Acinyx

Same here at 52 degrees, the evenings feel so much more useful when the sun is out than in winter when it is dark, an hour extra sun would be massive.

So I am wondering what the percentages for these preferences are, is t 50-50 split or is one dominant? You'll piss off part of the population any chocie you make nayway, but at least in the European (non-representative) polls they found 80% don't want the twice-yearly switch, so it would be progress anyway?

You see electric Volvo's everywhere in the more electrified markets in Europe like Norway and the Netherlands. Especially the smaller models like the ex30 and ex/xc40. They fit very well design-wise and I think software quality wise in the European market and they are essentially Chinese (Zeekr). I think it helps that they use Android Auto as the main interface and some of their designers are still located in Sweden. Korean electrics are also taking over marketshare hand over fist.

It is not a model, it is "just" using openstreetmap labels.

In europe the connections are a lot lower amperage, around here for example 35 ampere per phase. But having 3 phases is pretty normal and the standard in any new house, which means 3 phases can let you charge at 22kW with a few Ampere left, while with 1 phase you can only charge at 7 KW.

That does make it useful to charge it in a few hours in the afternoon, instead of having to wiat the night.

The issue remains: "-" breaks double clicking to select the full string, which means you'll have to manually select all the characters before copying. Same thing happens with UUIDs: using double clicking, you can only select one block at a time.

This isn't a major issue, which means there's no easy answer and it generally comes down to preference if this is a requirement or not.

The issue remains: "-" breaks double clicking to select the full string, which means you'll have to manually select all the characters before copying. Same thing happens with UUIDs: using double clicking, you can only select one block at a time.

This isn't a major issue, which means there's no easy answer and it generally comes down to preference if this is a requirement or not.

I don't think you understand: It has to be USB-C or better. So if USB-D (or a worse name knowing the consortium) comes out, the idea behind the law is that it should also be allowed _instead_ of a USB-C port.

IANAL though, so I am unsure how well they legally described that requirement.

> It hit me that many rich countries get their so called "green-ness" by paying poorer, more corrupt countries, to offshore their environmental damage, while globally the impact is still the same, but as long as it's not in their back yard, it counts as being green.

Shit rolls downhill, don't forget that a lot of stuff imported in Romania is produced in China, partially because their environmental rules are even less strict than places like Romania.

In the last decades around here (the Netherlands) they have started burning more an more trash in an effort to stop using landfills, produce energy and to lower the amount of these corrupt streams going through poorer countries. I think some Nordic country even had to massively import garbage as they didn't produce enough.

They are more and more working on doing the separation at the garbage company though instead of at the source. Generally the reason for this that that consumers aren't very consistent in the separation and a few mistakes makes the whole stream worthless if they don't implement separation after collection.

Two examples of large municipalities going this route:

* https://www.amsterdam.nl/afval-en-hergebruik/plastic-scheidi...

* https://www.almere.nl/wonen/afval/afval-scheiden/nascheiden

But it is also extremely easy to filter out aluminium from the general waste stream, so no real need to separate them, especially as the average consumer is not very consistent.

In Europe it is also likely the plastic packaging industry that's mostly paying for it as its cheaper for them to make it seem like plastic packaging can be recycled, that it is to get regulated to not cause so much waste.

A more generous reading would be that the industry is being incentivized to make their product easier to recycle by making them pay for the recycling, but it depends a bit on how cynical you are :).

The result though is that at least in my area the recycles pay so much for plastic waste that the municipality could lower the garbage disposal taxes as they were making money like with paper.

Any application that uses certificate pinning would fail in this situation as that's specifically what it is trying to prevent.

Because all the natives pay using Debit cards, so it is only foreign visitors that have this problem, and stores in the really touristy parts do support credit cards.

I am pretty sure that contactless payments around here do all support credit cards btw as AFAIK that's how Apple Pay and Google Wallet work, but I haven't tried it much.

SpaceX existed before he got there? Citation needed.

From the neighbors in the Netherlands: it is interesting to see these local differences as at least in my circles you don't need to get married to become part of the in-laws or other social circles.

Really, most couples I know really only marry when they are already very well established in each-others circles, as sort of a affirmation of their love. Maybe this is also because legally you can achieve the same protections for your children a lot simpler than getting married.

But this doesn't mean the whole of the Netherlands works like that, just my social circles :)

Hmm, living in the Netherlands, in Europe, it seems the reverse in my social circle. People mostly see it as a personal choice they make because they don't see the point, with other legal possibilities also being available. Looking around my circle it seems marriage (or registered partnership) is more popular under the lower income couples.

So not saying you are wrong, just saying it really depends on your social circle and broader culture or country, as there will likely be big differences between secular countries vs religious countries.

That's the main revenue stream of Google it would pretty much mean Google itself would be forbidden.

The EU gives companies the option and only requires all this hoopla if you want to use the data for something else than the user requested. The "problem" is that Google does want that, as they are an advertising network, so they give web developers access to their tools but tell you that you have to ask the user for consent. That everyone totally forgets those warnings and somehow forgets that Google is an advertising network is on them, just like it is your responsibility what are random dependencies you download using whatever dependency tool you use.

Google is an advertising network, they don't need to sell the IP to make money.

It's on the original website to prove that they only use your data for what you asked them to, if you want to do anything else, you need to request informed consent. Using hosted Google fonts is not needed to run the website (as you can also easily embed them without having the user touch Google). And Google will not say they won't do anything with that data, as they would be lying since that's the whole reason google fonts and other free webdev resources by Google exists: to gather as much data about the user it can.

Under the GDPR, an IP address is personally identifiable data, so you can't leak it.

And for someone with masses of extra data like Google it is enough to identify who is doing the browsing, so this isn't some crazy overreach.

We can if we want to, but right now it is totally voluntary and so left up to brands that want to look good, but also not pay too much extra.

If a block like the US or EU suddenly puts a whole lot of strong regulation on the coffee market, it likely will result in 90% coffee being problem free, but also costing 2-3 times as much and it just isn't as much a priority to be worth that.

Its pretty much pointless though, if you can't move all your revenue to an ip holding company, you just have to make it slightly more realistic.

In case of Starbucks: they move a ton of their profit to a coffee bean exporter from Switzerland which they own themselves. And how should a government say how expensive those beans can be?

Any company can outsource part of their revenue to a subsidiary in a different country like that and it would be extremely hard to encode in law when they wouldn't be allowed to do this "because of taxation". Uber could for example move their cloud management costs to some company in a low tax country, or maybe have their developers outsourced to some low tax country. How would you decide that is "valid" outsourcing vs "tax cheating" outsourcing?

What exactly should they pay tax on?

AFAIK, most countries like the US go for a tax on profits, but profits of a multinational country are extremely hard to "locate", as in: in which country was the profit made?

Some obvious examples are IKEA stores licensing the rights to the IKEA brand from some company in the Netherlands, which means most stores in the US almost have no profits. Or starbucks USA buying extremely expensive (but high quality they say) beans from a company in Switserland... which is also part of the multi-national Starbucks holding.

These are obvious examples, but it is almost inherently hard to define where profits are made for a multi-national company as they almost always have revenue streams going in many directions and who says which national company is really adding value while others are almost profitless?

Otoh a revenue based system would also be rather hard to manage, especially if you want to prevent double taxation (both countries in the equation taxing the same revenue) as that almost requires profit based taxation again.

> The USA, UK, Scandinavia, Australia have embraced these kind of transparent and simple taxes, and their societies are much wealthier because of them.

Eh, scandinavia doesn't use poll taxes but all have progressive tax rates (Just like the rest of northern Europe)? And AFAIK the UK and US also use progressive tax rates?

Or less, as the store is allowed to discount (officially the reverse: the manufacturer is not allowed to set prices of anyone except themselves, so if a store takes almost no margin or even sells below price, the manufacturers is forbidden to even talk about it.

What blew up is the second stage, the stage that would contain the astronauts. If this landing profile is also the profile they will use for a manned starship is unknown.

It feels to me like there is no backup plan for engine failures, but they can take so many paths here that I don't think anyone knows except people within SpaceX. Example paths:

* Don't launch it with people until it has landed unmanned so frequently that everyone trusts it. * Land cargo versions like this to get max payload, while manned versions light a lot sooner, with possibly more engines, and sacrifice some fuel for increased reliability. * Catch starship just like the booster in case of failure, with a longer travel to support higher speeds and lower G's. * Add a parachute or increase the flap sizes to lower terminal speed so much that it is survivable to land without engines.

The test articles for the first stage are still being built and are expected to land similar to the falcon 9, which the big difference that Elon is talking about them being catched by a tower instead of landing on their own legs. This seems far enough away though that I would not be surprised if that changes radically.

Those RFIDs make it possible to not just scan them when the article gets bought, but also to very easily scan the inventory of the whole store by just walking through the store with a scanner.

Just as useful, although currently still more likely to be done with barcode scanners is to identify the products in the logistics chain. Right now you need scanning ports with at least 4 cameras/scanners or humans manually scanning each barcode, with RFIDs the port would be simplified further.

I think he used "effective" as in: "they have the power to, they are able to/it fall in their domain", not as in "they did it perfectly without overhead"

Especially as all these "mild" hybrids have enough of a battery to move the centre of mass so far down that they are lower than older sedans.

This is why Teslas won so many safety awards at the start: they were pretty much unrollable in the tests as they existed at the time.

Ah true, but as someone that might buy a (used) car in the next few years: trendiness & freshness do play into this as estate cars do lose points in my book for their "old-school" look as it was the type of car people had when I was a kid (and I am nearly 40).

So that together with the higher ride height, which makes getting kids in and out easier and almost no extra cost makes the SUV more likely to win than a similarly specced estate.

(and please keep in mind a "SUV" in Europe is not really the same as "SUV" in the states).

I kind of wonder if what we Europeans call SUVs is really what a lot of thew people in these threads think about.

For example, I am going to buy a new car in the next 2 years, so looking a bit, and two cars I might be choosing behind would be the:

Peugeot 3008/5008, seen as a SUV in the Netherlands: 67% Pedestrian Euro NCAP score: https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/peugeot/3008/5008/26581

Peugeot 208, smaller car, same brand, same year: 56% https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/peugeot/208/38543

Or the original posters BMW X3: 70% https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/bmw/x3-/-x4/33285

Otoh, the BMW 3 series: 87% https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/bmw/3-series/38531

Full electric BMW i3: 57% https://www.euroncap.com/en/results/bmw/i3/8863

So what I am trying to say is: yes, "SUV" in general are likely to be worse for pedestrians, but there is so much variability, that "picking a SUV" doesn't mean much about safety.