a few month ago about a Wired interview with Signal Foundation’s president covering it in some depth (and a current archive link to the article). They seem to be one of the few actually good entities left in a world of surveillance capitalism and pervasive domestic government espionage.

Whether they succeed or not in the long term is certainly still unclear, but I expect they have many years of financial runway remaining.

[–] trailee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Traditional lithium rock ore mining is a dirty, polluting process that also uses huge amounts of fresh water. But that’s not all necessarily inherent. There are several projects around the Salton Sea in California that promise not only to extract lithium cleanly, but also to generate a lot of GHG-free electricity along the way, because the ore is hot salty corrosive water extracted from deep underground. optimistic podcast episode 1 podcast 2 website article

[–] trailee 1 points 1 month ago

Water Cycle 101: The oceans are salty because rain water has been flushing salt downstream for billions of years. Salt also collects in endorheic basins such as the Great Salt Lake and Mono Lake, for the same reason. Rain clouds form primarily from evaporation of ocean water, which leaves behind slightly increased salinity, although its effect is widely geographically distributed.

There’s a difference between that distributed evaporation and the concentrated salinity increase of effluent from a reverse osmosis desalination plant or a hypothetical hydrogen plant, but the basic answer is yes, leave the salt in the ocean. It will be fine.

 

The link is to a year-old article that helped me decide not to pay Alaska Airlines’ voluntary SAF carbon mitigation fees. I’m still not certain about the right choice, and would like to hear your thoughts on the matter.

The big picture includes acknowledgement that there’s no such thing as ethical consumption within capitalism, so in some ways this choice is entirely irrelevant. Also that flying is by far the most polluting form of transportation per passenger mile so we should each minimize doing it. Finally that flying has the most challenging logistics of shifting energy sources, fundamentally because batteries are heavy.

Alaska offers me a choice during the checkout procedure to contribute to SAF accounting for between 5% and 20% of the fuel that my flight will use, but it has nothing to do with the fuel actually consumed by my flight. They are already buying some amount of SAF and using it in their SFO hub only, so the program is hand waving about the fungibility of fuel consumption. Really they’re just offering me the opportunity to donate money towards their SAF usage, indirectly supporting the growth of the SAF industry.

It seems to me that the whole SAF industry is currently greenwashing bullshit, piggybacking on the big lie from the past few decades that adding ethanol to automotive gasoline is “sustainable” in some meaningful way. But that ignores the water usage depleting aquifers at an accelerating rate, necessary fertilizer use and soil depletion, using food-producing acreage for fuel instead, energy usage in planting/harvesting/refining/distilling, and so on.

Please validate my choice not to donate to the current state of SAF, or provide links to interesting reading that supports your claim otherwise.

view more: next ›