• 1 Post
  • 199 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 17th, 2025

help-circle
  • I really don’t think charging EVs from regular outlets is at all realistic for the vast majority of people.

    Unless you live on the ground floor, you’d have to drag a long ass cable through one of your windows. One of my neighbours actually does that, but just imagine everybody doing it. Not to mention the grid would most likely be unable to handle the load.

    I’ve never seen public outlets, aside from USB ports in public transport, so I doubt it’s a thing.

    Honestly sounds like a reasonable idea, and not just for EVs. The problem is that more and more countries are steadily moving away from public goods, so every building/complex would have to organize it individually.

    Arguably, EVs work even better for places that don’t have infrastructure. Which is easier? Building a network of fuel stations (which need electricity) and keeping them supplied or putting in solar panels in people’s villages?

    Absolutely, agreed. But keep in mind the fuel stations are already there, because most countries spent the last 150 years building them everywhere.

    It’s an unfair comparison, of course, but it’s also impossible to make a fair one. As it stands, pretty much all developed and a lot of developing countries are already well connected when it comes to gas stations. It’s a lot cheaper and easier to keep them going, than it’d be to replace them all with EV equivalents.

    Then there’s the question: does it really make sense to spend the next 50 years upgrading all that infrastructure? When, at least in Europe, public transport is already present everywhere and well developed?

    Would it not be a whole lot easier and cheaper to just get rid of fuel stations, and keep expanding public transport, which emits dozens of times less CO2 per passenger than cars do?

    Now, obviously, there are still uses for personal vehicles, even if public transport is great. It’s not a question which one to focus on exclusively, but which one to propritize.

    Those will be able to add significant amounts of range each day using just the solar panels on the roof.

    If this can be done well, then yeah, infrastructure problem kind of solved. Then you’d just need to wait for people to upgrade their existing cars, and afterwards all that gas infrastructure is basically redundant.




  • (most, maybe even nearly all, people have or can have a way to charge at home)

    What? Most people where?

    I live in a fairly rich European country, and EV chargers here practically don’t exist. Almost everyone lives in apartment buildings. If you’re lucky, yours will have 1 or 2 chargers in the underground parking lot or somewhere close by outside.

    It’s even worse in Eastern and Southern Europe. Outside of North America, Europe, and China, EVs, as well as chargers for them, don’t exist at all.

    Are those ‘most people’ you’re talking about actually just <5% of human population that happen to live in North America or Western Europe, and happen to be wealthy enough to afford that?



  • Personally, I just don’t see any point in developing anything for closed platforms like MacOS or iOS.

    At the end of the day, you’re just making Apple more money for free, on very bad terms. They have all the control; you’re just an unpaid intern.

    Who knows when Apple will stop supporting half the libraries your project relies on?

    Instead, you can develop for open platforms, which genuinely makes the world a slightly better place. In addition to you having a guarantee the project won’t have to shut down overnight.





  • Yes, the Comission is a problem, but sadly, it’s not the only problem.

    The European Council is just as big of an issue. It’s mostly made up of member states’ heads of state/government, so technically it’s democratically elected, except the Comission’s president who also gets a seat there, for whatever reason.

    However, members of the Council almost always push for their countries’ best interests, instead of the EU’s as a whole. And they’re an even bigger issue when they happen to be anti-EU, like about half of the current Council.

    Which essentially means the only EU body that is fully democratically elected, and elected on an EU level is the Parliament. Which coincidentally has the least influence, and which isn’t free of its own issues either.

    The Parliament’s current president - Roberta Metsola - appears to be friends with some American billionaires, and her husband is the head of an American lobby.

    Does that sound like a conflict of interests? Well, that’s probably because it is. Usually, all MEPs are legally required to disclose such conflicts of interests, but for some reason she never had to.

    In case you may be interested, she’s also anti-abortion, part of Malta’s nationalist party, and one of the main pushing forces behind Chat Control.

    Read more here: https://www.politico.eu/article/roberta-metsola-lobbyist-husband-ukko-european-parliament-president-transparency/



  • When a citizen’s initiative presents a serious issue, gets a record number of signatures, and provides some good, easy to implement solutions - the European Comission says it’ll do nothing, because it wants to focus on deregulation.

    The same Comission is perfectly fine with implementing new, insanely vague and/or complicated laws that benefit literally nobody other than big tech companies, at the expense of everyone else.

    And then the same Comission wonders why anti-EU sentiment is growing.

    We’re slowly but steadily getting to a point where the EU has all the dystopian surveillance and control measures in place as China does, except without any of the benefits that come with them.