perestroika

joined 2 years ago
[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Do you have any experience with this?

I have participated in holding about ten, and when it moved indoors to become a freeshop, I have volunteered a dozen times.

  1. Unless local climate favours you - if you hold it outdoors, your biggest concern will be weather prediction. You'll want people to exchange their goods, but not a truckload of abandoned goods damaged by rain. Avoid rainy dates, avoid announcing too far ahead (when the error margins are big), if risk of rain becomes likely, have a large quantity of plastic sheet available to cover goods. If possible, avoid changing dates - information travels slowly. If you have to cancel, announce the cancellation well, visit the site and put up a sign saying the market's canceled.

  2. Your market will have a "surplus". Some people will bring more goods than others take. You will need to make a compromise between warehousing and discarding goods. We used the local autonomous social center for warehousing goods between markets. We lacked a good plan for offloading surplus to others who might distribute them to people, since we were the first local phenomenon of this sort.

  3. Transporting goods to warehouse will likely require a car. I used a heavy electric bike with a towed cart first, but that quickly became insufficient. My car had no towing hook, so it was full of goods up to the ceiling. As the warehousing situation becomes more dire, be prepared to inform people about capacity limits. As a last resort, ask "unsold" goods to be taken back. Some will ignore this, but you can handle a few.

  4. If you observe hoarding behaviour, set reasonable limits (e.g. "as much as you can lift with one hand"). I have observed serious hoarding only once.

  5. Our market typically offered some easily prepared vegan snacks and drinks. It is always good style to display a list of ingredients and potential allergens.

  6. This can wear you out. Never do this alone, we had at least 8 bored people on our team and also used the opportunity to spread anarchism.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

The Guardian doesn't have a paywall, it just shows an annoying message you can get past. At least my browser doesn't prevent me from seeing the article, so I'll copy the essence.

It was jurisdiction shopping by the oil company, trial errors by the court and manipulation of public opinion, third world oligarchy style. :(

  • The jury – the most sacred due process protection available to a defendant – was patently biased in favor of the company. Seven of the 11 people seated had ties to the fossil fuel industry. Some had admitted they could not be fair, but the judge seated them anyway. There was no Native American or person of color on the jury even though issues of Indigenous rights were central to the trial.
  • Morton county, where the trial was held and where many of the protests took place, voted 75% for Trump in the last election and has extensive ties to the fossil fuel industry. In a pre-trial survey, 97% of residents in the county said they could not be fair to Greenpeace. Yet the judge refused repeated requests by Greenpeace to move the case.
  • Energy Transfer ran a major television and online advertising campaign in the county lauding itself in the weeks leading up to the trial. A newspaper called Central ND News, with articles critical of the protests, was also sent to county residents; Greenpeace believed Energy Transfer might have been responsible for it. But the court refused to allow Greenpeace to use court discovery procedures to determine how this unethical campaign to taint the jury pool happened.
  • Adding to the absurdity, Greenpeace was blamed for the entire protest movement even though it played only a minimal role. The protests were led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, on whose ancestral land the Dakota Access pipeline was being built. In fact, only six of the 100,000 people who came to the protests were from Greenpeace – yet Energy Transfer was able to convince the jury to hold the organization responsible for every dollar of supposed damages that occurred over seven months of protests.
  • Secrecy pervaded the proceedings. The court repeatedly refused to open a live stream to the public or to create and release transcripts. A request by media organizations (including the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times) to access the live stream was denied. Thousands of key documents were sealed and thus hidden from public scrutiny.
  • The judge, James Gion, made evidentiary decisions that gutted Greenpeace’s ability to mount a defense. For example, a major expert report showed that the pipeline had leaked roughly 1m gallons of drilling fluids into drinking water sources used by millions of people. Greenpeace lawyers needed the document to debunk the argument that the pipeline was safe, but the judge refused to let the organization use it.
  • The 35-page verdict form was confusing and the results seemed to prove the jury was in fact confused. It appears the exorbitant damages number was calculated by pulling numbers out of thin air – including millions for public relations expenses, private security costs, which were being paid anyway, and refinancing costs due to various banks withdrawing from the project once they learned about the protests. (Lobbying banks is also constitutionally protected advocacy.)
[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Interesting, but feels like abuse of the patent system (which is widespread) and feels pointless.

Personal experience: I drive the earliest highway-capable electric car, a MIEV from 2011. It has a "manual gear stick". Gear B gives hard acceleration and hard regenerative braking. D gives medium. C gives slow acceleration and soft regenerative braking. In reality, there's only one mechanical gear - the parking lock. All other "gears" including reverse are electronically implemented. As for why the letters are out of sequence, I don't know.

I use B in summer and D in winter, because applying B on glass-flat ice can lead to skidding. I hear that people in mountainous places appreciate B when going downhill - constant deceleration with no touching of the brake pedal.

But something that's been rinsed and repeated over the history shouldn't be patentable any more.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Cali, norway, japan or south korea?

Estonia. And it's probably the only one in the capital, with two more in the country. Nothing serious so far, folks are just experimenting a little. There's supposedly a fuel cell powered self-driving minibus somewhere, but I haven't seen it.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

I mostly agree. I have seen a local hydrogen gas station and they had to invest a lot in safety measures.

I don't see hydrogen as a viable street transport fuel.

However, I think it could be a viable stationary turbine or ship fuel, and a viable ingredient for synthesized methane or synthesized alcohols (provided that a cheap input of CO2 or CO is available).

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

The article itself provides the data to argue that it's sensationalist.

Hydrogen is therefore an indirect greenhouse gas with a global warming potential GWP of 5.8 over a 100-year time horizon. A future hydrogen economy would therefore have greenhouse consequences and would not be free from climate perturbations.

If a global hydrogen economy replaced the current fossil fuel-based energy system and exhibited a leakage rate of 1% then it would produce a climate impact of 0.6% of the current fossil fuel based system. If the leakage rate were 10%, then the climate impact would be 6% of the current system

P.S.

Nobody in their right mind will spend energy to manufacture a gas and then let 10% of it leak out unused.

Leak rates characteristic of fossil gas systems are related to the nature of fossil gas systems.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Depends on whether they're punk. :)

EVs can also be a solar gentification / dystopia, if they have a deadly price tag followed by "everything breaks and you can fix nothing on your own". Many current EVs are dangerously in that direction. Accept only the simplest and most open systems. Even if you never intend to get your own hands dirty, getting cheap assistance will depend on that.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

However, even without follies like crypto or overhyped tools like AI... there still is an electricity demand boom coming. All those vehicles need to be charged. Every country is predicting a rise in electricity consumption.

The expansion of renewable production and storage just needs to outpace the expansion of demand.

And that... that's a field where most conservatives lack any merit - they might ride with the hype or skip the ride on other topics, but sadly appear to be hell bent against renewables. Sadly, the expectation for a conservative politician lately seems to be: if there's a fossil fuel lobby anywhere nearby, the guy is expected to be found in their pocket.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

About methane: dealing with it at the source (oil and gas drilling and mining, waste disposal, etc) is going to far less than dealing with it later in the atmosphere.

Knowledge of how to increase methane oxidation rates in air is good to have, however - in case some geochemical methane source (permafrost, hydrates) gets pushed over the edge and starts outputting more than tolerable.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Safety features can be present if the manufacturer bothers. The only safety feature that's not allowed in that class is large amounts of mass.

Airbags and seatbelts don't add any appreciable mass. A protective cage around the passenger doesn't add much either. Space (to prevent hitting things with your head in an accident) does introduce a mass penalty. Many microcars lack a safe amount of head space which sure annoys me.

Automatic braking (a lidar and some actuators) would not add much. If a vehicle happens to have 4 independent motors, then traction control is a software problem with zero mass. Individual control of brakes would admittedly add mass - separate brake pumps for each wheel.

The frame of an L7e can be made pretty sturdy. Some folks have been asking me if I'm building a tank, but no, it's an L7e - instead of armor, it's covered in greenhouse plastic. :) It's the beams that count, I don't care if anyone punches through the gaps. :)

Tiny picture because I like to keep some privacy.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

This question needs a clarification: what is the definition of "highway" in your country?

Here in Estonia, I can go on highway with a farm tractor, I'm just obligated to pull aside if a column forms behind me. Meanwhile, for example in Germany, going to an Autobahn with a farm tractor would quickly attract fines for a traffic violation.

I've driven on a highway with a large L2e trike (rated speed 45, actual capability 55) but did not feel comfortable there. I do feel comfortable on a highway with a Mitsubishi i-MIEV (crappy e-car, do not buy), typically driving at 80 km/h. It has a motor of 37 kW (if I remember correctly) but cruises decently enough at 9 kW of power, so a lighter car would come to highway speeds with 11 kW for sure (if well built).

I would feel comfortable on a highway with an L7e cargo quad (for which I hope to get a rated speed of 70, but that remains to be seen when it's completed), and the one I'm building has 4 x 3 = 12 kW power.

A customer of mine sells electric road maintenance vehicles, but they are type certified in the N class.

I would advise googling for "L6e", "L7e", "electric car", or maybe "electric vehicle". In my search, various Chinese products come up, but I notice that many aren't type certified in the EU, so be very careful. You want to avoid doing type approval on your own. Also, consider if you can get spare parts in the future. Find a product with local support.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

For me and my habits, these have been working for a few years. They cost me about 75 €. But as always, product portfolios change and most likely they're out of production. And maybe they'll break this year, making my recommendation premature - but I see no signs of breaking yet.

Why I picked them: they had a rubber lower part and a string-tightened but closed upper part made of fabric (no "tongue" with open sides, no zipper, zippers can break down). My access way gets flooded often, and most of the flooding occurs during cold weather. So I often walk in snow that has ice and water underneath, and break it when walking. I could use rubber boots, but then it would be cold.

view more: ‹ prev next ›