On 12/20/21 11:14 AM, Rick C wrote:> Maybe it's good to not click that link.:-)> Here is what I got, > > "uBlock Origin has prevented the following page from loading" > Because of the following filter: > ||viglink.com^ > Found in: Peter Lowe’s Ad and tracking server listYep. When using a temporary exception, uMatrix gave a hard block on the redirect.viglink.com redirector. "uMatrix has prevented the following page from loading" uMatrix does provide a cleaner URL: https://www.amazon.com/Curious-Desire-Know-Future-Depends/dp/0465097626/ref=sr_1_1 Which can be further cleaned up to be: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0465097626/ Curious: The Desire to Know and Why Your Future Depends On It by Ian Leslie> Even going to legitimate sites can send your browser down a rabbit > hole of redirects.Indeed! I've seen less questionable behavior from porn and warez sites. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Curious
Started by ●December 19, 2021
Reply by ●December 20, 20212021-12-20
Reply by ●December 20, 20212021-12-20
On a sunny day (Mon, 20 Dec 2021 10:35:12 -0800 (PST)) it happened Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in <6b8f73c0-0a2b-438c-8531-07777703eb77n@googlegroups.com>:>> >it or found it interesting. "I like this book because it is cool" might >> >be acceptable as a book review when you are seven, but it is not really >> >appropriate here. >> > >> >(To be clear here - it is very likely that a book you find interesting >> >will be of interest to others here. I'm not objecting to you sharing a >> >book recommendation, merely to the way you are doing it.) >> Sure tinyurls are a potential security risk, so is every site these days after the recent hack: >> https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/12/hackers-launch-over-840000-attacks-through-log4j-flaw/ >> beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep >> Your PC is now encrypted click <here> to reboot > >Apache : 1 > >MS Windows : 5,385,349 > >-- > >Rick C. > >+- Get 1,000 miles of free SuperchargingAngry owner blows up his Tesla (VIDEO): https://www.rt.com/news/543738-tesla-explosion-musk-finland/ 20,000 Euro for a new battery is a bit much I think.
Reply by ●December 20, 20212021-12-20
On Monday, December 20, 2021 at 4:44:15 AM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 20:30:53 -0700, Grant Taylor > <gta...@tnetconsulting.net> wrote: > > >On 12/19/21 7:49 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: > >> https://tinyurl.com/y63rsseg > >> > >> Cool book. There's a lot of stuff about ideas and such, and a lot of > >> good references. > > > >Would you please share the real URL, not something obfuscated / hidden > >behind (at least one) redirect? > It's safe. Click it. > -- > > I yam what I yam - PopeyeuBlock origin popped up & blocked the redirect but it allows you to see the URL's contents I take it this is the book?: https://www.amazon.com/Curious-Desire-Know-Future-Depends/dp/0465097626
Reply by ●December 20, 20212021-12-20
On Monday, 20 December 2021 at 12:42:21 UTC-8, John Larkin wrote: ...> > > >I've seen less questionable behavior from porn and warez sites. > Probably so. This group is about electronic design.... Regardless of how much we trust John Larkin that post may be have been done by somebody else impersonating you and exploiting any trust we have in you. You are often calling out other people for being jerks, why are you being one on this issue? You simply needed to post the actual link when you were asked, or preferably the title and author of the book. kw
Reply by ●December 20, 20212021-12-20
On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:30:44 -0800 (PST), "ke...@kjwdesigns.com" <keith@kjwdesigns.com> wrote:>On Monday, 20 December 2021 at 12:42:21 UTC-8, John Larkin wrote: >... >> > >> >I've seen less questionable behavior from porn and warez sites. >> Probably so. This group is about electronic design. >... > >Regardless of how much we trust John Larkin that post may be have been done by somebody else impersonating you and exploiting any trust we have in you. > >You are often calling out other people for being jerks, why are you being one on this issue? > >You simply needed to post the actual link when you were asked, or preferably the title and author of the book. > >kwI didn't need to do anything, or please anybody. Feel free to ignore me. I don't mind. -- If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts, but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties. Francis Bacon
Reply by ●December 21, 20212021-12-21
On 20/12/2021 19:32, Rick C wrote:> Hey! Check this out! > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ >You forgot the < > brackets :-)
Reply by ●December 21, 20212021-12-21
On 21/12/2021 02:14, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 23:30:17 -0700, Grant Taylor > <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote: > >> On 12/19/21 9:44 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>> It's safe. Click it. >> >> No offense intended, but I have no idea who you are. You are some >> random person on the Internet. > > I've been posting here for decades.When a malware author starts impersonating you, I'm sure they will say that too.
Reply by ●December 21, 20212021-12-21
On Tuesday, December 21, 2021 at 5:46:27 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:> On 20/12/2021 19:52, Jan Panteltje wrote: > > > > > Angry owner blows up his Tesla (VIDEO): > > https://www.rt.com/news/543738-tesla-explosion-musk-finland/ > > > > 20,000 Euro for a new battery is a bit much I think. > > > Tesla battery : 100 kWh > CO₂ per kWh for Li-ion battery manufacturing (estimate) : 73 kg > CO₂ released when make battery : 7300 kg > > CO₂ per litre petrol : 2.4 kg > > Litres petrol equivalent per Tesla battery : 3041 litres > > Fuel consumption Toyota Yaris Hybrid : 3.3 l per 100 km > > Total distance for a Yaris to release the same CO₂ from petrol as it > costs to make a Tesla battery : 92,000 km or 57,000 miles. > > > Of course that doesn't take into account the CO₂ equivalent costs of > making the rest of the car, making the charging infrastructure, > generating the electricity, or any of the many other factors involved. > And there are many other environmental factors about mining Lithium. > Any attempt attempt at finding the "cost to the environment" for > something is always more complicated than you think, even when taking > into account that it is more complicated than you think. And of course > these are estimates, and of course there are other factors - other kinds > of pollution, comfort, convenience, personal preferences, etc., that > affect suitability of particular types of car. > > > But it /does/ show the ridiculously high environmental cost of lithium > batteries - and the price of the batteries should reflect that, just as > the price of petrol (in most countries) is artificially high to > discourage CO₂ emissions. > > (Roll on sodium, aluminium or carbon based batteries - the sooner we > stop using lithium, the better.)I don't think it shows any such thing. You compared the impact of making the lithium battery (in the largest car, not the model that sells well). Even then your basis is an estimate you give no basis for. Then you ignore the impact of building the alternative, an ICE vehicle or any other battery. So your analysis is completely bogus. Did you create this yourself or did you pull it off the web? -- Rick C. --+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging --+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Reply by ●December 21, 20212021-12-21
On 21/12/2021 16:22, Rick C wrote:> On Tuesday, December 21, 2021 at 4:19:11 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote: >> On 20/12/2021 19:32, Rick C wrote: >>> Hey! Check this out! >>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ >>> >> You forgot the < > brackets :-) > > No brackets required. >Did you miss the other threads about links? Or the smiley? Brackets around URLs are not required - but they are a good habit, and they /are/ required if the URL is long enough to be mangled by line breaks (and you want people to bother to click on the link).
Reply by ●December 21, 20212021-12-21
On 21/12/2021 16:20, Rick C wrote:> On Tuesday, December 21, 2021 at 5:46:27 AM UTC-4, David Brown > wrote: >> On 20/12/2021 19:52, Jan Panteltje wrote: >> >>> >>> Angry owner blows up his Tesla (VIDEO): >>> https://www.rt.com/news/543738-tesla-explosion-musk-finland/ >>> >>> 20,000 Euro for a new battery is a bit much I think. >>> >> Tesla battery : 100 kWh CO₂ per kWh for Li-ion battery >> manufacturing (estimate) : 73 kg CO₂ released when make battery : >> 7300 kg >> >> CO₂ per litre petrol : 2.4 kg >> >> Litres petrol equivalent per Tesla battery : 3041 litres >> >> Fuel consumption Toyota Yaris Hybrid : 3.3 l per 100 km >> >> Total distance for a Yaris to release the same CO₂ from petrol as >> it costs to make a Tesla battery : 92,000 km or 57,000 miles. >> >> >> Of course that doesn't take into account the CO₂ equivalent costs >> of making the rest of the car, making the charging infrastructure, >> generating the electricity, or any of the many other factors >> involved. And there are many other environmental factors about >> mining Lithium. Any attempt attempt at finding the "cost to the >> environment" for something is always more complicated than you >> think, even when taking into account that it is more complicated >> than you think. And of course these are estimates, and of course >> there are other factors - other kinds of pollution, comfort, >> convenience, personal preferences, etc., that affect suitability of >> particular types of car. >> >> >> But it /does/ show the ridiculously high environmental cost of >> lithium batteries - and the price of the batteries should reflect >> that, just as the price of petrol (in most countries) is >> artificially high to discourage CO₂ emissions. >> >> (Roll on sodium, aluminium or carbon based batteries - the sooner >> we stop using lithium, the better.) > > I don't think it shows any such thing. You compared the impact of > making the lithium battery (in the largest car, not the model that > sells well). Even then your basis is an estimate you give no basis > for. Then you ignore the impact of building the alternative, an ICE > vehicle or any other battery. > > So your analysis is completely bogus. Did you create this yourself > or did you pull it off the web? >If you read my post, you'd have answers to most of these points. My intention - very clearly stated, I thought - was to point out that making large lithium-ion batteries has a CO₂ equivalent cost that matches a very significant driving distance in a modern efficient petrol car. My analysis is no more and no less than that - since the discussion was about the battery. Yes, I ignored the cost of making the petrol car - I also ignored the cost of making the rest of the large electric car. (It might have been worth getting figures for these too, as it would probably surprise a lot of people.) And yes, fairly obviously I got the key figures from the web - that's how you get data in the modern world. You can do some googling of your own if you like. The 73 kg CO₂ per kWh for the lithium ion battery is, as I said, an estimate - and you'll easily find others ranging from about 50 kg to about 200 kg, depending on many factors such as the source of the lithium salts.
