Is this more common with Tesla than other EVs?

Electric vehicles can catch fire if they are inundated by saltwater, though the problem is rare

It makes a good title, and I’m not really here to defend Tesla. I hate cars in general and I think we should have much much more public transit rather than push EVs on everyone, but won’t/couldn’t this kind of news dissuade some people from getting EVs, and make them think ICEs are safer?

I guess it’s good to let people know about that small possibility, but it shouldn’t deter efforts to move away from oil.

I face the same specific issue. I started with the French (Canada) layout years ago but now Windows sets the default to Multilingual/CSA because it has been made the official one by the government a number of years ago.

So now everyone that got used the “old” one has to fiddle with keyboard settings every time they use a new Windows session/computer.

And it’s not exactly a breeze to switch, as Windows often keeps the multilingual one and switches back to it when you use a different application. Gotta make sure to delete the multilingual and leave only one layout. It’s a real annoyance.

Well, the tower was also supposed to be temporary and yet, it’s still there 137 years later.

Not in rescue mode. If you can’t mount your root partition because something was fudged in /etc/fstab, for example, you may be stuck in recovery and depending on your distribution, it may not have nano in that minimalist mode.

For me it also happens when I install a VM of Debian using the small image, on my dedicated server in a data center. The company hosting the server requires a special network configuration and AFAIK, there’s only vi. So i need to use the console to access the VM and from there, edit /etc/network/something with vi to setup the network. Once done I can reboot and install the rest of the software over the network, including nano.

I’ve been using Linux for more than two decades. Before nano I was using pico, but it also required to have pine/alpine installed. So knowing the basics of vi has often been helpful over the years for me.

Maybe it’s because I like tinkering with VMs and SBCs, and most people will not encounter situations where they don’t have nano, but it can happen. And you’ll be glad to know at least “i” and “:wq!”.

Sometimes you don’t even have the luxury of nano. Any moderately advanced Linux user should probably learn the basics of vi. Just knowing how to insert text and save it can fix a system that’s stuck in recovery. Even if it’s just to add a comment in front of a line in a config file.

How do you use these when you are connecting via SSH? You enable X forwarding?

It’s fine when you have a graphical environment, but what do you do when you dont have one?

This can also be practical in places where the police can force you to unlock your phone with biometrics but not with the PIN.

Ever since I’ve seen the police here force people to delete the videos of them abusing citizens, I have been very wary of biometric identification.

So far my ‘emergency’ procedure would be to restart my phone, as it’s asking for a PIN after a reboot.

As long as it’s not à la Musk where the new versions will be inferior to the previous one because “no modern trains should rely on antiquated technology so we’re scrapping everything from before to start from scratch”.

I’d be curious to see any numbers on that. Uber and Lyft played the card of “but it’s car sharing and thus reducing trafic” but in the end, it doesn’t really change much, and sometimes even increase trafic.

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/uber-lyft-traffic-congestion-car-ownership-study/

As someone that doesn’t have a licence, never have driven a car and avoids them if possible, taxis (autonomous or not) are generally useless to me. They are still cars and they keep people dependent on cars.

In a city, people shouldn’t need a taxi (read, a car) to get around. In urban areas, people can walk, bike or use public transit. And if you want to go from one city to another, one shouldn’t also need a taxi (car) to get there.

I’m aware that this is kind of “utopist” and requires efforts to change things but, if the solution to wanting less cars is “cars but shared!”, this is not a solution. It’s just proof of failed policies. It will not encourage any change, just stagnation. Things will stay based on cars… but autonomous… and electric (oh so green)! Oh and also, now big tech knows exactly where you’re going, and when.

EDIT: And if robotaxis would be “part of the solution” for the last mile, why wouldn’t a normal taxi already fulfil that role? We don’t have enough? So we’d need more vehicles on the road, But autonomous? Why do they need to be autonomous? How come is the last mile such a huge problem for most people? Is walking or cycling a mile that difficult for most people? Is everyone carrying a 42" TV around?

God forbid we have public transit instead of fucking cars everywhere. There’s no need for buses or trains when we can spend huge amounts of energy to autonomously move two tons of metal for each and every individual that exists.

Humanity is not running to ruin. It’s taking a car.

You know it’s not one or another, right?

I’ve been using Linux since 1999 and I’m a strong defender of free software. I’ve been rooting and installing roms on my phones for years. I’ve repaired them several times. I’m well aware of the issues and I still have the right not to like Louis Rossman, even if I support his cause with the right to repair.

I don’t think it’s necessary to tell people they are losers because they don’t like him. We are not ennemies. Some people can actually dislike him, or his style, and still support the cause. But if you want to antagonize them…

Ok fanboi.

This guy was offered an insane salary for doing engineering for US defense contracts and turned it down because he felt like calling out bad practices and improving repairability on our devices was a better thing to do.

I guess that makes him our lord and saviour then, and we can then only take him seriously because of that. Knowing this changes everything. He is so good to help us lowly people in our quest for repairable devices! And if you just keep watching his videos he can teach you how you also can be successful like him. And by the way you can buy his tools too!

He’s right on the right to repair, but every time I tried to watch his videos (and I tried a few times, I work in tech and like the subject), I always felt like I was being… patronized.

But if you just watch his videos and buy his stuff he will teach you how to repair yours!11! /s

The few times I watched his videos, he sounded like a libertarian bro, saying that if you just put the effort, you too can become successful. You just have to pull yourself by the bootstraps or something. He’s showing you everything you need to know to be as successful as him! And maybe it was sarcasm and I didn’t catch it but at one point he muttered something about Trump fixing the potholes of New York. That’s about when I stopped taking him seriously.

He’s still an important voice for the right to repair movement but you’re right. I also can’t stand him. Unfortunately he has very dedicated/vocal eeehm, fans, so legitimate remarks on him are often met with downvotes.

Quite candidly, it’s not articles selling the spiel of tech bros that is going to help us. I’m one of those commenters and I also wish “Technology” was about technology instead of trying to sell the latest gadgetbahn or a solar road or self driving cars.

EDIT: It’s not technically about “helping us”, but more specifically about the kind of spiel those “articles” are trying to push. It may very well be about technology, but it’s misrepresented as something that could help us and save us in the future while in reality, it’s just marginally interesting, Think about how many articles there has been about bitcoins, NFTs, AI and crap like this, coming from techbros and their simps. That’s why you’ll see the sort of comments you complain about. It certainly is tech, but it’s more like tech they’re trying to hype, misrepresent and sell.

I love tech. I work in IT. But I can also smell BS and will not hesitate to point it out.

Being “anti car” is good for people that love cars. More public transit means less trafic, less congestion, less demand for gas and generally just more space for people that actually like to drive cars.

Plus, if some people don’t want to drive a car and just want to get places, maybe don’t get a car? There’s already safe and proven “technology” to do that. I understand the added safety bonus of “autonomous” cars but let’s be real, it’s not advertised as something to boost the safety of everyone around, it’s advertised as “autopilot” or even worse, “Full Self Driving”.

I am certainly anti car, but pointing out the flaws in “FSD” or “autonomous cars” and how it’s being falsely marketed to people is also on topic and is not exactly “inserting my views”. People can still love cars and use them, just don’t BS us with the “FSD” and “autonomous” spiel.

I know it’s not the answer you’re looking for but, what is safer for pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers, is to have less cars on the roads. Buses can move dozens of people with a single trained professional driver. Trains can move hundreds. It’s illogical to try to push for autonomous cars for individuals when we already have “self driving” technologies that are much much safer and much more efficient.

I googled it a bit and apparently the micro usb cling is mostly because of cost and design. I thought the cost was about licensing fees but since there are indeed none for this connector, it seems to be about how USB-C is much more complex to implement on a circuit. So in order to simplify the circuitry and also save a few pennies on every device, we’re apparently stuck with micro usb for a while.

This sounds like FUD.

Fear, uncertainty and doubt (often shortened to FUD) is a manipulative propaganda tactic used in sales, marketing, public relations, politics, polling and cults. FUD is generally a strategy to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information, and is a manifestation of the appeal to fear.

The line about the “warning” sounds exactly like like my old boss when he was selling LCD panels and telling people they had to clean their monitor with the special liquid he was selling at 200% markup because otherwise it would ruin their warranty. Or like some big box employee trying to sell you gold plated HDMI cables so the image can be better quality. Gotta buy the certified one because the cheapo could cause issues!

It’s an HDMI cable FFS! It probably has been made in the exact same plant than other HDMI cables, but without paying for the license.

There is nothing saying the cables don’t work. The article speculates that they may be faulty but it’s just that, speculation. It’s just that the manufacturer didn’t pay to have the HDMI logo/license. A logo or a license won’t make the cables faulty.

The fraud is not paying the license to the consortium, but the consumers should not really see anything wrong with it. It’s a digital signal. Even if the cable is poor quality, it either works, or not.

I guess maybe the only problem that could arise from this is when trying to watch DRM content on cables that are not properly licensed, there may be some sort of HDCP protection that will not work properly. Maaaaaybe.

So yes, it’s fraud, but not really towards the consumers. The manufacturer was committing fraud by making HDMI cables without paying the license. The cables should be fine but they had to write something about them, like “you know, maybe they will be poor quality or don’t work” to encourage people not to buy them. It’s about money, not the cables.