[spdrun]

The criteria are apparently the same (narrower than, but same group) as for existing forbearance. Not sure why Fannie/Freddie would want those homes on the market, unless it’s cheaper to have “owners” dump’em in 5 years than to foreclose.

[spdrun]

Fine, so one could just just disconnect the explosive, and rely on the 3-point belt till the parts come in to fix the dashbombs.

Cars came unequipped with explosives for years, and people survived accidents. The only reason airbags were originally required in the US was to protect retards who didn’t wear their belts.

[spdrun]

I’ve read that fuel cells have a limited life span and also use rare elements that are in limited supply.

[spdrun]

There’s an option to disconnect the fucking thing and install a 5-point. Who needs explosives in their face anyway?

[spdrun]

Goal should be to raise standards of living, but reduce population and thus consumption everywhere. Gaia can’t take it much longer, clean energy or not. Limiting people to one kid per couple would be a good start.

[spdrun]

I disagree. Solar actually works best with a grid. A grid allows for pumped-storage hydroelectric, which is a lot cleaner and more reliable than thousands of battery banks. A grid also allows transfer of power from areas that are sunny to areas that are cloud-covered.

The goal should be to build out grids in Africa powered by clean power, whether it’s solar, wind, hydro, or modular nuclear.

Contrary to popular belief, cell phones actually require a “grid” and a lot of infrastructure. Range of digital phones is very limited, so you need a lot of antennae and terrestrial wiring to cover an area.

[spdrun]

Unless you have a BMW, why do you need to pay a high-school dropout to install a battery?

[spdrun]

Is the bar made of poured concrete, or something easier to remove?

Cap the gas line, reroute it as needed after demo is complete, then install something like a gas outlet box to connect the BBQ.

[spdrun]

Assuming people emit more CO2 when their standard of living is raised, wouldn’t a cynic say that we should NOT raise the standard of living in developing countries?

Also, developing countries have less infrastructure and more access to solar power (being generally located in warmer/sunnier climates). Perhaps they’re a chance to start building clean infrastructure from scratch where it doesn’t already exist.

[spdrun]

You’re assuming I give a flying motherfuck about “high-tech.”

[spdrun]

I don’t mind grit and dirt — I might have been happier in the corrupt NYC of the 1970s.

DC-Boston could be sped up significantly in 4 years if they wanted to. Build a parallel set of tunnels to NYC from NJ, which would allow more trains to pass. Run some express trains between DC and Boston, with only a few stops. DC, Philly, Newark, NYC, New Haven, Boston come to mind, with none of the podunks in between. Get rid of the 30-minute stop in NYC, which has no good reason for existing.

The US doesn’t need high-speed rail. It needs highER speed rail not run in a retarded fashion.

[spdrun]

China is having some teething problems with the same. SNCF is an established operator with a record of success. Wouldn’t be the worst idea to give them the contract to build/run CAHSR.

[spdrun]

Why not build the HSR using the I-5 ROW for significant portions?

PS- Vive la France:

What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR

[spdrun]

Personally, I’d rather take a train, assuming the train runs fairly frequently. Four hours stuck in a sensory deprivation bubble? Fuck that idea. I can get up, walk around on the train, eat something, piss, shit, meet people, all while in motion.

I DREAD a future where everyone is going from work to home to planned activities in their safe little boring self-driving bubbles of glass and metal. No unplanned human interaction. No serendipity. Just an ever more stratified society where people interact less and less with people who aren’t like them. And turn into blobs of quivering adipose tissue while sitting in their auto-cages, which deliver them door-to-door. No walking, not even across a parking lot. If this will be the future, then I’m getting my fuckin passport ready to move to a less developed country when this comes to pass. I’ll take my chances on a bicycle in a herd of tuktuks.

Drag coefficient might improve, but overdrive ratio is unlikely to improve much over modern transmissions, especially CVTs. We already have cars that can turn 1500-2000 rpm (the practical minimum without “lugging” risking bearing damage).

The future (IMHO) should be electric cars, not burning more fossil fools. Heavily automated trains (EVs with unlimited) range + limited-range electric cars would actually allow widespread adoption of both.

[spdrun]

Cars with 6, 7 speed transmissions or CVTs already have a tall top gear at detriment to throttle response. The issue isn’t gearing at this point — efficiency is limited by air, drivetrain, and road drag.

You might be able to gain efficiency by making cars lighter (lesser crash safety if they crash less), but above 80 mph, drag is mostly from air resistance. Frontal area isn’t going to change much unless you start building 4-person autonomous motorbikes.

And if anything, autonomous cars will be even more bloated since people will want to stand up, eat, go to the toilet. Think of an 80s VW Microbus except scaled up 25% in all directions for fatties.

[Author]

Posts