I've actually done the same thing with modeling my car at different speeds! I used linear regression though haha. I have the same car too!What a coincidence. Time to compare homework!

Site seems broken. I don't really know what its supposed to show.

Its a very interesting theory, either he's a genius or the theory is completely insane. I cannot decide which one.

For most bikes this ratcheting mechanism is in the back wheel, so when going down a hill the pedals, the chain ring, and the chain are all staying in the same position. In the demo the chain ring and chain are moving under the motors power, but the pedals are remaining still.

Thanks for the clarification! The more you kbow I guess haha.

I think we're beyond creating dangerous precedent at this point. He'll do what he wants and no one can stop him.

Between the Unitary Executive decision with "official acts" in July, and being able to claim democratic immunity by winning the Popular and Electoral vote - I'm trying to grasp whatever straws we have left. If this one is broken, we don't even have the "2 > 1" checks and balances between the 3 branches of government that's taught in every Govt 101 class, so it's good to spell this predicament out for people.

I personally use Checkmarks: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/checkmarks-we...

It just opens every bookmark to load the favicon. Brute force, but it works!

Sweet. After rereading OP and your post, I believe I misinterpreted it. But I will say I have that problem too...

Problem A: What OP and you are talking about: When you switch computers to one that doesn't have the bookmarks, you have to click through every one to get the icon to populate.

Problem B: Once FF has an icon, it will never update it. Even if you delete and re-add the the bookmark. I have no workaround for this.

The government and laws?

Most liberal democracies have provision within their founding documents and case law to allow for central governments at all levels to provide for the general welfare.

You are asking highly vague implementation details about a small hypothetical. It comes off as incredibly rude and like you're fishing for some answer you already mentally dunked on.

Why does your opinion matter more than anyone else’s opinion here?

Even if you believe my previous questions were too opinionated, responding with even more can only be detrimental, and it is not going to lead anywhere productive.

For example, try making a substantive argument as to how a credible enforcement system would come into existence. Otherwise the default assumption is that it will not turn out any better than already existing government systems.

I'll add a second opinion to that. Still feeling smug about it?

Smug about an argument I haven’t seen? What do you believe is the actual argument…?

The part where you like to go around being annoying and then when people get upset retreating to "my opinion is just as valuable as yours". Which I think is stupid, except this time I'm not even going to engage on that and directly say that I also agree with their position, which means that not only is your opinion dumb it is also in the minority.

This seems incoherent, how does this relate to the prior comment?

And why would the number of users expressing opinions even matter?

Edit: I’m not here to score points, so it seems irrelevant in any comment chain whatsoever.

Do you have an actual direction you want to take this conversation, or will you just keep asking questions like this that seemingly nobody can satiate?

What do you gain from doing this?

(Speaking in my own words again: I am going to be very, very explicit here. You have a habit of asking super vague questions which require people to do a massive amount of work for you to explain their position while you can sit and continue at little cost to you: a sort of verbal DoS. Except we're not computers, we are people, and nobody takes kindly to this. When they inform you of this you retreat to "ok, and why should I listen to you?" which is even worse. I think you should take a good look at how you communicate with other people and see if you frequently leave them upset and unwilling to continue talking to you. Maybe you should direct one of your questions at yourself for why they keep doing that, such that you have to keep replying like this: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que....)

This still seems incoherent, I’m assuming your the same person behind ‘saagarjha’, who entered into this comment chain and raised multiple bizarre points including “… which means that not only is your opinion dumb it is also in the minority.”

I’m not going to pretend your past comment doesn’t exist.

So the number of users opining in a comment chain is relevant… how…?

Edit: If you don’t like someone else asking questions, just leave the comment chain, otherwise don’t waste people’s time.

You're focusing a lot on my past comments (which I assure you were written by the same person who is writing this one) but I think the best response to your concerns is actually contained in what you've written yourself. You yourself raised the question of whether someone else's opinion can matter more than anyone else's here; i.e that opinions should implicitly be equal in standing. Not only is this false (and you have, long ago, said the same) but I also wanted to demonstrate that even if opinions were equal there are now two that disagree with you, which obviously leads us to believe that your singular opinion matters less.

This is of course a lot of words to say the more straightforward thing, which is that you are the one wasting people's time here, and they don't really appreciate that. You can't really ask people to leave a comment chain while also asking them to respond in a certain way that is very expensive for everyone else.

meme language? seems you dont have much constructive to say :p

Exact same boat here, Ioniq 5 owner. Destination charging and trickle charging at home does everything I need. I will still apply for this though! Super cool.

Thank you for this link! Interesting read. Looking into predictions regarding climate change is interesting. Especially on page 46 (pdf page 66), the section titled "Winners and Losers in a Post-Petroleum World".

> We believe the most likely occurrence by 2025 is a technological breakthrough that will provide an alternative to oil and natural gas, but implementation will lag because of the necessary infrastructure costs and need for longer replacement time. However, whether the breakthrough occurs within the 2025 time frame or later, the geopolitical implications of a shift away from oil and natural gas will be immense.

I wonder if solar's dirt-cheap cost would be considered a "breakthrough". Interesting breakdown on how major OPEC countries will be affected by such a "breakthrough". Great read!

Edit: This prediction is wild also:

(Page 62, pdf page 83)

> A Non-nuclear Korea?

> We see a unified Korea as likely by 2025—if not as a unitary state, then in some form of North-South confederation. While diplomacy working to end North Korea’s nuclear weapons program continues, the final disposition of the North’s nuclear infrastructure and capabilities at the time of reunification remain uncertain. A new, reunified Korea struggling with the large financial burden of reconstruction will, however, be more likely to find international acceptance and economic assistance by ensuring the denuclearization of the Peninsula, perhaps in a manner similar to what occurred in Ukraine post-1991. A loosely confederated Korea might complicate denuclearization efforts. Other strategic consequences are likely to flow from Korean unification, including prospects for new levels of major power cooperation to manage new and enduring challenges, such as denuclearization, demilitarization, refugee flows, and financing reconstruction.

Edit 2:

(Page 75, pdf page 95)

> Potential Emergence of a Global Pandemic

> Experts consider highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) strains, such as H5N1, to be likely candidates for such a transformation, but other pathogens—such as the SARS coronavirus or other influenza strains—also have this potential.

...

> If a pandemic disease emerges, it probably will first occur in an area marked by high population density and close association between humans and animals, such as many areas of China and Southeast Asia, where human populations live in close proximity to livestock. Unregulated animal husbandry practices could allow a zoonotic disease such as H5N1 to circulate in livestock populations—increasing the opportunity for mutation into a strain with pandemic potential. To propagate effectively, a disease would have to be transmitted to areas of higher population density

> Outside the US, critical infrastructure degradation and economic loss on a global scale would result as approximately a third of the worldwide population became ill and hundreds of millions died.

At least we didn't get hundreds of millions dead. That's pretty grim.