A new 3 series is wider, has a longer wheelbase, and approximately equal length of a 5 series from 2001. It's also ~500 lbs heavier, depending on options.
I drive a 1998 Lexus SC, a car that was built to compete with the contemporary 8-series and Mercedes SL. My car is comparable in size to a new Corolla. I'm longer, but I'm 4 inches shorter. Every other dimension is basically the same.
>The main reason kids get run over is unsafe crossing behaviors, such as running into the road after a ball. Older gets get run over because they're distracted by a smartphone.
(from the link)
Insane victim-blaming here. What is wrong with car people?
Agree, but in this case the new 2CV is shorter than the original and I imagine if the original was built now with today's safety and EPA requirements there wouldn't be that much difference
>It's ridiculous: Put a modern SUV next to a WW2 M4 Sherman and you will be surprised, the SUV is the same size. Some a bigger.
That would be what normal people would call a "bold faced lie" in normal conversation and is only above average levels of misleading compared to what's typical around here (which reflects upon the character of the people on HN, IMO).
A sherman is approx same length as the biggest modern SUVs but wider, taller and 10x the weight.
You may as well compare rowing shells to fishing vessels.
An M4 Sherman is about 6m long which production SUVs don't reach. That's about the length of an L3 delivery van, which is usually the longest version they make.
The M4 is 2.6m wide. No car is 2.6m wide. That's wider than a coach bus.
The M4 is 3m tall. Even the fattest SUVs do not come close.
My parents ID4 makes my old e39 touring look small by comparison. Funny thing is, it does not feel bigger on the inside, suppose modern safety standard have demanded a sizeable increase in vehicle size over time, and the battery bank also makes it grow on the, i suppose, x-axis
> But because the person next to you drives a big car and you don't want to get crushed, you also need a big car.
My position on this changed to "ah, now I see" after seeing a video where a Miata got run over from a standing start by a lifted truck. They were both stopped at the lights, but because the truck driver lacked both forward vision and object permanence, when the lights went green he set off .. directly over the car in front.
US size escalation will continue until legislated against. It's creeping into the UK, but fortunately you can't go too large until you start colliding with solid objects. And the max weight is limited to 3500kg unless you're on a Boomer license.
I think the trend towards SUVs was mainly because some car tax code incentivized it. If cars were taxed by weight (as they should - heavy vehicles cause so much more wear for public roads), the trend could reverse. (Plus you get better mileage with a lighter vehicle)
> If cars were taxed by weight (as they should - heavy vehicles cause so much more wear for public roads)
The problem with this argument is that because of the 4th power law, essentially all road wear due to vehicles is caused by 20+ ton commercial trucks and the difference between the different sizes of personal vehicle is immaterial.
If you want a tax that accurately reflects road wear it ends up being around $0.10/year for a 2500 pound subcompact, $1/year for a 4500 pound SUV and >$6500/year for a 20 ton commercial truck, assuming they all travel the same number of miles. And in practice the commercial truck will typically see ~10x more miles too.
A difference of $0.90/year in tax is probably not going to provide much incentive to anyone.
It is tax code and efficiency standards; SUVs are legally speaking light trucks and have lower fuel economy standards, so the Big 3 in the US just made their cars bigger rather than try to compete with the likes of Toyota and Honda on fuel efficiency.
The correlation between larger vehicles and profit margins is mostly because larger vehicles also cost more to operate, and then people with less money tend to avoid vehicles they can't afford to put gas in, so the people who buy larger vehicles usually have more money. In other words, nearly all large vehicles are premium vehicles whereas some small vehicles are the economy segment.
But that wouldn't stop them from making high margin vehicles that are low to the ground. The automaker with the highest margins is Ferrari.
The real problem is the nonsensical CAFE rules. If you want to make a high production volume small car with premium performance, you're going to blow your fuel economy target for that vehicle class, so they're de facto banned from making those. But >300 horsepower mid-sized SUVs? No problem. So premium performance cars are banned but premium performance "trucks" are fine, what are the premium buyers going to buy?
The companies are just making the thing people are buying. Pass stupid laws, get stupid cars.
A classic case of badly thought out rules/incentives getting perverse outcomes? But CAFE rules seem to be a US thing and we are seeing car size inflation in the UK, even if not to the same extent.
>The companies are just making the thing people are buying.
It is not clear to me to what extent the car companies are catering to the demand for big SUVs or creating the demand for big SUVs.
UK roads and parking spaces aren't getting any bigger. It is all going to end very badly.
If you see an old car next to a modern car, the size difference is extreme!
My daily driver is 220 inches long and 80 inches wide, weighs around 4000 lbs and over 50 years old. Most cars of that era were roughly the same size. It is definitely larger than most other cars I see today, although it also has much better visibility.
Most likely European vs American perspective? E.g. put an old and new Mini next to each other and it's almost unbelievable how tiny the original Mini actually is. While when you see a vintage US 'street cruiser' in a European city it's longer and wider than most modern cars.
Have a look at the original Fiat 500, it's comically small. You need to remember that the average adult Italian man in 1955 was about 8 cm shorter than today's average, and it's probably similar in other european countries.
Indeed - their original design language doesn't really scale. A bit like Ferrari and Porsche - their 4-door monstrosities scream mid-life crisis louder than a red convertible.
When interviewed about the new (BMW) Mini circa 2001, the designer of the original BMC Mini's hydrolastic suspension, John Moulton, said that calling it 'Mini' was ridiculous: "For heaven's sake, it's the size of an Austin Maxi!"
It would also likely result in your death if you hit anything solid. Cars are bulkier and visibility has been compromised by better crash protection. I'm reminded of that test they did years ago between a 1959 Impala and a 2009 Malibu. It did not go well at all for the Impala.
That was also a "specially engineered to show how far we've come" comparison. That generation of the impala was unconventional (in a bad way) for the time and considered particularly unsafe in a crash even by 1950s standards and they did a partial overlap with something much newer. They always do partial overlaps in these marketing videos (this is not a "test", they knew exactly what would happen when they spec'd it out) because that's where the biggest disparity is.
GM's X-frame cars were definitely weaker than average for the time, but going back to the original topic, I don't think a 2CV would stand a chance against one.
By the 70s, which is what I have, they were already much better, largely due to big shock-mounted bumpers and very long front ends that make for a gradual crumple zone:
That's an even more compelling video. Very small newer car vs a Volvo from the 90s, I would not have predicted that the Volvo would have done as poorly as it did. I totally expect cars from the 50s to basically disintegrate, but (showing my age) I had better opinions of 90s cars.
Yeah, that's why I said bulkier, I was trying to address the observation that visibility has gotten worse. I agree that it has, and a big reason is that A-pillars today are way wider than they used to be, because they are a critical part of the crash structure. They also typically have airbags, though in my experience those are compact and much narrower than the pillar itself.
I wonder if that difference is actually the safety standards rather than the efficiency ones though.
If you look at a modern vehicle, it's wide at the base and narrow at the top. The older ones were basically square, which is aerodynamically rubbish. But since the glass is at your eye level rather than below your waist, it meant you had a lot more glass.
I like to compare the 1960's Plymouth Suburban to the current Chevy Suburban both because of the name coincidence and because they cover roughly the same market segment (family hauler).
The Plymouth suburban is 9 inches shorter in length and well over 1000lbs lighter. I couldn't find specifications on height for the Plymouth, but the Chevy is obviously much taller.
They probably will be the one going through their parents stuff and hopefully by the time its an issue can move it to their kids' place. Options for trusted free hosting are limited sometimes. ;)
Sorry if it was not clear: The NAS is at my house but houses may burn down. THE discs are at my parents house for off-site backup. Like the sibling poster says, I would be the one going through the things anyway. But if unsure you can also ask a friend to keep them, one blu-ray can hold tons of photos and doesnt take much space.
Fair. Nothing is risk free. Move overseas, be more than 10 days away, other sibs have the burdens "we threw out those old unreadable backups Dad had stashed from his time at the computer center".. But your strategy isn't the worst by far. My 3-2-1 has 2 of the 3 in the same physical location. Not good.
Yes! For me, I like that foobar2000 (1) plays Ogg Vorbis files, and (2) will spin itself up as an FTP server on my LAN so I can easily upload music to it.
One difference between games and apps is the way of development and release. A game is build and then released to the community in one go, so everyone is assumed to be a learner.
Games are explicitly tested by new testers all the time to identify learning bottlenecks. App features are build for existing customers where the assumption is they already know how to use it, testing with new users seems to be rare.
Double down on this. I had a way worse back and bad pain in my early 20s than now later in life. I started with just walking an hour a day, later added gym. You don't need to become the next Arnold, just show up consistently.
One side note: There are core strength/posture issues but also issues that need medical attention. The tricky part is figuring out which.
Not about range, but speed. Wifi is surprisingly slow. I noticed downloading a model from the internet (Huggingface) to my Desktop (connected by LAN cable) is faster than copying it from said Desktop to the laptop in the same room via Wifi.
Yeah. I ran a hand crimped cat-5 Ethernet run to my office and speed tested it, and it turns out my wifi is faster, according to speed.cloudflare.com. Haven't had a chance to debug that yet, but there's a switch and some other wiring in the way.
Japan here and there is a word for it "nominication" for nomu (to drink) and communication. Instead of Christmas party we have a year end party (bonenkai). Otherwise reads the same. It's common and many people actually like it. There can be negatives, like the pressure to drink too much. But I never heard of anyone getting fired in all my social circle.
I was camping/bike packing in Kyushu when this happened! I think I was in Miyazaki on the 14th when we felt the first shock. It was the first earthquake I’d experienced. The multi-story hotel we stayed at felt like it was gyrating in a circular fashion.
Then my pal and I were camping by the Utagenka Bridge, east of Kumamoto for the main shock!
- Customer really wants X
- Customer doesnt actually need X at all
- Customer wants Y not X but couldnt express himself
- Customer B and C do NOT want X at all
- Customer is just messing with you for no reason
Also quite common for me is like someone says X is good (usually a PM) but common sense says it's crap, and when you actually ask the user they also say it's crap. If only LLMs could email a bunch of people for second opinions.
Or fuck them, fuck the managers, fuck the c-suites (intentionally decapitalized), go for a flat organizational structure like Valve where you have no one to report to (well maybe Gabe Newell or the team leader for that project occasionally), but the culture is that everyone can manage themselves organically rather than having hierarchies and forced, useless reportings
Valve ships almost nothing, and the engineering quality is mediocre. Their game design is good, but subsidized by a unique early mover monopoly market owner position.
There is almost nothing that can be generalized, and people who hold up their organization as an example to strive for are utterly clueless
Well, while I do agree it is an early mover (I believe Steam is not the first to do online game platform, but it should indeed be the first one to use a CDN for the solution), I'm sorry that you have Ubisoft Connect, EA Origin, Epic Games Store, itch.io, GOG, Humble Bundle.
So you do have a choice. That renders the statement of it being a monopoly impossible. It's simply because every other platforms sucks.
In other words, it's like Nvidia. You choose Nvidia because AMD and Intel sucks, not because you don't have a choice.
tl;dw: it is a voxel ray marching plus flood fill with Mie scattering. I'd like to point this out that is not only a really good game design, but it also requires ingenious engineering quality. I tried to improve upon it by adding octrees (or in other word, making it sparse voxel octree) but it doesn't seems to add much.
Oh and plus their new bomb shock wave system. I tried to reverse engineer it with vector field, but I couldn't come up with the ODE equations to recreate it. I believe it has to be some kind of field, because in a high energy explosion, it scatter through air into fluid-like structure and hence we can use some aerodynamics for simluation
Why deliver one solution? You're thinking small. If LLMs were fast enough, they could build A,B,C,...,Z in parallel. So that's what will end up happening. The operator will just have to make sure there's no combinatorial explosion of the possible requirements.
Right. Because If I want feature A and it is available in configuration among features A through Z I will always perfectly pick the right letter of the alphabet and I will not at all be irritated by having 26 options that I have no idea about what is the difference between them.
But I think there's anyway a point there. I watched a talk once and it was humorously said that the amount of time spent discussing whether solution A is better than B is more than implementing both A and B and seeing in practice. It's funny because it's true.
I am trying this. I noticed I only browse a subset of sites a lot. Also HN works wonders for finding links. But how do you get around all those bot measures/cloudflare nowadays? It seems only google IPs get a special pass.
Yep, discovering that you only need a subset of sites is the key. In my case, I still had my entire Firefox browsing history in its SQLite cache, so I tried to index every page I'd ever visited, and had a list of the domains I actually visit. It's the same insight Brave Search had - they used to be a metasearch engine, but they built their own index until they could serve 99% of queries directly, even though their index was vastly smaller than Google or Bing.
I struggle with indexing too. I don't do any crawling, just indexing from sitemap.xml files or URLs I add to the queue manually. Also I'm indexing from my own residential PC, not a hosted VPS. Something that helped me was Cloudflare's new crawler API. For all the sites where Cloudflare blocks you, just use their API instead:
Also for a quick index bootstrap, the Curlie database can be useful. It's the old DMOZ directory, the open Yahoo competitor, with 1.4 Million websites. A lot of the links are now very outdated, but it can be useful, and it's less than 500MB when converted to an SQLite database.
It's ridiculous: Put a modern SUV next to a WW2 M4 Sherman and you will be surprised, the SUV is the same size. Some a bigger.
All that weight needs power to get into motion. It is incredibly wasteful from a money and resource perspective.
But because the person next to you drives a big car and you don't want to get crushed, you also need a big car..
reply