• 0 Posts
  • 749 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • There are reasonable limits. Let’s say his car takes 30 minutes. Is 31 minutes total connection time acceptable? I think everyone would say yes. How about 35 minutes? 45? An hour?

    Where people draw the line is going to vary. I agree with the premise that you shouldn’t have to wait by your car to charge, whether it’s 30 minutes or 2 hours. That is wasted time, and drastically reduces the attraction of having an EV. For myself, having to wait an extra 15 minutes isn’t too bad, and extra half hour or more is probably too much. I think context also really matters. If I’m parking at a station in a garage where most of the users are there for work, I expect to be there for at least 2 hours, possibly 4 (and would pick a charger I could use most of the time). At a mall, where people are in and out, if I was going to be there much more than 30 minutes I would probably plan to be back at my car to move it when it was charged. Especially since most of the chargers I’ve seen bill based on connection time and not electricity used.


  • Time for a joke.

    And economist and an accountant were taking a walk when they noticed a frog. The accountant says to the economist, “I’ll give you $100 if you eat that frog.” The economist thinks for a moment, then agrees. A little later they come across another frog, and the economist says, “I’ll give you $100 to eat that frog.” The accountant thinks about it for a second and also agrees. As they continue walking, the accountant says, “So I got to see you eat a frog for $100, and by eating a frog myself, I got my money back, so I understand why I did it. But you had already eaten a frog and had $100, so why did you do it?” The economist replies, “Ah, but this way it’s twice as good for the economy!”













  • Claiming that someone stole what you stole is a little hypocritical. Not having a Pebble, and having discovered them just after they were shut down by Google, I’m glad Rebble did what they did. But claiming ownership seems a little over the top. Having an archive of apps available via a third-party site sounds like a win for both parties, except for the financial side. Certainly, not paying anything would be a benefit for RePebble, and not having an option to charge anything would be a loss for Rebble, but it sounds like an unmitigated win for Pebble and RePebble users.

    RePebble seems to be very committed to going FOSS, up to releasing some or all of their code as GPL3, which is hard to argue around. I’ll be revisiting this saga in 6 months or so when I’m in the market for a smart watch.




  • Android isn’t FOSS, AOSP is. If you keep conflating that, I’m not sure what you’re getting at. And having a sandbox or VM that allows you to run Linux apps is not the same as having native support. That would be like saying Windows had Linux support 20 years ago because VMWare existed.

    And no, control of your phone doesn’t equal Linux, but native support for a FOSS OS at the base level means that if the maintainers decide to go in a different direction, you can more easily part ways with them. AOSP used to be a more complete version of Android, but that has been clawed back repeatedly as Google transfers functionality to Google Play services and elsewhere, which has caused difficulties for LineageOS and GrapheneOS to be maintained over the years, including Graphene exploring moving to another device for support from the one line of devices they support now.

    Clearly, this isn’t solely the fault of Android and Google, hardware vendors bear a lot of blame, as well as their desire to exert more control over their customers. But Google and Android have the exact same issue and certainly won’t be pressuring hardware vendors to open up their standards.