I think there's one big issue for massive electrification and insulation of buildings: renting.
As a renter, I have no incentives to invest thousands in my home's betterment because I will have lost those when I am gone. As an owner, I have no incentives to make my apartment/house better because I don't live in it and I don't pay the energy bills.
Something has to be done about that if we want to combat climate change. I know in France it is now forbidden to rent again or sale when the renter leaves if the home's energy grade is F or G (A is best) but it is probably loosely enforced/easy to circumvent. And it is too damn slow ! This is for regulation but maybe there are other levers ?
As a renter I would basically have to wait for energy prices to skyrocket for it to make economic sense. I hate this situation.
Another big problem is NIMBYism and ideological opposition to air conditioners.
Installing a heat pump can require (city) permits, permission from your landlord (if renting) or HOA/condo association (if you own a flat in a shared building) which can either be or feel impossible to get.
Some cities have either actually or de facto (through requirements/regulations that are impossible or unaffordable to meet) banned air conditioners, resulting in people buying inefficient monoblock units that can't be used for heating.
Edit: Other regulatory hurdles come from rules about refrigerant handling. Refrigerant must only be handled by experts who are certified in proper handling and recovery (and who, of course, are now in high demand and charging princely prices for their work). This made a lot of sense in the times where 1 kg of refrigerant had 10 tons CO2e in global warming potential, ozone depletion potential or other dangers.
Nowadays, a skilled layperson can probably set up an air conditioner with quick-connect couplings by themselves, but they aren't legally allowed to. These cost something like 500 EUR, contain less than 1 kg of R32 with a GWP of 675, so let's say 500 kg CO2e of harm if it leaks. If you passed a law that landlords cannot prohibit installation, and any electrician that passes a quick online training can install them, you could have them all over the place very quickly.
These could then be used for covering some or all of the heating load in winter, but they'd also alleviate suffering in summer, and that's luxury, and we can't have that (especially as it uses energy to provide the "needless" luxury!)
> As an owner, I have no incentives to make my apartment/house better because I don't live in it and I don't pay the energy bills.
In a rental market with more supply than demand, having more efficient / cheaper heating is an advantage to attract tenants - but this kind of market in residential housing is typically rare these days.
Which is why governments need to enforce this by regulation, e.g., in my country landlords are required to meet insulation / heating / ventilation standards that often end up with their rental housing being better insulated and heated than the homes that the landlords live in themselves.
If you own an older home and are renting it out, you'll often find that the heating capacity is too low for the modern standards, and in that case, a heat-pump is usually the most cost effective solution.
Well, there are heatpumps made to slot into a window frame (ex: https://www.mideacomfort.us/packaged.html ). The ones I'm familiar with are made for double hung windows, which are more common in the US, though. But might be worth a look?
> The hardcore, moved to vim or emacs, trading immediate feedback and higher usability for the steepest learning curve I’ve seen
The only hard part about vim is to be forced to strecth the finger up to Escape for what is essentially the most essential function in a modal editor: Going back to command mode. The ideal workflow is do a quick edit and go back to command ("normal") mode instantly. The fact that Escape is used is a historical artifact that needs to be called out.
So just remap CapsLock to escape, it system-wide, it's not that hard and it's nice to have Escape there generally. In Linux and MacOS it's just a GUI setting away and in windows you just have to edit (create?) a registry key. Can be done on any machine under a minute.
Apart from that I don't see where the learning curve is since you can just start with the basics from vim-tutor and look up for more when you feel you're spending too much time on something. I already felt faster than in any other editor when I just knew the basics. The real problem of vim is that you get used to modal editing very quickly and it feels like the stone age when you don't have it.
Unfortunately, remapping escape to caps lock can lead to serious friction if you have to work with different laptops a lot, like I do. The muscle memory gets in the way a lot.
I always remap Caps Lock to Ctrl. I understand that Caps Lock needed to be next to Shift in typewriters, but in computers it seems like it is wasting a key in the home row for only be used sometimes for screaming (which can be done by holding shift...)
I remap Caps Lock to Ctrl when held and to Esc when pressed - the best of both worlds when you live in Neovim. https://github.com/rvaiya/keyd works really well for me on Linux, but there is a similar software on MacOS.
I map it on all my computers, works well, if I end up in an environment where I don't have the mapping I just use Ctrl-[ or stretch.
When I end up helping other devs and use their non vim setups...now that really trips me up. Capitals everywhere, random hjkls ... I have to really slow myself down when using a "normal" editor.
Which is why I never went with CapsLock being both Ctrl and Escape depending of whether it's part of a key combo because it's whole setup. On the contrary, whenever I use someone else's machine I can quickly go in the settings, set the option and then set it off after I am done.
Weirdly enough I actually like that Esc is so far away and it is not for efficiency but for ergonomics. It forces me to lift my hand up and reposition it away from the home row and back so I'm forced to move muscles that would otherwise just wait around and collect RSI points. I tend to use the arrow keys often as well for the same reason on the other hand (although I do still use hjkl quite a bit still)
remapping capslock to esc is something nobody whom i've shamed into doing can go back from. it's just night and day. i've been thinking lately that the reason we need hjkl is vim is because the keyboard layout is actually bad for arrows. on typewriters there was no arrows, but on a computer arrows are of primary importance. i think the spacebar doesn't need to be so big, there's no reason for it to be available to both thumbs, and i think moving the small set of arrows into the left or right part of the spacebar position would be so much better for typing because the hjkl hack only work in hacker editors, but we need to use arrows a lot on normal software and it's super bad for your hand if you use it a lot. i started developing inflamations because of the way i fold my thumb to reach for the arrows without moving my entire hand.
> i think the spacebar doesn't need to be so big, there's no reason for it to be available to both thumbs
This is why I love JIS, even though I don't actually need the Japanese keys. That small spacebar is so much better, and you get three extra keys (Henkan, Muhenkan and Kana) along the bottom row. As an Emacs user, I bind Henkan and Muhenkan to be Control keys. It's very comfortable.
I was just thinking this today tweaking the layout on my lilypad58, a layout I don't love and kept arriving at, "I just want more modifiers". Using JIS is genius.
I have left Control mapped to Meta, {,Mu}Henkan mapped to Control, Kana to right Alt, right Alt to Super, Menu to Compose/Meta (tap/hold) and right Control mapped to Greek.
I use keymapper[0] to do low-level remapping and tap/hold, and a custom XKB layout for the Greek modifier. I highly recommend this setup.
Yes but then you get used to jj (or jk) which might not be available on other vi modes (shells vi modes, gdb, glide browser ?) and it's overall quite nice to quickly escape any situation by having the key be closer.
Ctrl + [ would be acceptable if it wasn't, imo, the most important function of the editor.
I've yet to come across something with vim bindings that lacks a .vimrc where you can map 'jk'. Either way, switching back to ESC is as annoying as it is in the first place.
Not sure if this is bad form but i’ve always loved using jk for escape. It feels so natural to roll your index and middle fingers to get back to normal mode.
I agree, too, besides reminding myself to use numbers before movement commands there was really nothing that felt super hard about vim. It almost disappointed me, I always heard the jokes about not being able to quit it!
Yes but jk does not work in other contexts (shell vi modes at least for me) and it's actually to have Escape closer to home to quickly get out of a situation
To be fair I mostly use `/` + (n/N) + Enter with `incsearch` on (by default in nvim), I feel it's really the superior way to move around and it has deprecated a lot of my vim-fu.
In the same way, apart from occasinal `ciw` (or other text-objects), I do most of my edits with `:s/old/new`. I don't even use a complicated regex as sometimes it's just easier to write one or two simpler ones. It's just faster to not have to go to a specific location before you make an edit.
Because Ctrl+C for the most important function of you editor kinda sucks ? I mean you can get used to it, but you can get used to anything. Maybe we can have nice things ?
From the emacs perspective, it's barely even a learning curve. If you want to use the default keybinds it takes maybe a day to get used to them (probably less on mac since it uses some of them by default already) and GNU emacs has a very nice CUA mode. Hell, if for some reason you like vi keybinds and don't use vi and don't want to use vi, emacs has a pretty good vi mode
You know that CTRL + [ functions same as ESC right? Sr. dev at my job told me about this a year ago and it made vim SIGNIFICANTLY more comfortable to use day to day.
It's about the ascii code and terminal code. (Almost?) Every non-printing character can be entered with Ctrl+<some keyboard key>. With Control pressed, D is eot (end of transmission), G is bell, H is backspace, I is line feed (next line), L is form feed (new page), M is carriage return (start of line), Z is substitute, and [ is escape.
I is tab ('\x09' or '\t') and J is new line ('\x0a' or '\n'). These Ctrl combinations follow a predictable linear mapping to the control character section of the ASCII table. Basically Ctrl subtracts 0x40, so I is 0x49, Ctrl I is 0x09.
The big problem is stupid guides talking about modes instead of calling it a command interpreter, which it is. Modes are an irrelevant implementation detail.
Tangeant but then it means that framework's expansion card design for their laptop is a great idea:
When the expansion cards plug into the mainboard they are already on a rail that prevents lateral stress, plus generally don't un/plug them often and you let the cheap replaceable expansion card takes on the wear.
Well maybe if all the space was not given to cars there could be some little space for those small lightweight vehicles which is much more efficient than those stupid fat trucks (EDIT: by which I meant SUVs and the likes)
Edit: I misunderstood what OP meant by trucks. NVM
How are light weight vehicles more efficient than trucks? That’s such a broad statement with absolutely no data provided to back it up.
Efficiency matters a lot depending on the context. Delivering 40,000 kg of good cross country? Even a diesel truck is going to be more efficient than 10k little robot.
Last mile delivery? Yes, obviously it’s not good to send a semi trailer to deliver a pizza.
The point is, those big fat trucks aren’t just there to annoy you, they are doing something pretty useful.
I don't think OP's upset with the actual delivery trucks (though NYC banned them from city center for very good reasons). It's those F150 and Cybertruck pavement princesses and massive SUVs that are problematic.
> The e-bike craze, which is putting many people, including kids, in the hospital at an alarming rate, has thus far defied similar regulatory frameworks.
CTRL + f : "suv"
0 matches
"truck" ?
0 matches
I stopped reading past that. That level of carbrain is intolerable. If you think light vehicles capped at 25km/h is an issue idk what to tell you. At least with delivery robots people don't have to take a one ton metal box everywhere with them just to get groceries because they live in a poorly designed car-centric city.
They're not talking about properly regulated e-bikes. They're talking about the huge groups of kids riding around on Surrons and other electric dirt bikes that are actually just motorcycles. They're getting bikes that can do 70mph, wearing no safety gear, and riding them in traffic, and getting hit. That's the e-bike craze the author is talking about.
What are the fatalities for e-bikes vs SUVs in the US per year?
Your comment is irrelevant otherwise because last time I checked cars are the real problem, and concerns over e bikes / delivery bots is just another lame extension of “safetyism” and ignorance around public transport failures that just misses the mark.
“Riding in traffic” is half the issue here. Like trying to explain water to fish.
I'd like to think I'm about as car-skeptical as your average person with no driver license who just got back from taking three forms of transit home from an all-day recreational road cycling event. But I'm a bit nervous about the speeds of some e-bikes.
A friend of mine spent a week in the hospital recently after crashing his new e-bike almost immediately after buying it. One interpretation of his accident is that he didn't have some of the right instincts for riding a bicycle at that speed.
I don't actually have a clear sense of the breakdown of risk attributable to the different factors of lack of appropriate cycling infrastructure, lack of appropriate rider training or experience, lack of appropriate rider expectations, or inherent safety or stability problems of some designs. My friend whom I mentioned above said his doctors told him that they had been seeing a lot of patients who'd crashed e-bikes (as well as electric mopeds and electric skateboards) at speeds that produced fairly serious injuries.
That is a regulatory issue and a name issue. Those are actually motorcycles. In Europe e-bikes are capped at 25 km/h (the electric assistance stops at that speed).
So your problem is (electric) motorcycles that are (legally?) accessible without a motorcycle license and motorcycle equipement. For safety what matters is the speed and the weight of the vehicle, the faster and heavier, the more dangerous.
I am also noting that unlike with SUV accidents, your friend put a lot less people in danger if not only himself.
I'm sorry to hear about your friend, and hope they recover well.
Something I think a lot about when it comes to e-bikes, is the level of protective gear people feel they ought to wear on "a bike". Not all cyclists even wear helmets (obviously bad), but in addition to a helmet, on an e-bike you really ought to be wearing elbow and knee protection, purely because of the speed involved.
However, my sense is that people (a) don't think about that at all because they think of it as just like a bicycle, or (b) don't want travel with all of that extra gear. They want to treat an e-bike like a bicycle, when it is something much more.
I say all of this as a cyclist (non-e-bike) and rollerblader. On my bicycle I will just wear a helmet, but because of the particulars of rollerblading, I always wear elbow-pads and knee-pads. Differing circumstances require different adaptations.
Indeed, if it's going above 50 km/h, it's not a bike it's a motorbike. Protective gear should match the speed and weight of your vehicle. To drive a motorbike, you should have motorbike license and equipment. It feels like a regulatory issue frankly.
They can both be a problem. I saw a kid hitting a dike like a ramp with one of these electric dirt bikes. I've seen kids too small for these cruising around way too fast with no helmet.
Big trucks and SUVs are a much bigger problem. But that doesn't mean kids riding around on motorcycles isn't a problem either.
The point of contentions is calling them e-bikes instead mopeds or e-motos or motorcyles, which you did, but the article didn't. And they are a journalist so I hold them to higher standard.
I think we can tackle different issues at the same time
For heart issues, it is a bit hard to fix. You need a healthy lifestyle is general is something you need the correct environment for and a good education about. Still, it's not impossible and any sane country has food labeling requirements and education around it as well as promotion of physical exercise. It's being done.
Similarly car-centric city design is not easy at first but it can be done and has been done:
Relax zoning and parking requirements, provide good fast collective transport alternatives,that is with dedicated lanes and safety staff. The general idea is that you shouldn't be forced to have a car if you don't want one. Even people who do want to keep their cars will be happier because there will be less people on the road overall: Imagine that traffic jam you're stuck into if half the people vanish because they are using a bike or a subway, woosh, no more traffic jam.
I think you're right, but journalists have gotta stop calling them ebikes. We already have a widely used term that fits them perfectly and is legally accurate - moped.
They're not mopeds. They have no pedals, only stationary foot pegs. They are full on motorcycles capable of freeway speeds. Kids are riding motorcycles with no licenses, helmets or training.
A small city near me in the suburbs of Detroit just had to have a town meeting / facebook post / etc about teens driving electric scooters and bikes driving recklessly, causing accidents, injuring themselves and others, etc.
Your caveat makes sense, and I agree those are a serious issue. However, the article doesn't say "illegal e-bikes", "e-motos", "suped-up e-bikes", "dirt bikes", or anything like that. It only says "e-bikes". Even their link to another article is discussing 20-to-28-mph e-bikes, and refers to the faster categories as "e-motos".
If that is truly what McNamara meant, it is very sloppy that they failed to say so.
EDIT: For anyone downvoting me, I am respecting the text of the article, because that is what most people will read. Most people will not see olyjohn's caveats and context (which again, I agree represent the real problem).
> At least with delivery robots people don't have to take a one ton metal box everywhere with them just to get groceries because they live in a poorly designed car-centric city.
Robots are not needed and do not enhance grocery delivery. The ones I've seen aren't large enough for a grocery order. I suppose it would be entertaining to see a line of them proceeding to a delivery.
Apart from the fact the round-trip efficiency is abysmal, hydrogen is so small and lightweight, it leaks through everywhere unless you have some specialized (read, expensive) equipment.
I'd say why not if we could just repurpose gas infrastructure for it but turns out, no. I know people like to accuse each other's favorite energy sources of being fossil industry shills but hydrogen truly look like an attempt at stalling by big fossil. Hydrogen sounds good to politicians who don't understand energy, only understand fuel and just want a new clean fuel.
Sure but at the end of the day(cade) if my kids end up paying more for green reliable energy it's not a bad outcome compared to the price on betting the farm on renewables/grid update/hopefully seasonal, scalable, cheap energy storage. I'd rather hedge my bets by also investing in nuclear.
I am surprised that this is the case after reading how Orban was behaving on the matter of its oil and gas sources. I guess the big problem is that the economy and heating is still very fossil dependent ?
The proposed system moves sources of identity from the nation to private banks under it. So banks own people. Propose a financial regulation to the national congress/parliament and you stop existing, digitally or potentially physically as well. That's feudalism. Or Chinese struggles-of-nations warlord era situation which is often grouped up into that concept as close enough things.
I am not sure the proposal was for the bank to "own" the identity rather than being the manager of it the same way they already manage your money.
The state establishes your identity at birth. The bank already has access to your identity. If a service needs to know your identity, it asks the bank and it is illegal for them to store than information anywhere on their servers. It means only the bank is repsonsible for the safety of your id and selling and buying id information will be illegal.
Banks can be state-owned as well as private. Moreover, some countries have a particular bank that serves all citizens, even if they would not be able to bank elsewhere.
As a renter, I have no incentives to invest thousands in my home's betterment because I will have lost those when I am gone. As an owner, I have no incentives to make my apartment/house better because I don't live in it and I don't pay the energy bills.
Something has to be done about that if we want to combat climate change. I know in France it is now forbidden to rent again or sale when the renter leaves if the home's energy grade is F or G (A is best) but it is probably loosely enforced/easy to circumvent. And it is too damn slow ! This is for regulation but maybe there are other levers ?
As a renter I would basically have to wait for energy prices to skyrocket for it to make economic sense. I hate this situation.
reply