Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Business, Economics, and Taxes: Capitalism. Yay? >=(

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Deutsche Gopher Fan
    replied
    Cancelled my Prime membership for a few reasons:

    - so much of what is sold on Amazon is crap
    - prime shipping isn’t as fast on some things and frankly I don’t order enough
    -ads being forced on tv if you don’t pay extra now. I barely watch prime as it is

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    Not just unlocking, but unlatching. These cars don't have handle mechanisms. They just have magnets and buttons that deenergize at certain times from what I understand. So like, you need them to stay latched during a crash but immediately unlatch after. Good luck finding that perfect balance.

    Leave a comment:


  • Slap Shot
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    Bah. Every car company does it!!!
    -Elmo fanboy

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    https://www.threads.net/@ktvu2/post/...c4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

    Tesla is recalling 120,423 vehicles in the United States over the risk of doors unlocking during a crash, according to a report
    https://ktvu.com/news/tesla-recalls-...k-during-crash
    That ain't good...

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Feel The Burn Elmo

    The Reuters Article

    Leave a comment:


  • rufus
    replied
    Mook, we don't need to hear about your life experiences.

    Leave a comment:


  • mookie1995
    replied
    Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post

    A reasonably low vacuum in a 4,000-gallon vessel is hard enough to control. Obviously there are ways to do high vacuum in very large volumes (the NASA cryogenic vacuum building that I thought got decommissioned a number of years ago).

    But I agree, even a small partial vacuum over 500 miles would have been immeasurably expensive. I just can't even imagine. For such a relatively small gain in efficiency. Like even if you improved the efficiency by 10x, your capital costs are going to be 1000s of times higher than building two parallel steel rails.

    Going from an atmospheric vessel to one rated for full vacuum basically triples the cost. Usually more depending on the alloy involved. And that's for building a vessel, which is already expensive!!
    Shouldn’t all this has be proved out negatively with dudes sticking their wang in the house vacuum tube, expecting to add some inches……

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Originally posted by LynahFan View Post

    100%. Economics and even physics aside, there are too many parts that have to work all at the same time for it ever to be reliable. Keeping a vacuum on a 500-mile tunnel is just a ridiculous concept.
    A reasonably low vacuum in a 4,000-gallon vessel is hard enough to control. Obviously there are ways to do high vacuum in very large volumes (the NASA cryogenic vacuum building that I thought got decommissioned a number of years ago).

    But I agree, even a small partial vacuum over 500 miles would have been immeasurably expensive. I just can't even imagine. For such a relatively small gain in efficiency. Like even if you improved the efficiency by 10x, your capital costs are going to be 1000s of times higher than building two parallel steel rails.

    Going from an atmospheric vessel to one rated for full vacuum basically triples the cost. Usually more depending on the alloy involved. And that's for building a vessel, which is already expensive!!

    Edit: I should have said reduced the inefficiency by a factor of ten. But whatever. The point is there.
    Last edited by dxmnkd316; 12-24-2023, 09:54 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • LynahFan
    replied
    Originally posted by Kepler View Post

    It was always BS, right? It was never a viable idea?
    100%. Economics and even physics aside, there are too many parts that have to work all at the same time for it ever to be reliable. Keeping a vacuum on a 500-mile tunnel is just a ridiculous concept.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post

    Well it can only go as fast as the F-150 pulling it!
    That was so hilarious. I really wish ford used that in an ad.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by French Rage View Post

    They've just made trains, but worse and less efficient.
    Well it can only go as fast as the F-150 pulling it!

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Originally posted by LynahFan View Post
    It was always BS, right? It was never a viable idea?

    Leave a comment:


  • Drew S.
    replied
    As someone who loves a good cableknit this is sadly right on the money https://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...ashion/675600/

    Leave a comment:


  • Spartanforlife4
    replied
    Originally posted by French Rage View Post

    They've just made trains, but worse and less efficient.
    That reminds me of a tweet I saw with a video promoting a new concept “bus” prototype that was elevated so cars could drive under it, and what made it “innovative” was the bus was on tracks.

    Leave a comment:


  • French Rage
    replied
    Originally posted by LynahFan View Post
    They've just made trains, but worse and less efficient.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X