Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #89055 > unrolled thread
| Started by | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-07-26 01:09 -0400 |
| Last post | 2026-07-27 20:04 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 104 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 01:09 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-26 07:22 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 20:37 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 01:16 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late John McCue <jmclnx@gmail.com.invalid> - 2026-07-26 20:00 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-26 22:40 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:10 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-26 21:24 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 01:02 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 02:59 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 23:18 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Epherma <epherma@remort.app.invalid> - 2026-07-26 20:31 -0700
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 04:35 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 06:37 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-27 23:45 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 18:10 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-28 19:52 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-28 15:17 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 16:22 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-07-27 11:51 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 16:22 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-27 04:42 +0000
Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread (was: Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 08:48 +0100
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 17:19 +0100
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 16:40 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 21:22 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 14:44 -0700
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 23:37 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 21:47 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-28 00:24 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 04:23 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 23:46 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:07 +0100
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-07-29 01:50 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-29 02:32 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-07-27 17:57 -0400
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 00:03 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-28 04:11 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-28 04:38 +0000
Re: Another XLibre and/or Wayland subthread rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 18:19 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 16:11 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 18:27 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 04:46 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 15:47 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-27 23:45 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 18:03 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 06:35 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-27 16:12 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 21:07 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:19 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 03:08 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 23:19 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 03:30 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-27 15:07 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-27 15:48 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 18:27 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-07-28 01:02 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:10 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 00:01 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:19 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:37 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:43 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-27 16:22 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-27 23:07 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 00:10 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-28 04:20 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-28 04:40 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 23:00 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-28 10:48 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-28 22:29 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 23:02 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-29 08:36 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-28 22:57 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-07-28 10:24 +0200
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:24 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:22 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:16 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-26 22:51 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2026-07-26 23:27 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:23 -0400
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 04:42 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-27 23:43 -0400
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:57 +0200
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:06 +0100
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-07-28 15:22 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 09:00 +0100
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-27 23:47 -0400
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 10:18 +0100
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:11 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 01:10 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2026-07-27 15:45 +0200
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-27 16:16 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 18:24 +0100
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-27 19:55 +0200
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 09:59 +0100
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:59 +0200
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-28 11:25 +0100
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:07 +0000
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-28 22:48 +0200
Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-28 17:00 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-27 00:59 +0000
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-27 08:54 +0100
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-26 21:08 -0400
Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-27 20:04 +0200
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 04:42 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <nco5u4FovvdU24@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89081 |
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 21:23:57 -0400, c186282 wrote: > They DID promise atomic-powered cars back when I was a little kid. > Wonder what happened ? Ford didn't make any promises with the Nucleon. It was a concept based on small, lightweight reactors becoming available in the future. Never happened. I do remember Chrysler's turbine car from the '64 World's Fair. There were working prototypes but that didn't prove out either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 23:43 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ViSdnXD3lb4XuPX3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #89091 |
On 7/27/26 00:42, rbowman wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 21:23:57 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> They DID promise atomic-powered cars back when I was a little kid. >> Wonder what happened ? > > Ford didn't make any promises with the Nucleon. It was a concept based on > small, lightweight reactors becoming available in the future. Never > happened. > > I do remember Chrysler's turbine car from the '64 World's Fair. There were > working prototypes but that didn't prove out either. Turbines aren't great for automobiles. We CAN make 'em cheap enough now - but they are not very fuel efficient and take too long to wind up and down. So, no "Batmobiles". "Hybrids", using a small constant-speed diesel as the recharge generator ... those can be very efficient. 40s/50s, some of the 60s ... "atomic" everything was the big promise. Radiation ? No, no - "sunshine units" ! :-) Everything from yer wristwatch to yer flying car, PLUTONIUM POWERED !!! They'll pay YOU for using the excess power !!! Of course it was all just cover for the excessive atmospheric bomb-testing in the southwest. Ain't the Marlboro's that killed the cowboys, it was the FALLOUT. Found a map once - NOT a good picture. I'm old enough to have seen those old news and docu-series TV shows. Fuzzy TV with static. My fave was "Union Carbide's - The 21st Century - with Walter Cronkite". Walter really was a tech enthusiast. You were promised 'atomic' everything - including the flying cars - and you MIGHT be able to have a COMPUTER that'll just squeeze in yer hall closet with enough power to calc yer tax bill and remember some meat-loaf recipes !
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 11:57 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncrcoaF9t46U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89126 |
On 2026-07-28 05:43, c186282 wrote:
> On 7/27/26 00:42, rbowman wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 21:23:57 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>
>>> They DID promise atomic-powered cars back when I was a little kid.
>>> Wonder what happened ?
>>
>> Ford didn't make any promises with the Nucleon. It was a concept based on
>> small, lightweight reactors becoming available in the future. Never
>> happened.
>>
>> I do remember Chrysler's turbine car from the '64 World's Fair. There
>> were
>> working prototypes but that didn't prove out either.
>
> Turbines aren't great for automobiles.
>
> We CAN make 'em cheap enough now - but they are
> not very fuel efficient and take too long to
> wind up and down.
>
> So, no "Batmobiles".
>
> "Hybrids", using a small constant-speed diesel
> as the recharge generator ... those can be
> very efficient.
There was an hybrid with a turbine and a generator. Volvo? They made
about a dozen of them, then disappeared, no talk about them.
ChatGPT just explained to me what happened. Basically small turbines,
even at constant speed for a generator, are trouble.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 11:06 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <1149uu8$3tkg5$15@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89151 |
On 28/07/2026 10:57, Carlos E. R. wrote: > There was an hybrid with a turbine and a generator. Volvo? They made > about a dozen of them, then disappeared, no talk about them. > > ChatGPT just explained to me what happened. Basically small turbines, > even at constant speed for a generator, are trouble. Yes. An open cycle gas turbine is only about 37% efficient and that relies on running at a constant temperature and speed and having excellent tolerances between fan blades and housings. Percentage wise those tolerances cannot be maintained at smaller diameters. And spool up times are measured in tens of seconds. Not fractions of seconds Road use - especially urban use - suits electric cars perfectly if only we had the sort of batteries you find in Marvel comics. But not real life. All these things have been tried, and discarded simply because they were not as good as what we had already. We, as a society, are paying a high price for EVs. -- “The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it.” – H. L. Mencken
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich <rich@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 15:22 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <114ahfb$5fav$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89126 |
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote: > On 7/27/26 00:42, rbowman wrote: >> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 21:23:57 -0400, c186282 wrote: >> >>> They DID promise atomic-powered cars back when I was a little kid. >>> Wonder what happened ? >> >> Ford didn't make any promises with the Nucleon. It was a concept based on >> small, lightweight reactors becoming available in the future. Never >> happened. >> >> I do remember Chrysler's turbine car from the '64 World's Fair. There were >> working prototypes but that didn't prove out either. > > Turbines aren't great for automobiles. > > We CAN make 'em cheap enough now - but they are not very fuel > efficient and take too long to wind up and down. > > So, no "Batmobiles". > > "Hybrids", using a small constant-speed diesel as the recharge > generator ... those can be very efficient. Which is also a "usage point" for "turbines". Run them at constant-speed spinning a generator, then use the resulting electricity for battery recharge. But you still have to deal with the "not terribly efficient" factor for a car sized model, plus the heat generated by the turbine combustion process.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 09:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <1147365$30n9l$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89072 |
On 2026-07-27, Robert Heller wrote: > At Sun, 26 Jul 2026 22:51:39 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence DÿOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > >> >> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: >> >> > For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, >> > no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing >> > with cloudflare. >> >> âÂÂno java scriptâ on the one hand, yet >> âÂÂcan read any siteâ on the other. >> >> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without >> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. > > Sure, an EV with a trolly pole or pantagraph. :-) Why reinvent the wheel? Just go with a train! -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 23:47 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <W4udnf0JyezQu_X3nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #89097 |
On 7/27/26 04:00, Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2026-07-27, Robert Heller wrote: > >> At Sun, 26 Jul 2026 22:51:39 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence DÿOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: >>> >>>> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, >>>> no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing >>>> with cloudflare. >>> >>> âÂÂno java scriptâ on the one hand, yet >>> âÂÂcan read any siteâ on the other. >>> >>> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without >>> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. >> >> Sure, an EV with a trolly pole or pantagraph. :-) > > Why reinvent the wheel? Just go with a train! Won't stop at yer favorite doughnut shop alas ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 10:18 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <1149s54$3tkg5$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89125 |
On 28/07/2026 04:47, c186282 wrote: >> >> Why reinvent the wheel? Just go with a train! > > Won't stop at yer favorite doughnut shop alas ... Seriously,an integrated nuclear ship/rail/EV network could solve 90% of the movement of goods. At least In Europe and Asia. And passengers, at a pinch... Using all nuclear power 'Look Mom! No CO2!' A physical packet-switched network... -- You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone. Al Capone
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 17:11 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncs66jFovvdU43@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89125 |
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 23:47:15 -0400, c186282 wrote: > On 7/27/26 04:00, Nuno Silva wrote: >> On 2026-07-27, Robert Heller wrote: >> >>> At Sun, 26 Jul 2026 22:51:39 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence DÿOliveiro >>> <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: >>>> >>>>> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, >>>>> no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing >>>>> with cloudflare. >>>> >>>> âÂÂno java scriptâ on the one hand, yet âÂÂcan read any >>>> siteâ on the other. >>>> >>>> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without >>>> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. >>> >>> Sure, an EV with a trolly pole or pantagraph. :-) >> >> Why reinvent the wheel? Just go with a train! > > Won't stop at yer favorite doughnut shop alas ... I lived in a small New Hampshire town when the sidewalks rolled up at 9 PM except for a Stop'n'Rob and Dunkin Donuts. There was also a switch yard in the middle of town and one of the tracks was next to Dunkin's. It wasn't uncommon to find a train parked in the crossing at 3AM while the crew had their coffee and donuts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 01:10 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncnpglFovvdU19@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89070 |
On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 22:51:39 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: > >> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, no >> AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing with >> cloudflare. > > “no java script” on the one hand, yet “can read any site” on the other. > > Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without > refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. I've done several web map implementations with ArcGIS SDK for JavaScript, Leaflet, and even Google early on. John would be surprised to find the basic HTML creates a div for the JaveScript API to use. There ain't no there there anymore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 15:45 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <875x205yx5.fsf@eder.anydns.info> |
| In reply to | #89070 |
On So 26 Jul 2026 at 22:51, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: > >> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, >> no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing >> with cloudflare. > > “no java script” on the one hand, yet “can read any site” on the other. > > Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without > refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. Yoy can have that now. Electric cars need no fuel! 'Andreas -- ceterum censeo redmondinem esse delendam
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 16:16 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <RvL9S.338579$0CK1.148439@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #89100 |
On 2026-07-27, Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> wrote: > On So 26 Jul 2026 at 22:51, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without >> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. > > Yoy can have that now. Electric cars need no fuel! I'll let you explain when the brownouts start. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people: X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate / \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 18:24 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <1148490$3c3hi$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89100 |
On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote: > On So 26 Jul 2026 at 22:51, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: > >> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote: >> >>> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script, >>> no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing >>> with cloudflare. >> >> “no java script” on the one hand, yet “can read any site” on the other. >> >> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without >> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that. > > Yoy can have that now. Electric cars need no fuel! > Really? Where does the electricity come from then? > 'Andreas > -- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 19:55 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncpkbnFtqkuU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89114 |
On 2026-07-27 19:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote:
>> On So 26 Jul 2026 at 22:51, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 26 Jul 2026 20:00:30 -0000 (UTC), John McCue wrote:
>>>
>>>> For example, users want a browser that blocks ads, no java script,
>>>> no AI, fast and lite on memory and can read any site without dealing
>>>> with cloudflare.
>>>
>>> “no java script” on the one hand, yet “can read any site” on the other.
>>>
>>> Why not wish for a car that you can drive for infinite miles without
>>> refuelling? You might actually be more likely to get that.
>>
>> Yoy can have that now. Electric cars need no fuel!
>>
> Really?
It is strictly true :-D
>
> Where does the electricity come from then?
Irrelevant. The car itself doesn't use fuel :-D
>
>> 'Andreas
>>
>
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 09:59 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <1149r0u$3tkg5$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89117 |
On 27/07/2026 18:55, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-07-27 19:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote: >> Where does the electricity come from then? > > Irrelevant. The car itself doesn't use fuel :-D > Depends on your definition of 'fuel' -- In todays liberal progressive conflict-free education system, everyone gets full Marx.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 11:59 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncrcrnF9t46U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89144 |
On 2026-07-28 10:59, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 27/07/2026 18:55, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2026-07-27 19:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote:
>
>>> Where does the electricity come from then?
>>
>> Irrelevant. The car itself doesn't use fuel :-D
>>
> Depends on your definition of 'fuel'
>
>
It combusts with oxygen producing heat and expands dramatically.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 11:25 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <114a02f$3tkg5$17@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #89152 |
On 28/07/2026 10:59, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-07-28 10:59, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 27/07/2026 18:55, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>> On 2026-07-27 19:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote: >> >>>> Where does the electricity come from then? >>> >>> Irrelevant. The car itself doesn't use fuel :-D >>> >> Depends on your definition of 'fuel' >> >> > > It combusts with oxygen producing heat and expands dramatically. > So uranium isn't 'fuel' then. And organic life doesn't use 'fuel' either? It's a loose term, used by people today in many different contexts beyond 'something for the fire' which is where the word originates... Today its more used as 'something that can supply 'free energy' (free in the thermodynamic sense, not economic) -- New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in someone else's pocket.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 17:07 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncs5uqFovvdU42@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89154 |
On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 11:25:19 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 28/07/2026 10:59, Carlos E. R. wrote: >> On 2026-07-28 10:59, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 27/07/2026 18:55, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>>> On 2026-07-27 19:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>> On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote: >>> >>>>> Where does the electricity come from then? >>>> >>>> Irrelevant. The car itself doesn't use fuel :-D >>>> >>> Depends on your definition of 'fuel' >>> >>> >>> >> It combusts with oxygen producing heat and expands dramatically. >> > So uranium isn't 'fuel' then. And organic life doesn't use 'fuel' > either? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldier_Fuel I had some when they were still called Hooah!. They weren't too bad.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 22:48 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncsisdFapkgU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89154 |
On 2026-07-28 12:25, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 28/07/2026 10:59, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2026-07-28 10:59, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 27/07/2026 18:55, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> On 2026-07-27 19:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Where does the electricity come from then?
>>>>
>>>> Irrelevant. The car itself doesn't use fuel :-D
>>>>
>>> Depends on your definition of 'fuel'
>>>
>>>
>>
>> It combusts with oxygen producing heat and expands dramatically.
>>
> So uranium isn't 'fuel' then. And organic life doesn't use 'fuel' either?
>
> It's a loose term, used by people today in many different contexts
> beyond 'something for the fire' which is where the word originates...
>
> Today its more used as 'something that can supply 'free energy' (free in
> the thermodynamic sense, not economic)
>
>
In the context of cars, no, I restrict it.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-28 17:00 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Open-Source Armchair Critics At It Again |
| Message-ID | <ncs5h6FovvdU41@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #89152 |
On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 11:59:19 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-07-28 10:59, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 27/07/2026 18:55, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>> On 2026-07-27 19:24, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> On 27/07/2026 14:45, Andreas Eder wrote: >> >>>> Where does the electricity come from then? >>> >>> Irrelevant. The car itself doesn't use fuel :-D >>> >> Depends on your definition of 'fuel' >> >> >> > It combusts with oxygen producing heat and expands dramatically. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fuel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web