“On the other hand gas has a much higher energy density than batteries and a much faster refuel rate.”

Mainly 100% removal from Ukraine (not unreasonable, but also not going happen without Ukraine doing much better on offense) and a shit ton of reparations for all the damage done and people killed (this is never going to happen).

IMHO The most likely scenario is Russia keeps 50 to 80% on land they’ve already captured and Ukraine agrees not to join NATO and the war stops. Keep in mind much of the land that they’re currently fighting over will be useless for a generation due to all the mines and shells shot into it. (Maybe “useless” is too strong, but it will take a lot of work to make it safe for living and farming.)

The reality is that both sides are laying out unrealistic terms for surrender right now… and that’s fine. The start of a negotiation is always to start with a stated position and go from there. This war will end at the negotiation table… at least we hope it does becuase unconditional surrender won’t come from Russia, but it could come from Ukraine.

The real question is have both sides suffered enough for a negotiated end to this war? Look, it sucks, but that’s the truth of it. It would be good to see an end to the fighting and dying in Ukraine. Wars suck. The only side winning in this war is the US. They/we spend a pittance of money and watch Russia burn their future generation, military reputation, and global standing to the ground. That’s the #2 political opponent the US has in the world, and it’s acting as a great example for to show China (the #1) why it should behave itself over Taiwan. Win win!

But wars suck. It’s easy to sit on the sidelines, but there a lots of people fighting and dying over there who have nothing to do with make the decisions for war. Yes Putin’s demands are ridiculous, but so are Ukraine’s. That’s fine. Put them in a room and hopefully they can figure out way to end the killing that’s in between the two.

deleted by creator

You understand me correctly and correctly predicted my response. Your last paragraph is the interesting part however.

Imagine you have an AI. It’s a fully functional self aware AI. Let’s call this software “Bob”. From one instance to the next, this software is just memory and processing inside a computer. It is aware of it’s place in the universe to the same extent we are. Let’s say you pause the CPU. Did you just kill the AI? Of course not. Now lets say you make a perfect copy of the AI on two separate computers in two separate locations. The AI asks me “which one is the ‘real’ me?” My answer is their both the “real you,” but one moment they start processing independently, they’re now two different individuals that deviate from the moment of the copy.

Now lets say you change a stick of memory in the original AI, is that the same entity? If you unplug the memory cards and fly them to another location and plug them back in, is that the same entity? If you FTP the entity from California to Germany and install it on another machine, is that the same entity? It’s all the same answer as making a copy.

We humans are only the sum of the software in our heads. There is no real us, only the code executing line by line in our biological processor. That’s why there is no “real you” in this discussion, only software, and the person on the other side of the transporter is just as much the real you as the copy that’s destroyed. You are just a self-aware program.

I disagree with you, but I don’t know that I can explain it anymore clearly than I already have. There is no metaphysical “you” that exists outside of the software running in your head. You would experience perfect continuity if your body was dismantled and reconstructed. There is no real “you” except the software program that is running on your meat CPU.

Like I said, this is a hard thing to wrap your head around.

I dunno even if there is no you in a metaphysical sense the deconstruction method still ends your personal subjective experience of being you which sucks. Sure the next you might be just as much you as the first one but you don’t get to be around to enjoy that.

But it doesn’t and that’s the point. You are not the collection of atoms that make up your body, YOU are the software program that is running on your brain-computer. The software program can be transferred (or copied) and you are still you. There is no “you” outside of that software.

The real problem with all of this is that people can’t get away from the idea of a soul. Something intangible unmeasurable that is really “us” riding around in a meat-robot. It’s hard for people (me included) to realize that the meat packaging is all that we are. If you destroy My body and recreate it, nothing will have been lost. The continuity within the meat computer in my head is all that I am. There is no “me” outside of that… And that’s a really hard concept to accept and internalize.

That’s not fucking true. They would smear Jesus Christ so hard… a poor brown skinned, long haired hippy peacenik liiiiberal pansy. About the only thing they would like about him is that he hangs with prostitutes. But even that they would get all snooty about.

An actual Jesus they would hate with the passion of a thousand suns.

OK… so this is weird. The Supreme court just upheld that the funding structure of the CFPB was constitutional overruling the 5th circuit ruling that the CFPB funding structure was unconstitutional… But THIS federal judge just used the 5th court unconstitutionality ruling as the basis for why this CFPB credit card rule was unconstitutional (the CFPB is unconstitutional so any decision they make is invalid). It seems like he’s leaning on a just overturned ruling to make this decision. Is this just a case of a timing error where everything in the credit card fee case was filed before he Supreme Court overruled the 5th circuit’s ruling or is there another argument there?

You must be a troll. Are you really not able to say “quit killing innocents?” That goes for both sides BTW. “Quit killing children, quit killing innocent people.” Is that really hard? Protesting the people who are actively killing children and innocents using American made bombs seems pretty straightforward. Don’t kill innocent people. Don’t commit genocide.

Not the OP, but of course there are SOME people in the group who will be anti-jewish, but it’s all a question of percentages. If it’s 1%, then who the fuck cares? If it’s 50% then it’s a big deal. I’m sure it’s somewhere in between. From what I saw, the vast majority of protestors were not anti-jewish even if they were anti-Israel, however the new media quickly smeared the two together to waaay to many of their statements. It was really disappointing to see that message on so many different platforms.

Ben Carson… I thought he died.

But the reality is managers want to pick who gets laid off. It’s not that they want to just cut heads and reduce costs… upper management. may want that… but the actual managers want to keep their best and brightest. They know who the people are who get shit done, and they want to keep those people. Rto tends to have the opposite effect.

The reality is it is often the best employees, the most experienced employees, and some very high level employees who have the most confidence and are most willing to say " screw you, I know I can find a job somewhere else" And give the middle finger to the employer who’s trying to do an RTO plan.

Don’t be fooled by the headlines. Real businesses want to control who they let go. They want to have all the power in the relationship. They want to cut their lower performers and keep their superstars. RTO is about the worst head cutting program you could dream up.

This is the home of Tesla. There are a million EVs here.

I’m in the SF bay area.

The off-hours rate for my electricity is $0.04 cheaper than the prime hours rate. It’s laughable. $0.51 vs $0.47. Why bother even thinking about it at that pathetic difference? It’s certainly not going to change the math much.

It’s shockingly high. I live in the SF bay area and I’m a bit pissed off at how bad we’re getting screwed.

We have a Volvo XC90. Much bigger (and probably heavier) than your Bolt. It gets ~26MPG on the gas only mode. It has an 18.8kWh battery and can go ~30 miles on a charge. So again, bigger, heavier, and less efficient. At $0.50 per kWh, it takes ~$9 for 30 miles, and ~$5.5 in gas to go 26 miles.

That’s all great, but the real thing that will stop it is economics. We have a PHEV and I calculated it out and we pay $8 per gallon equivalent compared to $5.50 for regular gas. That’s a pretty big difference. Right now we ignore the EV part of the vehicle. (Live in California and I pay $0.50/kwh.)

We’re planning on getting solar shortly and that may make it feasible, but until then, it’s not.

I’d even go simpler than that. “If calling people by their preferred pronouns is one of the hundred biggest challenges…” Inserting “correct” into the statement just begs to get into an argument with a conservative and feels like you’re trying to force them to accept a different reality than they want to.

IMHO it’s simply a personal preference thing. Let people live how they want to live. You don’t have to convince everyone that Sally is really a woman trapped in the body of a man, you just have to say that it’s her preference you call her as a “she”. People should have the freedom to define themselves. That’s it. End of story.

My conservative neighbor brought up trans stuff thinking he’d use all the conservative media talking points and my answer was simply “it doesn’t really bother me. I’m a live and let live kind of guy. If they want me to use a different pronoun I’ll do my best to switch to that pronoun.” If you spin it as a freedom instead of a reality then it’s easier to accept.