If implemented like moped battery swapping on Taiwan, things might work. If everyone designs their own unique solution, nope. :)
It's like with earthquakes. At first, when nobody knows jack s**t, they tell you 10 people died.
When the statistics come home, often enough, an initial 10 turns into 10 000.
With a heat wave spanning half a continent and breaking records, the typical mortality to expect (basing on experience) is at least 1000 people (some of them old and about to go anyway, but pushed over the edge by heat).
Something is wrong here. Likely the exact category in which things are compared. 1.17 kilograms, 200 W and world's lightest... I've seen 2000 W drone motors that weigh less than 1 kilogram and aren't called the world's lightest, because one can go lighter.
It looks like a neat motor, though. For a very limited power level. But they didn't even tell the efficiency...
I think the 38% number is definitely wrong, maybe even wrong by one order of magnitude.
I tried fact-checking and came up with this:
https://providencemag.com/2018/04/what-a-country-immigrants-serve-us-military-well
Few Americans realize that 65,000 immigrants serve in the US military today. That number includes some 18,700 troops who hold green cards (in other words, legal permanent residents who are not yet naturalized citizens). According to the Pentagon, about 5,000 such residents enlist each year.
Since the total number of the US armed forces is around 1.3 million, it follows that 38% is definitely wrong and the correct number of immigrants is likely around 5%.
I think the 38% number originates from service member naturalization stats or service member family stats and has been mis-interpreted. Can't tell for sure, didn't hire a spy to find out. :)
P.S. Edit: found a secondary source with similar data:
https://www.usafis.org/can-i-join-the-us-military-as-a-green-card-holder/
Approximately 8,000 Green Card holders join the US military each year and around 35,000 are currently serving on active duty.
Since green card holders aren't the only variety of immigrant, the number 65 000 seems plausible.
My estimate is that this will result on 410 lawsuits filed per day. :o
I think it's not a smart move to have 150 000 lawsuits per year over the same question - it's much preferable to have 1 lawsuit for a whole class of people - defending the rights of everyone in the same situation - and some extra lawsuits for those who want to present a unique take on the matter.
Looks nice, but then comes a snow plow and pushes 30 cm of snow on top of it. Drivers use voodoo to find it and hack their way down there with a shovel. If the box survives that, it's a good box. :)
I hope they get mild sentences because they didn't even manage to enter.
The law is extremely dumb, as it sends the message "accomplish maximum obstruction, as you will get massive sentences, don't talk with anyone, don't even consider getting caught".
Maybe next time, someone does like some alleged (claim unverified) anarchists in France. They burned a substation and cut down a high voltage pylon. Most likely a bit foolish because they didn't stop the Cannes film festival from completing (it had backup power), but the point remains: they caused a massive pain in the ass for hundreds of thousands of people. If they get caught and get 10 years, they can say it was worth it.
Dishing out 10 year sentences for attempting to stop a plane from using a taxiway by standing in front of it... is not very smart from a judicial viewpoint. People might do the math and find they'd get smaller sentences for considerably bigger deeds.
in the pandemic example, what happens when the next local group decides to not participate in mutual care?
Some entire countries essentially did that. They responded carelessly and slow, and experienced harsher consequences as a result. Nobody can stop a group of people from getting themselves hurt. Sure, one can try to help them once they are hurt, if some resources remain available for that.
If you can give me a novel idea about this, I’d appreciate it.
Change the select few decisionmakers regularly. With dice, not an expensive and polarizing campaign followed by elections. (Note: creates incentive to educate everyone well, since they could be chosen at random.)
It comes down to some version of “Well, that sounds nice, but what about the bad actors?”
I have encountered the same. One avenue of argumentation that typically follows is "but we needs cops because there's crime" -> "crime can be reduced with social policy, without cops" -> "but never to zero" -> "but cop duties needn't be a person's career".
Next comes politics. The political system where I live is a parliamentary republic with proportional elections. Compared to volatile cases (e.g. presidential two-party system) it is fairly slow. Risk of takeover by a bad actor is not perceived as high. Anarchist critique fails to get attention.
I have also encountered the argument: "if we decentralize, we [insert national indentity] step too far down the organizational ladder [of ability to mobilize resources fast], and become possible to conquer". People perceive that a stateless area or low-intensity state would be an invitation for the nearest highly invasive state. They also fear that change would cause weakness, which would be exploited. Thus, a foreign state becomes a justification for the local state. Sadly I must admit that the reasoning is not without merit.
My responses have typically been:
leaders wanting to return to power are a problem for democracy
playing voter groups against each other causes long-term problems (degrades cooperation)
electoral democracy inherently favours wealthy individuals (campaign expenses)
decentralization protects against takeover and decapitation strike
authoritarian takeover of local state has happened already once, with tragic results
party politicans have for decades failed to enact simple, popular measures (e.g. progressive income tax)
My suggestion to a statist person typically ends up being "at least, try sortition". Which is laughably hard, since it would require a rewrite of the constitution, and parties agreeing to a measure that pushes them into history books. :)
I can convincingly argue that sortition reduces the sway that elites hold over policy, and makes equalizing policy measures easier to pass. But it keeps the number of politicians small and leaves the door open for acting fast (e.g. in case of military threat).
Meanwhile, I would appreciate if mainstreamers left anarchists on their own to experiment with more. Especially in the economy.
P.S. Ultimately, I fear that anarchist society can be only planted on the ruins of a state. The niche must have been emptied by a catastrophic event (and it's ethically wrong to cause one). However, it's not wrong to do what's right when others have done wrong. One should know that catastrophic events increase people's desire to have stability and order. So there must be a type of anarchy that can quickly deliver freedom + equality + stability + order. That's a pretty tall list, which is why it typically doesn't happen.
"My immediate reaction was to say, ‘I don't talk with the FBI,’” Neill said. The man said, “OK,” and Neill shut the door. Two other activists described similar visits in interviews with WBUR.
This guy is my hero. :)
That's some quite chilling reading.
People never got information about what mistake or malfunction took their relatives' lives, but the leaked files draw a pattern of Teslas making erratic maneuvers when self-driving.
Also, there's a pattern that crashed Tesla drivers tend to burn to death without passers-by being able to help them - because passers-by depend on opening doors using their handle, not pulling people out through windows or cutting through structures with hydraulic scizzors. By the time firefighters arrive, the person is dead and the fire too hot to apprach.
I would never buy a Tesla anyway, since I like utmost simplicity in vehicles.
But the Tesla battery seems like a special invitation for trouble to me - a ridiculously high number of small lithium ion cells. Unless your production is 100% reliable, that's not a manageable configuration. A low number of large cells in manageable. Also, it seems that their battery is very likely to short in a crash. A low number of large cells have more limited options for shorting and more chances of the single series connection breaking. As soon as you have parallel cells, you're asking for trouble.