So to not get confused, when you ask for a new laptop in your corporate and you say 14 inch Pro Max, don't get lured to get Pro Max Premium, or even Pro Max Plus, just say you want Pro M5 Max, because otherwise you are getting Dell.
And make sure to not say "Just get me a Pro, bro", because you might be getting HP Pro desktop!
For people that want to make the calculation:
A truck does not need a 15 ton battery. In Europe, we have mandatory breaks for truck drivers. So you need a battery pack for max 400km of range, let's say 500km. When you have a break, you charge. For this, you need like 1500kWh battery pack, which weigths like ... wait, 15 tons.
But this is not entirely correct, the real values reported are between 120-150Kwh/100km, that means a half of the stated number, 7.5 tons for the battery pack.
You cannot do that, because there will never be that many charging places around. Never. The situation is so bad now that there are barely enough places for trucks to get parking spots, let alone parking spots with electric charges. I'm talking about Europe, my brother is a truck driver (right now is on a ride to Morocco, he picked something up with his truck from Hungary), I know those stories about parking spots from him.
It’s weird that he’s so in the numbers but then doesn’t carry through with the battery electric truck calculations. He just dismisses it out of hand.
Your cargo may be reduced but your fuel costs will also be reduced. It’s quite a complicated calculation.
Are you hauling sand? Then you probably can’t spare a single kg of cargo limit. Doing LTL work? Then maybe you’re not totally filled anyways. It really depends. If you’re fine with a 35 ton limit you might be able to make good money with the fuel savings.
Those mandatory breaks are 45 minutes long. You're not charging 750 kWh in 45 minutes. With a fast charger 750 kWh is 2 to 7 hours. At the far more common level 2 chargers it's 18 hours. Either mandatory breaks need to be substantially longer, you need a substantially larger battery than just that required to go between breaks, or you need some sort of specialized technology for dramatically speeding up charging rates well beyond those for personal EVs, any of which cut hard into the economics.
So _if_ your route had those, you could charge in somewhere around 1.25h. Not enough for break time, but you can imagine starting with, say, a 1.1MWh battery with one +500kWH boost mid-day being enough to get you to an overnight full recharge. Lots of "ifs" there, since you might not always be able to get full charge rate from the charger, might not time things perfectly, etc., but it doesn't seem completely out of scope for a few years from now.
(And who knows, perhaps tesla will come through with those megachargers. Seems more likely than, say, building an autonomous humanoid robot.)
Charge full overnight, top up at 300-350 KW once a day for 45 minutes. 600 kWh lfp battery weighing 4.5t. This seemed to work out fine for a guy on YouTube documenting his experiences. SoC wasn't a big deal in itself, flexibility in (overnight) stops more so, but still less than I expected.
Azure DevOps doesn't have any hosted images above the minimum-sized ones... if we were ever going to move off of GitHub Actions, it wouldn't be to a service that required use to manage our own VMs/images.
ADO is far worse in every conceivable way. It lends itself to utterly byzantine dependency trees for the CI definitions, and also makes it very complex to set permissions to prevent pipelines running from branches with the same permissions as the protected branch.
LM Studio is awesome in a way how easily you can start with local models. Nice UX, not needed to tweak every detail, but giving you the options to do so if you want.
The recent tactic is to spread distrust to own government by any means necessary - seemingly random failing infrastructure is hardly attributable to some foreign actor, yet it has implications on who gets in the government after next elections, especially europarliament. And as you can observe, most of the "anti-system" parties are pro-russian, openly or by agenda.
edit: I'm not saying this accident looks like sabotage. The spread of propaganda after it happened it's a different story.
Good job! OSINT rules.
And regarding drones, surely any state actor may be doing this, however doing surveillance by drones over military bases is just so noob. That just points out they don't have a capacity to do reconnaissance with satellites, or they are doing something completely different. Probably making sure the target knows someone is watching, saying "We know where you have your sensitive spots".
They don't need satellites, they can surveil us close up with £200 drones and we don't do anything about it. It's like the story about the astronaut and the pencil.
A bit of a shame. I had a Nokia 6090 with 8 watt of transmit power on 900Mhz. Combined with a 33 centimeter antenna that phone had reception in nearly all of the European continent. And with a 70Ah 12v battery you had a battery life of weeks. Even with the phone consuming up to 25 watts during calls.
My fancy new 5G smartphone doesn’t work in rural parts of the country. We are going backwards.
It's a hot mess too. When you have an American carrier / phone number on an international plan and they shut down all radios in the case of an emergency in the EU, you still get 2G/3G service abroad while everyone's phones around you is dead.
What do you mean? They are shutting down the radio transceivers for 2G/3G, how would an American number/carrier get a signal in countries that have shut down their 2G/3G networks? Or are you talking about plans to do direct-to-cell satellite service, cause none of those are 2G/3G as far as I can tell?
The whole point is to free up spectrum, how would that work if that spectrum is still in use for the American carriers in countries that shut down the service for domestic use? Why would service be maintained for such a niche usecase?
Oh I love the contact page forms, usually this being the only interactive part of a otherwise static website. Either they crash with a visible 500, or they crash in the background, or the mail goes into who-knows-where, as it was set by a guy that left years ago.
PET scan
(You have to wait for civic applications of the newly discovered technologies for a while, but the "technology transfer" from CERN to practical applications has a few notable examples.)
PET stands for Positron Emission Tomography. The radioactive tracers emit positrons (antimatter), which then annihilate with electrons to produce the gamma rays that are detected. So it does use antimatter, just indirectly through the decay process.
I am familiar with PET. As we both agree, PET does not use antimatter directly, so this article is irrelevant to it (which is what the original comment was asking about).
Indeed, it would be quite difficult to smuggle some antimatter to a tumor. I'm saying that research in this particular area eventually led to practical application, PET scans.
