• 3 Posts
  • 43 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle
  • If the motor mount is hackable with reasonable effort, and the motor controller’s interfaces are open, then in principle… yes.

    Yet in reality, companies build extremely complicated cars where premature failure of multiple components can successfully sabotage the whole. :(

    I’ve once needed to repair a Mitsubishi EV motor controller. It took 2 days to dismantle. Schematics were far beyond my skill of reading electronics, and I build model planes as an everyday hobby, so I’ve seen electronics. Replacement of the high voltage comparator was impossible as nobody was selling it separately. The repair shop wanted to replace the entire motor controller (5000 €). Some guy from Sweden had figured out a fix: a 50 cent resistor. But installing it and putting things back was not fun at all. It wasn’t designed to be repaired.

    Needless to say, replacing a headlight bulb on the same car requires removing the front plastic cover, starting from the wheel wells, undoing six bolts, taking out the front lantern, and then you can replace the bulb. I curse them. :P

    But it drives. Hopefully long enough so I can get my own car built from scratch.





  • Well, there’s a DIY electric car which needs both axles to be re-designed. They didn’t pass driving tests in the field. Design is complete but welding cannot start before weather turns nicer.

    Also, my house needs a battery shed on wheels - wheels to keep away construction bureaucrats, shed because it’s uncomfortable to sleep under the same roof with a very considerable amount of lithium cells. I’d like to keep some distance from them so that if something goes wrong, it’s would be just the cells. :) The bottom platform with wheels is complete, walls and roof and everything such - nope, not a trace, not even a good drawing. :)



  • perestroika@slrpnk.nettoSolarpunk@slrpnk.netProjection at Cal Berkeley
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I agree that Hamas is a response to conditions. I do recall that a long while ago, Israel did fund Hamas, in hope of counterbalancing Fatah.

    But, just like many other movements, Hamas seems to perpetuate the conditions which created it. Their rule is Gaza hasn’t only brought a war with Israel, but also a suppression of democracy and repression of people from competing Palestinian movements (mainly Fatah).

    Israeli forces do often act like they’re a recruitment branch of Hamas, stirring up anger. I don’t doubt it the slightest that Hamas has received many recruits because the IDF again killed someone who randomly got in their way (or again made the calculation that for a junior Hamas official, 15 civilian lives are OK to take).

    But, despite knowing the above-mentioned - I don’t see a way out of the long-term conflict without both sides changing.

    As long as Israel behaves like it wants to destroy (or drive away) all Palestinians - there will be Palestinian politicians who call for the destruction of Israel and support terrorist tactics, with considerable support among the population, even if their rule is not democratic (the rule of Hamas in Gaza only started democratically). Meanwhile, fear of revenge and terror, fear of appearing weak and another Arab-Israeli war - this ensures that politicians in Israel who promise to deal harshly with Palestinians get votes and frequently attain power.

    Since the conflict is now quite old (at least 70 years) and the fighting parties have lost a viable framework for solving it, they need either massive luck or considerable foreign assistance / advise / pressure to find a stable solution.

    Re: one state solution: did you mean two state solution? Because I think - but I could be wrong - that Israel must somehow come to the point of understanding that a Palestinian state with a reasonably defined territory (not a patchwork-of-enclaves territory) can be their neighbour, but the current situation is unstable.


  • perestroika@slrpnk.nettoSolarpunk@slrpnk.netProjection at Cal Berkeley
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Though the projection is about solarpunk, a side note about the situation in Gaza…

    …recently, the UN demining agency (I’ve forgotten their acronym) published an estimate of war damage in Gaza. They assessed that there was “more rubble in Gaza than Ukraine”. Since that seemed unbelievable, I consulted various sources, among them a review by the Lund University Center for Middle-Eastern Studies named Monitoring Israel’s Destruction of Gaza from Space.

    What I found out:

    • the UN measures war damage in kilograms of rubble per square meter
    • Gaza is tiny and densely populated
    • thus despite a hundred times less (approximation) munitions getting fired than in Ukraine, Gaza has massive damage to infrastructure
    • the rubble density is currently 300 kg / m2
    • the most damaged settlement is Gaza City (75% of buildings damaged or destroyed)
    • the least damaged settlement is Rafah (31% of buildings)
    • on average, 57% of houses are damaged or destroyed
    • war was waged in an un-evacuated city: this typically produces high civilian losses
    • the current estimate is 30 000, so Israel’s response has caused 30 x more losses than the initial attack by Hamas
    • night time satellite photos suggest that electricity is missing in most of the strip
    • crop monitoring photos indicate that agriculture has mostly stopped (and irrigation is likely broken)

    For me, journalistic photos from Gaza most remind of what happened in Grozny, the capital of Chechnia during the First Chechen War (disproportionate amounts of Russian firepower reduced it to a trash heap).

    Since both sides are responsible for war crimes (Hamas at first and now Israel) and the military response has overshot any goal associated with justice, I support any action that makes the conflict stop. Hamas started this war, but Israel has gone far beyond sanity while responding. Later on, I think the leaders of both sides ought be brought before the International Criminal Court and answer charges of war crimes (which could take decades).

    How to ensure another war won’t happen… much harder without structural change in both societies. Considering the way Israel currently functions and how the Palestinian Authority functioned in Gaza (Hamas militants took it over, things seem better on the West Bank), there’s a high chance that someone from either side could ignite a new conflict in future.



  • The article is fine, and I second the recommendation to read it, but from the article to the slogan you present, things do not follow a logical path. Yes, war is both an incredibly expensive activity (diverting money that could be used) and a resource-intensive activity (the money goes into actual materials that almost surely destroy something or get destroyed) and an incredibly stupid activity (and it can snowball)…

    …but the problem is that successful unilateral disarmament during a war tends to result in a situation called “defeat”. If the defeat is not an attack being defeated, but defense being defeated, that is called a “conquest”. Now, letting a conquest succeed has a historical tendency of the conqueror having more experience at conquest, and more resources to conquer with… which has, several times in history, lead to another conquest or a whole series of conquests. A regional war in Ukraine resulting in Ukraine being taken over by Russia has a high probability of producing:

    1. a bigger regional war later, in which Russia, using its own resources and those of Ukraine, proceeds to another country, gets into a direct conflict with NATO and then indeed there is a risk of a global war

    2. an encouraging effect after which China, noting that international cooperation against the agressor was ultimately insufficient, and deeming itself better prepared than Russia, decides that it can take Taiwan with military force

    However, a war ending with inability to show victory tends to produce a revolution in the invading country. For example, World War I produced a revolution in Russia and subsequently a revolution in Germany, with several smaller revolutions in between, empires collapsing and a brief bloom of democracy in Europe, before the Great Depression and the rise of fascism ate all the fruits. The Falklands War produced a revolution in Argentina. The Russo-Japanese war produced the 1905 near-revolution in Russia.

    It is better for Ukraine to not get conquered. It is better for Russia to be unable to conquer Ukraine. That result is also better for everyone around them. It’s even better globally because it sets a precedent of large-scale cooperation defeating an agressive superpower, discouraging agressive superpowers from undertaking similar wars until memory starts fading again.

    Unfortunately, until we see indications that Russian society is getting ready to stop the war (this could involve starting negotiations on terms palatable to Ukraine, a change of leadership, a withdrawal, a revolution, etc)… the path to achieving that outcome remains wearing out the agressor: producing enough weapons and delivering them to Ukraine.

    Ultimately, both sides in a war wear each other down. The soldiers most eager to fight are killed soonest. The people most unwilling to get mobilized or recruited, and soldiers most unwilling to fight - they remain alive. If they are pressed forever, some day they will make the calculation: there are less troops blocking the way home than in the trenches of the opposing side. After that realization, they eventually tend to mutiny. Invading troops tend to do that a bit easier than defending troops, because they sense less purpose in their activity. In the long run, if nothing else happens, that will happen. There is just (probably, regrettably) no particularly quick shortcut to getting there.


  • Strongly disagree.

    Disarmament is feasible (and very smart, because war is a terrible waste) if the other side is understanding and willing. In the 1980-ties, the USSR under Gorbachev was willing to mutually reduce nuclear weapons. Gorbachev also ended the attempt to make Afghanistan into a Soviet satellite state and loosened the rules in the Soviet bloc enough for most of Eastern Europe to leave the bloc. Russia under Putin has not shown any willingness to widthdraw or disarm. In fact, it is making desperate attempts to restart all the Soviet military industries, double down and overwhelm Ukraine.

    (for those unaware: the war is Gaza is statistically a gang shootout compared to the war in Ukraine, the intensity differs so much that I’m not even addressing it - it’s practically over, Hamas attacked and lost)

    NATO countries are of course increasing military production - ironically at such a leisurely pace that EU has been able to supply some 0.3 million of the 1 million shells promised to Ukraine, while North Korea has been able to hand 2 million shells to Russia. I don’t see a case for claiming that NATO is arming too fast. I see a case for claiming that NATO is arming ridiculously slow, at a pace which might allow Russia to force an unfavourable deal on Ukraine.

    I would predict: if Putin wins in Ukraine, or gets considerable parts of Ukraine as war spoils, in a decade’s time, the next war will be Russia vs. Eastern Europe. Most of the warring parties will be NATO members then. And indeed, those countries (Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria) - they have all rapidly raised their military production and purchases.

    About escalation: so far, all the long-range offensive weapons supplied by NATO have come with the strict condition that they may not be fired at Russian territory, and Ukraine has respected that - firing them only at occupied Ukrainian territory. Not a single ATACMS or Storm Shadow has landed in a Russian nuclear bunker, not to mention a seat of government. Ukraine is using Western missiles to shoot at its own (occupied) territory, hardly an escalation.

    (a side note: Ukrainian-made drones do land in Russia regularly, mostly destroying aircraft that would bomb Ukraine - and World War 3 has not broken out because of that)

    To finish up, I’d like to point out that the US is not even scheduled to give airplanes to Ukraine. The F-16 planes are being given by Denmark and the Netherlands.

    P.S.

    What’s the rationale for calling Biden “Genocide Joe”? If that’s an appropriate nickname, what do we call heads of state who start an actual war? :o

    P.P.S.

    Problems have differing levels of urgency. Wars tend to have the highest. Several EU countries have indeed been forced to scale back their climate plans because they don’t have enough money to make the green transition and help Ukraine defend against Russia at the same time. The rise in interest rates has also contributed - it’s harder to finance projects with a loan. However, they have also made incredibly fast pace at curbing their use of Russian oil and gas. Ironically, by proving what a fine seller Russia is (“run for the hills” grade of fine), Putin has contributed greatly to the transition off fossil fuels. Once he’s deposed, tried and jailed, he should get a medal for that. :)



  • Interesting idea. :) What kind of a mattress do they use for leveling roads?

    The current plow has many problems:

    • it is imprecise, unless the pulling chain is short
    • regardless of the chain length, it “wags its tail” when encountering resistance (this can be a plus if the car isn’t powereful, though)
    • it is shallow and weighs less than conventional road plows (can be a plus because I need to carry it without pulling muscles or joints)
    • it has the simplest geometry, a triangle

    Generally, a snow plow does level the road also - but only a little because the ground is frozen and everything is slippery, and the mechanism (with a spring if fancy) is holding it just above ground. When I look at my plow after working, the steel of the downward edge shines - it has worked hard against the ground.




  • It’s a poor solution, but better than nothing. The plowing profiles are welded with the L pointing forward and down (to ensure rising on top of snow), the holding profiles can be welded any way. They are at 1/3 of length and 2/3 of length respectively.

    P.S.

    A note: if one has automatic transmission, or continuously variable transmission, one should not pull things.

    With manual gearboxes, fixed reductors and direct drive, it’s OK. The car is indeed blurred for privacy. :)






  • Wow, I would expect Udmurtia to have a continental winter at this time, but nope. :)

    We have had a very mild autumn also, this is the first time ground starts to freeze a little, on the top. Tiny field roads that were unpassable by car will be passable (if one is careful) after a day or two. For me, this means: I can bring firewood with a car, not with a garden cart. :D

    Snow has not bothered to appear so far. Some time every autumn, wind starts blowing from the north and the Gulf of Finland subsequently tries to evaporate and fall into Estonia. Hasn’t happened yet. Surprises us every time. :P