This does exist, the Maextro S800 is one example. Over 800 mi with the gas extender. For trucks there's the Ram 1500 Ramcharger, and Mahle makes a drop in attachment for EV truckers.
I think for most consumers though, if you want that range I wouldn't go EV. At the point where you're adding extra weight via engine + gasoline you're giving up range, and we've already figured out what the most efficient gas vs battery tradeoff is in hybrids. Like the Hybrid Camry with 600 mi of range is insane, if it had a bigger battery (with current tech) you'd just be losing range from the additional weight
I'm not the right person to explain English history, secret courts, and the American revolution. Suffice to say, public courts a vital check on the power of the state by way of the court of public opinion. The real final court of appeal.
I don't know what that means. But presumably you are talking about some difficult technical feat that one can perform with a vehicle?
I'm fairly sure, if it's something mechanical and a human can do it, the computers won't be far behind. But even if not, we can redesign the vehicles to make it easier for a computer, eg we can make all axes or even all wheels independently steerable and control their velocity individually. A human would be overwhelmed with that, they can barely keep hold of a steering wheel, but a computer wouldn't mind too much.
Have a look at how the shipping container took over global logistics. They also had to redesign nearly everything about that industry, but the savings and efficiency gains were too juice to ignore.
> The point is there's a million of these edge cases for which autonomy will not economically compete for another hundred years.
My prediction: anything a human can do by just manipulating the controls of the car (steering wheel, gas, breaks) will be automated fairly quickly. Especially stuff like parking maneuvers (I assume that's what you describe?), because those happen at low speeds and mostly involve fixed non-moving obstacles. And it's pretty easy to generate training data. When the autonomous system attempts these edge cases, they can simulate a myriad attempts with the on-board computer. There's not a lot of physics going on at low speeds. (Or rather, pretty simple approximations are enough.)
The harder parts are dealing with moving and ambiguous objects (pedestrians, other cars, cyclists etc) at speed. But the industry is well aware of that.
About what will take longer: at the moment a truck driver provides a lot of incidental labour around the truck. Like helping with loading and unloading, minor repairs, etc.
If you have no person on board, you need to redesign how the industry is organised. If you need human help to unload at the destination, you need to preposition a human there, you can't rely on the truck coming with a human.
The logo of shopping lines is painted on co tainers because they own them. Cars on the other hand are owned by people. Millions of people own cars and may never switch go a self driving model. The average age of a car on the road keeps climbing because the quality of new cars is worse.
I'd like to see cars with better autonomy features but theyre still far too expensive and non standardized. When the computer breaks or needs an upgrade the whole car is junked. The purchase data shows people aren't asking for autonomy.
I think we have to distinguish between people who outright post Russian propaganda like Scott Ritter and people like Greenwald and Mearsheimer who say the Ukraine war is a US proxy war and was provoked.
The latter applied to many US (and historically British empire wars, from where the US learned).
Greenwald had a Rumble contract for daily videos during the Biden years, so I think it would be fair to say he was a Trump influencer.
He also has many enemies in Brazil (e.g.. Supreme Judge Moraes), so that video could have come from anywhere.
But yes, he could also have been threatened over the Snowden files earlier.
> I think we have to distinguish between people who outright post Russian propaganda like Scott Ritter and people like Greenwald and Mearsheimer who say the Ukraine war is a US proxy war and was provoked.
The Russian government literally finances Mearsheimer's books. It's written on the title page. Doesn't get any closer to government propaganda than that.
Valdai financing in 2023 does look bad. But his 2015 talk "Why Ukraine is the West's fault" does not appear to have any financing and says the same already.
In 1993 he advocated for Ukraine to keep nuclear weapons:
I found the debate with Sikorski very illuminating. Sikorski is the foreign minister of Poland, with a long and distinguished career in the US (scholar) and EU (MEP) in addition to Poland. He's been in the dirt too, covered the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan as an on-location reporter in the 1980s. During the debate, Mearsheimer tried to lecture him about things that went on at diplomatic gatherings where Sikorski was present (and led a delegation) and Mearsheimer was not.
He's a total hack and his brand of "realism" has nothing to do with reality. Dude can't even read Russian, yet thinks he's an expert on Russia. The only reason we're discussing him here right now is because Russian troll army has been promoting him hard; like most charlatans, he has the appearance of someone who knows what they're talking about.
Mearsheimer says that there's no evidence Putin had imperial ambitions before 24 Feb 2022; that the war has forced him into this. Some of the closest people to Putin say that he told them fucking 20 years ago what he was going to do with Ukraine.
Mearsheimer is weird. His book "Israel lobby and US foreign policy" is outstanding. But when he speaks about many other things it feels like he's improvising all the time.
Suppose that I grant you that the Ukraine war was "provoked by the US" - which I most certainly don't. But suppose.
It might still be the case that something is true AND propaganda. Good propaganda has a grain of truth. The key for identifying propaganda isn't "is a statement false?" but "is one of the sides pushing the statement, because it's benefitial for them". In this sense, "the Ukraine war was provoked by the US" would be propaganda even if it were true - which it's not.
That said, I think you have to be proficient at mental gymnastics to believe that the aggressor is actually the victim.
> That said, I think you have to be proficient at mental gymnastics to believe that the aggressor is actually the victim.
That is a fine example of propaganda: All people, including historians who evaluate different possibilities, surely want to paint Russia as the victim!
They're just hiding misconduct because the government does an enormous number of things that would be national scandals if they weren't allowed to bury them.
Kinda, but the back catalog has never been bigger or more valuable. There is good stuff from every era, and it only accumulates. What happens when the viewing mix is 10% new stuff, 90% classics?
reply