DefederateLemmyMl

  • Gen𝕏
  • Engineer ⚙
  • Techie 💻
  • Linux user 🐧
  • Ukraine supporter 🇺🇦
  • Pro science 💉
  • Dutch speaker
  • 1 Post
  • 290 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 8th, 2023

help-circle





  • if it’s good enough for the majority of historians

    It isn’t. Historians would love to have independent evidence of the existence and crucifixion of Jesus, but there isn’t… so most historians refrain from taking a position one way or the other. The ones that do have to make do with what little objective information they have, and the best they can come up with is: well because of this embarassing thing, it’s more likely that he did exist and was crucified than that he didn’t, because why would they make that up?

    That’s rather weak evidence, and far from “proof”.

    Not sure why you’d need more

    Well for one because the more prominent people who have studied this have a vested interest in wanting it to be true. For example, John P. Meier, who posited this criterion of embarassment that I outlined in my previous comment, isn’t really a historian but a catholic priest, professor of theology (not history) and a writer of books on the subject.







  • Hmm, I can’t say that I’ve ever noticed this. I have a 3950x 16-core CPU and I often do video re-encoding with ffmpeg on all cores, and occasionally compile software on all cores too. I don’t notice it in the GUI’s responsiveness at all.

    Are you absolutely sure it’s not I/O related? A compile is usually doing a lot of random IO as well. What kind of drive are you running this on? Is it the same drive as your home directory is on?

    Way back when I still had a much weaker 4-core CPU I had issues with window and mouse lagging when running certain heavy jobs as well, and it turned out that using ionice helped me a lot more than using nice.

    I also remember that fairly recently there was a KDE/plasma stutter bug due to it reading from ~/.cache constantly. Brodie Robertson talked about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCoioLCT5_o




  • Ah, so you’re wanting to transport tons and tons of batteries back to a centralized facility to be inspected and have testing done?

    No, that’s just something new you invented to shoot down the idea.

    Batteries can have a tamperproof seal so that customers can’t easily mess with it, just like you normally don’t mess with the electricity, gas or water meter in your home. QC and charging can be done on site where you swap, and can mostly be automated. The only thing that needs to be transported back and forth regularly are defective and replacement batteries. Just like gas stations at the end of the day or week need to order replenishment for the fuel they’ve dispensed.

    We already do this kind of swapping with other stuff as well: from crates with empty beer bottles and office water cooler bottles to refilling propane and butane bottles.

    It’s not a gov problem, it’s a logistics issue.

    1. The lack of government oversight that you brought up, and which this was in reply to, is literally a government issue. Regulation and inspection works fine in most of the civilized world, the fact that it doesn’t in Backwater USA is no argument.

    2. Fossil fuel distribution already is a huge logistics issue, we have to dig it up in the middle east, transport it in oil tankers, refine it at some central locations, then distribute it again with tanker trucks to millions of gas stations so that finally you can put it in your car and use it to drive somewhere, but somehow we have been making that work for over a century.


  • Quality control on batteries that go out to customers, and make the stations legally liable.

    For example: I once pumped petrol in my diesel car due to human error by the gas station’s supply company (they put petrol in the diesel tanks). They found out about the error as I was filling up and stopped me halfway, so luckily I had no engine damage, but they had to pay for the tow and to get my tank emptied.

    how many states with counties have no inspections

    Sounds more like a “your government is shit” problem than a “this scheme can’t work” problem.



  • No idea why 60 Hz on an LCD works better, though.

    Because LCD pixels are constantly lit up by a backlight. They don’t start to dim in between refresh cycles. They may take some time to change from one state to another, but that is perceived as ghosting, not flickering.

    On a CRT the phosporus dots are periodically lit up (or “refreshed”) by an electron beam, and then start to dim afterwards. So the lower the refresh rate, the more time they have to dim in between strobes. On low refresh rates this is perceived as flickering. On higher refresh rates, the dots don’t have enough time to noticably dim, so this is perceived as a more stable image. 60Hz happens to the refresh rate where this flicker effect becomes quite noticable to the human eye.