Dude UI (and anything to do with looks) is always a subjective thing. Some people will like it and some people will hate it. I know every dev wants their UI to be loved by everyone but that’s a fools errand as there are always people with opposing opinions. What matters is that that you like what you have created. Also know that there are people like me and many others who use photon daily and love the design. Don’t let subjective opinions get you down.
Damn. You have my respect.
(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻
This could be promising depending on how well they implement quality control. Currently, this is where Indian manufacturers struggle
I haven’t hit a deer, not even come close since they aren’t a problem in my country. You are most probably right and i have seen videos of deer just jumping onto the road at the last second which causes an unavoidable accident. My viewpoint is that when you hit a creature(animal or human) at 80mph, they are most certainly dead. If you hit them at 60, they might survive but be gravely wounded. If are able to react and slow down before contact to about 30, they will be hurt but at least they have a much better chance of the survival. Somehow going at same speeds during the day and during the night seems very risky
It was an expressway. There were no lights other than cars. You’re not wrong, had a human sprinted at 20mph across the expressway in the dark, I’d have hit them, too. That being said, you’re not supposed to swerve and I had less than a second to react from when I saw it. It was getting hit and there was nothing I could’ve done.
I am neither blaming you nor critiquing your actions. In fact I agree that we should not swerve. I was just making an observation that driving slightly slower in low visibility might help by giving you more time to notice an obstruction and brake while provide also providing more time for the obstruction to react and clear the road. At least very least, people might slow down enough so that the crash is no longer fatal to the person or animal being crashed into
Nobody is asking you to go at 35 mph. But going 60 mph instead of 80 mph means that your stopping distance will be nearly half and you will have almost twice the amount of time to react.
https://www.automotive-fleet.com/driver-care/239402/driver-care-know-your-stopping-distance
Maybe drive a little slower at night. If you can’t spot and react to animals on your path, you won’t able to react when it’s a human
Perhaps nobody should be making an electric motorcycle for this use case. At such low quantities, maybe it makes sense to have ICE vehicles for the pleasure aspect.
They’re well suited for commuting
You have hit the nail on the head. The group of people described in the last paragraph of the article should be the target audience for now. Electric motorcycles, for now, are utilitarian vehicles meant to be used within a city. They are not meant for the long haul pleasure drives.
In the US, the regular wall outlet supply is at 110V. Drawing about 12A from that outlet, the power comes to about 1.25kW which corresponds to a charge time of 4 hours. I live in India and drive a electric scooter/moped. It has a 3 kWh usable battery capacity and range of 65 miles. My average daily usage is 15 miles and once in 2 days, I am able to plug in my vehicle to charge from ~35% - ~75% using a 650W charger. It takes only around 2 hours. The charging time is never a hinderance
Sorry to hijack the thread but are question style posts allowed in this community. Nothing in the community rules mention not allowing posts asking questions or asking for advice but from what I have seen, all the posts here are articles or studies relating to EV.
If I remember correctly, the gen 1 kona electric had no inbuilt internet connectivity (atleast in the Indian model). Maybe you can see if that is true for your region
Well my comment was not about having control over the software/firmware though that will be cool.
My logic is that well tested, polished software/firmware have very few bugs and hence most of the updates they get are feature additions or improvements to current functionality (examples in an EV could be updates making the BMS more robust, tweaking the regen modes according to feedback from the users, etc). Poorly tested, half baked software/firmware will be full of bugs and broken functionality and will lead to ‘updates’ where all the changes are correcting broken functionality and serious bugs. This will be an unpleasant experience for the user and we should hold companies accountable when they do shit like this
Dude I think you have replied to the wrong comment
There is a difference between software getting updated and software getting fixed though. We want the first scenario not the second one
This is fine. Electric cars are becoming competitive when it comes to price (atleast in India). Anyway we need to promote 2 wheelers + public transport more since they are the actual solution to environment friendly transport in a country with nearly 2 billion people.
The chips are made in taiwan but the other components - battery, phone body, etc are made in china and assembled in china or more recently India
You keep going again and again about 'quantum science’s but what exactly do you think that means because particle physics is based on quantum field theory which is probably the most advanced and complete version of ‘quantum science’ known to us.
As for Sabine’s proposal that we should be concentrating on quantum gravity -
a) A lot of people are currently involved in quantum gravity research and
b) the only reason that quantum gravity research is ‘inexpensive’ is because it is mostly theoretical in nature and not because the experiments to research quantum gravity are ‘efficient’. Also we can create a thousand theories but it doesn’t matter after a certain point because without experiments to verify which theory is right, it is all educated guessing in a sense
Time can be devoted towards coming up with better hacks so as to reduce the amount of resources necessary to get the necessary results, which would be important in the long run. The science behind building an efficient collider may be useful in fields like nuclear fusion, where the energy of initiation is high and containing the reaction is equally important.
I am bewildered that you think scientists are not already doing everything they can to build/operate colliders(and any experimental setup for that matter) in an efficient way. They are already trying to get more data from the experiments while keeping all other parameters the same while also building better methods to parse and interpret the data so more conclusions can be drawn from the same amount of data. Experimentalists always know that their field is viewed unfavourable by certains sections of the public which results in them getting less resources as compared to shit like sports, entertainment, etc. which is why they are used to maximizing the equipment they are able to build.
Physicists might want to print their names on a research paper that comes across the next obscure short-lived particle in the universe, but the path that leads to the discovery is arduous. The architecture necessary to document the observations are expensive. The energy necessary to replicate the data multiple times in order to prove a point beyond reasonable doubt is equally high. These physicists, on the quest for image and recognition in the scientific community do themselves a favour, more than the Earth for whom these discoveries are supposed to benefit.
While I agree that a lot people are involved in science have personal motivations to claim that those motivations supercede their interest to progress knowledge seems very insulting especially as there is no data to backup your claims.
Fields like quantum behaviour, which involve studying entanglement and information exchange better explain the state of the universe we are currently living in(on Earth).
Again particle physics also comes under ‘quantum behaviour’ and gives us a lot of information about the current state of the universe
Individual experiments may not reveal a huge breakthrough such as the hype that would be created upon discovery of a new particle, but in the long run they would be helpful in building new technology that may end up reducing energy consumption
I don’t see how this field would directly contribute to reduction of energy consumption.
Finally while I respect discussions on investments in science and whether that money can be utilised in a better way or for a different purpose, I ultimately find these discussions facile because things like sports, cinema, other forms of entertainment use much more resources(both monetary and natural) while contributing little to society in the long term. Unless we divert resources from those fields to use for the betterment of the planet, arguing that we should do the same from scientific research of any kind is a meaningless gesture
You can turn it off somewhere in the settings
This study is for 2021-2022 during the peak of COVID and is not indicative of the current situation. While we still have to be vigilant, accidents, murder and especially intentional self harm should be way more concerning