242 karma · joined July 9, 2020
In some places they care more than others, but you can make a perfect cappuccino with simple whole milk.
My problem with English is twofold, I'm not the best at it and I find writing from the smartphone painful, even in Italian.
I'll give a shot to grammarly, thanks!
Of course I did.
And if you compare features and prices, they offer a way worse experience than a traditional car.
I've also driven rally cars professionally and on track sometimes with semi automatic gears.
I just lack the vocabulary to talk thoroughly about it in English (sorry, I studied business English and then computer science, not mechanical engineering...)
The state of the art is absolutely better and has been for decades, but the state of the art is not what people drive everyday.
The most popular EV right now in Europe is the Renault Zoe, which honestly is good, but far from great (and you can buy the same exact car with an ICE engine for 10k less, it's 30% less!)
Smart EQ is on the rise given the small size which is a great quality in many EU cities, it's as bad as the ICE one. At least it's affordable.
Except for Tesla all the other offer a very bad experience for the price, even the BMW i3 is not what you would expect from a 40 thousands euros car.
> People constantly break them by not using the clutch properly, shifting at the wrong moment
As I said I grew up in a repair shop too, imagine what they do to their cars when the same people think that an automatic is easier to drive so they put even less effort to it.
They destroy every other piece of the car, irresponsible people will be irresponsible.
I am not rooting for ice cars, but for letting cars go as a necessity and think of something else.
Electric cars are just another way to keep producing the same old product in a slightly different way.
They give a false sense of security and of progress.
But we are gonna have a black market for hacks and modified parts (batteries probably) anyway and they will be as dangerous as the traditional cars we have right now for pedestrians and other road users.
The problem with cars is barely the pollution, it's the effect that they produced on our environment, especially the highly dense urbanized areas of the World
If they were harder to drive and operate there will be less of them around
We got rid of people dying by falling from horses by not riding horses anymore as a standard way to travel
How many people do you see flying a plane?
A Cessna is not more expensive than a high end Tesla
P.s. flying without autopilot is barely possible, using an autopilot without mastering flight first is unimaginable
P.p.s. the same people not using the clutch correctly are going to mess with the engine controls on their new electric cars. How is that going to be better? Are they magically going to be better at operating machinery? Or will they care less because "EV are the future they almost drive themselves?"
P.p.p.s. the number of fatalities is constantly going down because there are more and more mandatory safety devices on cars, but the number of accidents is almost steady (at least in Italy) also considering that the number of km driven went down due to 2 global economic crisis and a pandemia in 20 years and the increase of restricted areas in cities. But, and this is the bad news, there were more cars in Italy in 2019 than ever before, 1.4% more than 2018.
In red goal for 2020 victim reduction, in black actual number of victims
https://www.pneurama.com/ew/ew_articolo/images/weekly_it/ima...
I just can't get the day started without the smell of breakfast.
It all depends on what time you wake up, I wake up very late when I'm not working and have breakfast even if it's 2pm.
No way I'm skipping it, if I'm out of latte, I go to a bar and have a cappuccino (milk for cappuccino is more creamy, so it taste better and make the popular foam, it's also a bit harder to digest but there's also less of it in a cappuccino than in a caffellatte)
No shame in it, bars are there to serve not to judge.
Contrary to what people believe you can ask for a cappuccino whenever you want in Italy, the only exception is meals, no cappuccino during lunch/dinner, no cappuccino immediately before or after it.
Usually Italians don't have a cappuccino after a certain hour because bars run out of brioche (we call them cornetti) and a cappuccino without cornetto it's almost not worth it.
And because if you have it to close to lunch or dinner, grandma is not gonna be happy that you are not eating your 30th fettina panata.
But it's 2020 in Italy too and there are a lot of options for lactose intolerant, one is skimmed milk, another is lactose free milk
They are both very populyar and every bar serve them.
----
@moderators ok this is getting a bit ridiculous. Few minutes in and the usual downvote arrives.
Am I being targeted?
There are downvotes I deserved or that are understandable, but lately they are coming as soon as I comment.
On any topic, even the less popular (like this one)
I'm not believing anymore it's coincidence.
are you chosing it or how much?
the answer is no.
you can't become an expert if you aren't allowed to control the parameters.
> The reasons why trucks don't usually have automatic transmissions is that the torque needed to move such a huge mass would destroy nearly every traditional hydrokinetic transmission
that's another point, automatic transmission is more expensive, less robust and increases the cost of the vehicle without adding any other benefit than being 'easier' to operate.
would you fly on a plane where the pilot only knows how to use the autopilot?
that's where safety comes in, when things take more time to master, people tend to become better at them
Manual gear is not stupid, it is simply technically superior (it costs less and lasts more).
That doesn't mean we should have levers and clutches, that's the simplistic view of wannabe futurists, trucks have something much more similar to a semi-automatic (with 10, 12, 13 gears) than a full automatic one.
Truth is car makers need to sell more cars and will gladly make them do all the work "automatically" so people don't have to learn how to do it properly.
If they don't do something now, the 15 years old of today will grow up without cars and in a generation cars would be a thing of the past (that would be great!).
How to make them survive? Well, first of all don't make them useless, make them electric and costly and cover the added cost with people taxes that go directly in car company's pockets.
Secondly make them "easy" and "cool" and "sexy" so that a teenager doesn't have to learn to drive, that's scary and dangerous, like... do you really still practice to learn? what are we, cavemen?
And make them as complex as possible, so that the price won't ever go down and a Renault Zoe will cost as much as a Tesla (a Model 3s cost about 35k, a Zoe around 33k. It's just ridicoulus!).
We live in the era of the iPhones where the promise is that anybody can do what any other people can do, even though there are people that spent their lives learning something and other that did not (I did not, for example).
Of course it is possible when what you can do is dictate by the manufacturer, because "it dangerous out there, think of your old parents! would you give them a smartphone that let them do whatever they want? of course not"
Would you give your children an ICE car?
With manual transmission?
Are you a criminal?
The whole idea that you don't know how to not destroy the planet and the car needs to teach you how to drive responsibly, while the same car has been built by those that profited from destroying the planet's environment, always fascinated me.
How did it become a good idea in people's minds?
Engine braking is an important part of driving safely because it avoids losing control of the steering wheels and can be used to drive at constant speed or slow down on slippery surfaces (snow, ice, water etc.)
There's a reason if trucks are still mainly manual and even the automatic transmission in trucks is not the same used in cars (it's much more advanced and it's more a computer activated gear than simply automatic)
"In 2019, Fortune's Global 500 list of the world's largest corporations included 119 Chinese companies, with combined revenues of US$8.2 trillion (that's 40% of US GDP). That same year, Forbes reported that five of the world's ten largest public companies were Chinese"
We agree
You make an important point, the exact one that makes me doubtful that EV transition should be subsidized, again.
EV incentives will go to the same actors that created these conditions and is going to pay for the same infrastructure that made our cities a living hell.
Instead of banning cars, remove the need to use them.
Instead of subsidize car makers, subsidize the rethinking of the entire mobility plans
If people won't need cars, they won't use them
If people feel that they invested in new "safe" EV cars, even the young people who show no love for cars (not wrongfully) will start using them, because they are new, they are modern, they are safe and probably smell good too and for sure they signal that you care about the environment, so you won't keep them hidden in the garage, you'll use them as much as you can (also to maximize the investment)
Which will bring us to the same point we are now: much of the cities public real estate is eaten by roads and parkings while walking is disincentivized because everything useful, from IKEA to the shoe shop, are in some giant mall out of town unreachable without a car
We need to get rid of cars as a social need, EV or not, it is a really bad habit to rely on them other than for fun and the occasional emergency
Not because of manual gears...
Or because people love to drive
But because we move too many things burning fossil fuel
Pleasure is never stupid, before considering driving stupid, there are many things I would call it first
For example drinking beer, to quote you "you are literally burning fossil fuel to produce something that poison you"
The war on ice is wrong in many ways similar to the war on drugs: it is punitive only for the final user.
Do you really want people to stop using cars?
Instead of putting public money in private companies to help people buy the expensive new electric cars, give the money directly to people to not use the car and see what they use the money for, so you can better understand what their needs are, instead of creating an artificial one.
What's really polluting the atmosphere is not people's cars, it's the constant and unstoppable traffic of goods delivered from country to country for no real reason other than "economy of scale"
A friend of mine has asked for an eye pencil replacement the other day because it was delivered of the wrong colour
It costed a couple euros and came from Korea
They gladly sent another one and picked up the old one
For a two euros eye pencil
Imagine what the fashion industry produces when it moves the 30 billion pounds of clothes that every year are discarded in UK
Not to say that people don't pollute, but that the control should start on who produce the most pollution and also profit from it, not from the last ring of the supply chain
EV are cool, they make people who supports them blindly look cool too
Banning fast fashion is not, it'll make anyone who proposed it sound like a sad trombone or a "boomer" who wants to stop youth expression of inner self
But I know which is worse and I know that if we ban the first, we should obviously ban the other 5 years before
p.s. I do not own a car anymore (sold the last one 7 years ago) and I only make an average of less than 1 thousand Kms/year - this year I still have to surpass the 500 Kms - on rented cars (mainly inside the city, on electric cars)
I don't know what kind of air they want, but it doesn't look like they are doing much to stop polluting.
If they wanted to, they could stop buying so many clothes or wear them for more than a season...
https://indigohoneycomb.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/fash.png
https://assets.weforum.org/editor/4DxwPKr6vDnGTAjAheQiVQrcrv...
See?
Nobody likes a bit of truth
People only want to believed the stories they already believe in.
As I've written in another comment
"Praise EV and you'll look cool, blame fast fashion and they'll hate you"
Point proven.
It's the beauty of driving
I'm all in favour for people to stop driving if they don't like it, I can't wait for the day where I can be among the few owners of a mechanical car that I drive when I need to relax, outside of the cities, just don't call what other people enjoy stupid, please
Before anybody jumps at me, I quit driving for commute or day by day activities 7 years ago and when I need a car now I use car sharing (I spent around 25-30 euros a month, it really is nothing compared to what I used to spend when I owned a car).
But please don't tell me that one of those electric smart is a real car
The feeling is just not there
Which is quite an enjoyable activity and not a relic of the past.
Pre made food has been everywhere around you, you just didn't notice.
When was the last time you made your own bacon or olive oil or sugar, pepper, salt, etc etc?
(I grew up in a farm, we made all of that, except for the salt)
Delivery means you are not even going out from your house, which can only make those browsing sessions while eating longer and more depressive.
On one side being home 24/7 gives me a lot more time to cook myself, on the other side going out to buy food finally makes sense, it's one of the few occasions I have now to go out and have a walk in the open.
In this covid times when I don't want to cook I simply go downstairs and order a take out from one of the tens of restaurants around, where I can get the same quality of a dine in at half the price while also supporting local businesses that are suffering.
Food delivery is overrated in my opinion and also unfair to workers.
The only reason I found to order from a delivery company is to skip the waiting line at McDonald's those rare times I feel like having junk food on a Sunday night while watching a movie and don't move from the couch.
But if I want a good pasta I simply order to the guy at the restaurant below my home from the window, don't even need to phone them, and they give me the food in a regular dish, not some lousy plastic wrap that I just return when I have time.
I am from Italy so they even looked a big novelty back then.
I'm not blaming people who appreciate it, I consider my job my professional endeavour and as I pretend the best from myself, I pretend it from my employer.
Which means that they have to provide me the tools and the means to do it at my best.
I used to be a smoker, I wouldn't have considered it a bonus if my employer paid for my cigarettes.
My salary has to be good enough to pay for that.
It's good to have the option, it's not what drives my decisions.
I have no problem with people that see it as a bonus, to each his own, it simply doesn't matter much to me.
But maybe SV corporate culture has gone a little bit too far on it.
I don't need snacks and drinks at work, just water and the occasional coffe, which I get at the bar anyway so I can have a little walk and clear up my mind
Workplaces that looks like a teenage dream party give me the chill
When I need to relax I stop working entirely and go out
I consider more money or more free time (or both) an incentive
I appreciate solid forniture, a comfortable seat, big windows with natural light, a nice neighborhood (last work I accepted was because they had an office in Duomo in Milan, the one I have now has an office 5 minutes away from the Colosseum in Rome), I don't care much about "free stuff"
Paying for my drinks or snacks it's not what will bankrupt me
So no
> I was thinking that Apple is the Punto, Apple never had a Koenigsberg.
The Punto is reliable, durable, and easy to modify
And Koenigsberg is a burg in Germany, maybe you meant Koenigsegg?
Switching to Apple has a cost, switching to Apple with Apple silicon has an even higher cost.
It all depends what you use your computer for, if you buy a Tesla you probably don't depend on your car, people buying entry level hw are people who don't need something fancy, they need a tool and good enough it's enough.
To reverse your analogy, if they have the same price, I take a computer that I can upgrade and actually own over an Apple
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subnotebook
P.s. in Italian they are usually referred to as "portatili" (portable) from the 80s portable computers, even though they were not laptops
You're stuck with what you bought :)
(in the article: Fiat Uno - 30 years old Fiat model - with Lamborghini engine runs at 320km/h)
https://www.automotorinews.it/2020/05/27/fiat-uno-motore-lam...
I did not choose it, they gave it to me at work, but it's definitely a workstation
It's not a lightweight laptop, but it's a laptop nonetheless
It still does 8 hours on battery after 3 years
Being entry level performances don't matter much, but it's still a good backup
Bonus point: Linux works great on it
For 13 hundred dollars (30% more in Euros) I can buy a pro machine, one that at least will give me the option of using more than 16GB of RAM
The new Apple Silicon looks good and I love that they are finally shipping some decent GPU, but price wise they're still not that cheap
------
The downvotes are because I said Xiaomi or for something else?
LG sells a 17 inches, 2.9 lb (same weight of the Air) 16GB of RAM (up to 40) and a discrete GPU (Nvidia GTX 1650) for 1,699
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2014/...
Regardless of the motivation USA is more dangerous than Somalia (4.31/100k) - of course there are other reasons to be scared there,being killed is only one among many - but still it is kinda bad IMO.
If we count, for example, people killed by the police, there have been 1,004 killings in USA in 2019, 3 every million, 34 every 10 million residents. compared to Germany, whose police is said to be quite violent, it's 30 times more (Germany is around 1 per 10 million residents) and 170 times worse than Japan (0.2 per 10 millions)
All in all, as much as I know numbers don't tell the whole truth, something needs to change over there .
To be fair the US has a tendency to side with tyrants, dictators, oppressors, not exactly with the peasants, at least in the past 80 years.
To name one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...
But I see your point, my objections are to:
1 - you don't need to be armed, you nede to be able to, in case you;re going to need it (for example through external support)
2 - you prove my point, there is no armed revolt that succeeded only because people were armed, you need international support (at least from your neighbours)
> I'd like to see a citation of a single unarmed revolution that succeeded.
here's one for you, my friend.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Revolution
> The purpose of being armed is really to force the opposition to massacre you
exactly.
that's the point.
and that's why you don't point a gun to a policeman.
being armed has always been a disadvantage for regular people.
That's why the comment bringing up the 2nd amendment is completely off topic in this context, 10 centuries ago if you traveled armed you had to be ready to fight, because everyone armed like you was going to try to kill you: you represented a danger.
it's the same thing that happens today in US, a lot of people are armed, they have guns on them, the police patrolling is even more heavily armed that the gangsters, they take a look a round, see something fishy, they see a gun, they shoot.
No question asked.
So, to go back on topic, being unarmed for the peasants of the Carolingian era most of the time made the difference between being killed and being simply robbed.
US is the only country in the western World who only made one real revolution.
And it was to not pay taxes, not against a true tyrant.
> And I also think the reasoning is that the anti-tyrannical populace will be much larger
The only thing that will be larger is the anti everybody else populace (tribalism, to give it a name).
USA had one major civil war and they keep killing each other like nowhere else in the World (like ten times more than the west average).
It's mathematically provable.
there is no "the people" as a single entity and interests when there is a revolt.
if everybody is armed, the supporters of the tyrant are going to be armed as well.
But with better equipment.