PowerCrazy

joined 2 years ago
[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"Pointless" god I wish we lived in that society.

Off-road vehicles don't need to be registered or conform to any safety standards so if you are designing something for off-road use, none of this stuff matters, you just can't ALSO drive it on-road.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago
[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

But now he has what? A piece of code that says he has non-exclusive ownership* of some bits on a particular exchange, and he paid 23k for that privilege?

*There are no legal frameworks that enforce his ownership of said item. Additionally their are no technical hurdles that prevent other from the same ownership.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

It can electrify, it just can't be carrying around batteries that will give it 300miles of range. A ford Ranger from 1990 weighs <3000lbs.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Cars didn't used to weigh that much and the safety regulations can still exist, it just requires car manufactures to fix their safety issues without adding more weight ultimately making everyone less safe.

A 1990 Ford Ranger weighed <3000 lbs.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 27 points 10 months ago (12 children)

The idea of needing specialized transport as an individual beyond just walking is a failure of society. Replacing cars with "not-cars" isn't really helping that aspect. You should be structuring society so that cars or "not-cars" have no need to exist for almost everyone.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago

The video kind of proves my point. It was janky, he fired <20bullets, and it jammed several times during the demo. Don't get me wrong, it's cool as hell, but yea not very practical for anything and certainly not durable enough to be a viable alternative to CNC/Milling.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn’t ban cameras, but I would require the visibility be obtained without them. Cameras can give vision that is useful and implausible without them.

Yea this is probably the better play. But too often with modern cars they use the existence of the camera's to make the sight lines impossibly dangerous (the infamous front facing camera on the f150 for example).

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (14 children)

If there isn't a weight limit, nothing else matters. Limit truck to <3500lbs, ban cameras and require ~130 degree unobstructed view for all mirrors.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Point of order, Kamala didn't "lead" anything, she was chosen by party insiders of the clinton wing to take over.

Also Aljazeera has always been highly critical of the US, I started reading them fairly regularly in the mid 2000's as they were one of the only outlets criticizing Bush. (I don't think the intercept existed yet.)

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 months ago

Probably the same number that used 3d-printed guns.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago (4 children)

This is basically how today's 3d printed guns work, but even still the gun isn't good for more then a few magazines afaik. So it's interesting as a way to create a gun that isn't serialized and the ATF can't trace, but it's not durable, and it still requires a good deal of precision engineering/cost, so its not feasible to print a truck-load and sell them for cheap.

view more: ‹ prev next ›