That makes sense. Though I would like to see stats on number of cars going into the used car because of EV purchases. Judging on conversations with work colleagues, there's still a lot of people keeping their old cars around because of "autonomy fear" - in other words, people convincing themselves they need a 400Km autonomy for that one time a year they might use their car on a vacation. Which is stupid, IMO, as they'd benefit more from selling their cars and renting on the rare occasion they need to do a really long distance, but it's apparently fairly common. Though I'm sure that will change once people realize they are mostly not touching their old cars.
tables
joined 1 year ago
Eh, a motorbike isn't going to be as comfy as a car with an AC regardless of whether it's electric or gas powered. Vented gear and lighter colors can help a lot in the summer, but they don't look as cool and people would rather scorch in black gear and be almost invisible at night apparently.
I've seen a much greater adoption of EVs in my area once the range started becoming decent enough, along with the prices and the greater availability of charging stations. And I figure the same will happen with motorbikes. Electric scooters are already super popular in the city. They're cheap, they allow you to skip traffic, and the range is decent enough for short commutes. Once there's bigger motorbikes with a decent enough range and decent prices, people will buy them as well.
There's something that bothers me about the whole EV transition thing which is how polluting the transition itself is - if I have a newish gas powered car, that took a lot of resources to build, am I really saving the environment by buying a new EV, which will cost even more resources? Ideally, it would be people with really old very polluting cars switching to EVs - but because of the cost of EVs, I notice it's mostly people with bigger purchasing power switching to EVs - people who often already had fairly new and efficient gas vehicles which could keep running for a little longer without as much harm to the environment. I have a not that old medium CC four-stroke motorbike, with a low fuel consumption and supposedly fairly low pollutant output. Even if a decent alternative EV exists and I switch to it, how long do I have to ride the EV before the polution benefits of the EV in comparison to my current bike outweigh the pollution cost of building it in the first place?
Boring answer, but I play on the PC exclusively. When I'm not playing, I'm usually already using the PC for other stuff, so it's a faster switch than jumping to some other device. I thought about getting a Steam Deck for a while, but I gravitate so much towards the PC that I think I'd probably put it down after a while.
There's usually "routine" games I'll play during the week when I have little time - which are usually games that are unlikely to receive any big updates - and I'll leave new games to moments when I know I can sit down for a long while without worries.
The PC I use for gaming is practically only a gaming box, though. I don't tinker with it nearly as much as I used to. And I've started using a controller more, when that's an option.
It says it's been updated 12 years ago apparently.
I'd never heard of GL TRON but I just installed it out of curiosity and it does seem to run fine. Android 13.
I'd say yes, not necessarily because of the story ties, but because there's progression in the gameplay itself. So playing the second one after the first one will feel like an upgrade in gameplay. Whereas if you decide to play this one right now and at the end you're left wanting for more, going back to the first one might feel like a slight downgrade (even though I love it as well).
I get what you mean. My pet peeve is more with "real life" people. I don't spend that much time on Lemmy anymore because, well, in a lot of ways it's a lot like the worst parts of Reddit. And, in general, I've started to notice that "internet opinions" hardly ever represent what I see when I talk to real life people. So I tend to not care much about anything coming out of Lemmy, Reddit, Twitter, etc, as I find it's often the loud very tiny minority.
But I have the habit of reading opinion pieces on a couple of national newspapers, and I've noticed the "you're an anti-semite if you disagree with me" pattern a lot. Most opinion pieces by usually left leaning political writers have been more level headed than I actually expected them to be - in the sense that there's a couple of them who usually hold far more extreme positions on pretty much everything else and have been surprisingly "center" on this issue. Whereas on the right, a few people who I would say are usually fairly moderate and level headed have gone hard on the "the left actually hates jews, they don't care about civilians" trope. And it's very confusing to me because I have yet to find any actual left leaning person who's any relevant in my country's political scene actively sharing that discourse. So it all feels like baseless deflection. It was the kind of behavior I expected out of Reddit - it's been the case for years I feel that in most bigger subreddits any critique of Israel's government would immediately make you an honorary anti-semite. Though that seems to have changed a bit after we entered the "Bibi is trying to turn Israel into a dictatorship" arc and he's not seen as the savior of Israel anymore. But it weirds me out to see these talking points coming out of real life political commentators who I would usually expect to be at least somewhat level headed. In general, with exceptions from the usual crazies and outside places like Twitter, I have yet to find the big leftist pro-Hamas discourse everyone seems to pretend is all around.
It’s why I happily soak up the downvotes all the time from the pro-Hamas crowd on here.
The second part of this sentence is likely why you're downvoted. The whole "everyone who disagress with me is pro-Hamas / anti-semitic" is tiring, disingenuous, shoves aside any possible good faith discussion, and I'd argue it's actually destructive as it muddies the definition of these terms. Anti-semite specifically is a term I don't think people should be throwing around willy nilly, but by this point, 99% of the time I see it used in online discourse it describes someone who doesn't think mass civilian bombings are OK, and maybe 1% actual anti-semites. It's basically the right wing version of some "leftists" calling people fascists for having the slightest right of center opinion.
I usually either scroll past any mention of these or downvote and move on because it's too tiring to devote time to people who, most of the time, are arguing in bad faith.
but they just waited for years
Israel destroys Gaza tower housing AP and Al Jazeera offices - 2021
Israel Bombs Hospital and UN Building - 2019
'The world stands disgraced' - Israeli shelling of school kills at least 15 - 2014
You can Google for "Israel bombs", limit the results to whatever range of years you want, and you'll find plenty of these. Throughout the years there's been areas of Gaza that haven't even had time to rebuild before they're being bombed again. Searching for "UN condems Israel" is another great one. It's almost funny how many times a country can be condemned for war crimes by the UN without any actual repercussions against that countries' government, as long as they're "allies". Is this what you call "waiting for years"?
I personally have a pet peeve with commenters who edit their posts to complain about having "offended" others when all of the replies are reasonable and calm. It always makes it seem like the commenter was actively trying to upset others, and when they noticed no one was actually upset and people only gave reasonable replies, they pretend everyone was upset anyway so they don't actually have to engage in a conversation.
He was in the opensuse board of directors at some point I think. I knew him from his Youtube channel that talked about Linux and related topics, it was fairly popular in the Linux community for a while. I mostly watched it for Linux related news and technical opinions. A bit after he left that position, he started occasionally mentioning how now that he wasn't representing opensuse anymore he could finally "speak freely". That's when the channel started taking a weird turn.
At first he started going on weird political tangents while doing the whole "I don't talk about politics" thing. Some videos started popping up where he would attack some person or organization for what seemed to be mostly political reasons, but under the guise of his reasoning being purely technical.
Eventually, he just started sounding like someone who fell into a conspiracy rabbit hole, or some weird far right cult. I stopped watching then, most of his videos by then had little technical interest anymore and they sounded more like someone who was losing their mind. I don't know if it's a mental issue or something, but his whole persona shifted dramatically into something... weird. I haven't kept up in the mean time, though.
You raise some good points. I find that it's hard to find information on the topic as a whole because a lot of sources have fairly big biases - either pro or anti EVs - which often times aren't very transparent. And also because you usually have to dig deep to find an example that fits your situation. For example, on the topic of your last paragraph, when comparing cars to motorcycles, what's a "car"? Are we talking about a two seat Clio or a four seat family wagon? It gets even worse with motorcycles given the big variety of engine configurations.
Some years ago I read something similar to your last point - that in general, motorcycles produce a fair amount more greenhouse gases than an average car. More recently I've come upon an article that tested different motorcycles with different CCs and engine configurations and the results were a lot more nuanced. They mentioned that 2 stroke motorcycles were basically awful in terms of how much greenhouse gases they released. 4 stroke motorcycles, on the other hand, were comparable to a small car. Small and medium CC 4 stroke motorcycles would win out against the average car in terms of emissions, whereas bigger CC 4 stroke motorcycles would emit slightly more greenhouse gases than the average car.