Exactly. I also used to have a Surface (both the regular one and a Book 3) but the smaller screen of the former and the higher cost and weight, and lower performance, of the latter made me buy a MacBook. The form factor appeal is there for the Surface, it's just death by a thousand cuts in terms of their other problems. I never had an issue with Windows development however, as I generally used WSL 2.
Yes, that's basically it. Microsoft had the right idea they were just too early on it and cannot put as much money into it as Apple does. And they don't have a competitive enough chip to choose from their partners.
If either Intel or AMD gets there, Apple will get some much-needed competition.
> I see where this is coming from but making platforms fully liable for user content will make it impossible to start a business that includes (semi-) public user interaction at all
So? What value have these platforms provided that justifies their existence?
While I don't disagree, it requires that both the members of government and the public have a decent technical literacy. I'm not sure how true this is even on HN.
I'd personally love to see the government build a lot of frameworks that can be considered "public goods" and be less reliant on private entities who must generate a profit. I happily pay taxes to serve many networks which operate as natural monopolies, such as roads. I'd also be happy to have that extended to such things as telecommunications. I'd happily pay more taxes if it got rid of my phone bill or internet bill. Though I'd say that personally this is conditioned on them being E2EE and privacy focused, since I consider that information having a higher potential for abuse in a single governmental entity than distributed among corporate powers (even if they still want to abuse it, they can do less and there are competitors).
Because improvements aren't taxed. So if you add improvements (read: more housing), you don't pay taxes and you become more profitable (more rent, same taxes).
So you move all tax to just the land value at a higher rate than present, then let people build to offset the tax.
The envisioned car charging situation is that you charge your car at home or at work. Cars sit unused 99% of the time, they can use that time charging without issues.
What we are experiencing now is transitional, where people use infrastructure intended for road-trips for their daily needs. That phase will pass
I charge at my parking spot with around 2-2.5kW power use. With that I'll get about 100-150km of range overnight easily. I drive less than that daily, which means my car's battery is full practically all the time.
Have you seen the queues for H2 stations? 2 hours is peanuts.
Also: the longest wait I've had in the almost 3 years I've owned an EV has been about 15 minutes and in that case it was a couple who had clearly rented an EV and was charging it for the first time ever.
The infrastructure is perfectly solvable. The US is just at a disadvantage because gasoline is practically free over there compared to the rest of the world so there isn't that much of an incentive to improve the charging infrastructure.
As a reference, currently gasoline at the station near to me is $7.47/gallon, which actually pretty cheap. The most expensive price here is $9.24/gallon at the moment.
Compare that to electricity, which costs 0.02c/kWh right now. That's 0,0002€/kWh. Looking at the market price it'll dip down to -0.18c/kWh in the morning hours, they're literally paying people to use electricity =)
Even in the US it is mostly a solved problem for Tesla owners. There are a few places that are consistently problematic (eg, Las Vegas), but there are new stalls planned there to help.
Several companies are in the early stages of national DCFC rollouts. It will get better quickly in a lot of places.
Did you know that car ownership has kept increasing in the Netherlands, at least until a few years ago? The country renown for cycling and public transportation.
From 197 cars per 1000 people in 1970 we've grown to 662 in 2019. i.e. we now have more than three times the number of cars per person even compared with the "bad old days" of the car dominated 1970s ... The simple fact is that Dutch car use has grown continuously for 70 years much as it has in every other nation
I love train, but let's not pretend that public transportation will be dominant. Rather, it will be a mix of different modes of transport. Cars will continue to be important. Visit the Netherlands and see for yourself.
> 2 hour wait to get a charger spot isn't a workable transport system.
That rules out widespread use of hydrogen, then. Hydrogen filling stations need to periodically recompress their hydrogen. Which is never a problem because current hydrogen stations are virtually always idle. However, if they were continuously busy, you'd have to wait.
I don't see why you'd look at a 2 hour wait somewhere and extrapolate that out as an impossible problem. Show an EV nerd a video of a 2 hour wait and they can probably tell you where it happened and maybe even when, because that is really unusual.
> This is the only explanation that doesn't depend on a source of dumb money that can never learn buying this debt.
No it isn't. A simpler explanation is that the people making the decision aren't the ones paying for the failure. I see this all the time at the executive level in finance -- people will knowingly make bad deals if it gets them their bonus.
