octave

This does not seem like much of an endorsement of Putin

Further to my last post. From Solar Analytics (a pro-solar group) Draft rule change allows network companies to charge for solar energy exported to the grid This may result in a reduction of your solar feed-in tariff (estimated around 2c/kWh), but could also increase feed-in tariffs at peak times (evening), making home battery storage more attractive These charges won’t apply until 2024 at the earliest The charges are intended to incentivise network companies to enable more rooftop solar to be connected and to export more solar to the grid We support these changes but only if they include the right for all customers to put solar on their roof, and to export a reasonable amount of solar back to the grid (networks currently can reject solar applications or solar export) Rooftop solar is still the cheapest form of electricity is a fantastic investment for most households

I wouldn't get overly concerned about this. As with many things, the detail is important. "According to the publicly available fact sheet, and a statement issued by Ausgrid on Thursday, “under the new pricing arrangements a typical solar customer could see an increase of $6.60 per year – or 13 cents a week. Some solar customers can expect a rebate.” Or, as the fact-sheet puts it: “If the retailer fully passed through our two-way tariff, a typical 5 kW solar customer will see an annual bill increase of $6.60 per year. This includes $13.30 a year of charges offset by $6.70 of export rebate.” It could be argued that if the grid took power it did not need at a cost and actually paid for it, it could be argued that those without solar would be footing the bill. I don't particularly have a problem with lower prices or even a small fee to offload power that the grid does not need. Of course, this is due to our antiquated grid and this will and is changing as we modernize the grid. My electricity bills are pretty small. Most of my savings come from utilizing the power I produce at the time I produce it. As lower-cost batteries become more common (sodium etc.) the preferable option will be to store our excess power for our own use. The media loves to present sensationalist headlines such as "sun tax coming" however when examined closely it is usually not what it may seem. For an in-depth analysis Export charges are coming! What does it mean and should you still get solar?

Yep and not very well done. Note the man with 2 left legs and the back half of the bike missing.

Barack and Michelle Obama endorse Kamala Harris as Democratic candidate

Not shocked but pleased 😀

Are you absolutely sure about that? As far as I am aware the only supermarket that charges extra for card transactions is Aldi which charges 0.5% for card purchases. If you are getting cash out then there is a 3% charge by the credit card company not the supermarket. I can say for sure that I do not pay any extra at Woolworths when I use my phone/credit card. I know this because every time I shop I get an e receipt. https://www.finder.com.au/credit-cards/how-to-avoid-bank-fees-at-the-supermarket

I use my phone for just about everything. If my phone were to be out of power I would just use my card. All of my cards are on my phone and in my wallet.

Orange lives matter!

These days there are more choices re crossbars on bikes. My bike has a mid crossbar which is somewhat lower than a traditional "mens bike". I have seen plenty of men riding what would have traditionally been called a women's bike.

Ammo vending machines offer "24/7" access to bullets at some U.S. grocery stores

Spacey people already rent out their cars through schemes like Uber car share https://www.ubercarshare.com/au/en/rent-my-car These schemes do work and they do have protections in place. There are also schemes GoGet. I have used both of these schemes. Sure bikes and scooters do turn up in odd places although I believe this has moderated as we get used to these schemes. I do take notice of these things as a keen cyclist. Both in Geelong where I live and in Melbourne for the most part, it works.

Another method of charging.

I agree, it will be some time before the price drops or that all cars are autonomous. I don't think autonomous driving is only for the elderly or disabled. We moved from inner Melbourne to Geelong 6 years ago to retire although we had to commute into inner Melbourne for the first 18 months. The drive in and out at rush hour was harrowing. We used to work west of the city and when we would leave the western freeway we could see the 4 lanes of traffic crawling into the city and we wondered how people could do this day after day, year after year. A couple of years ago I had a chat with a Geelong man who had recently bought a Tesla. He worked in Melbourne. His commute had become much less stressful because although he still had to monitor the car it would take care of staying in its lane or lane changing where necessary and not running into the back of the car in front. To be clear I am not saying that we are ready for mass adoption yet but unless you take the view that we have reached the end of technological advances or that we should just stop technological progress then it will happen if enough people want to adopt it. If it was available now and I could afford it and it proved to be safe I would be up for it. About 4 times a year we have to travel to Adelaide. There are a couple of ways we get to the airport. Mostly we take the train into Melbourne (1 hour) and then Skybus (30 minutes and $19 each) We usually work out depending on how long we will be away for and work out the price of public transport Vs driving and paying for long-term parking. If in the future my car could drop me off and then return home and pick me up when I get back, I would be all for it. I don't believe this will happen at a reasonable price in my lifetime but I think it would be a bold call to say never.

It is a problem for many people. My parents bought a house in a retirement village about 5 km from town. This proved to be a bad move with respect to transport once they ceased driving. There was no public transport and taxis often took ages to turn up and often didn't turn up all. This did feed into decisions around going into aged care. There is a sliding scale of driver automation from nothing through cruise control to adaptive cruise control to lane keeping to automatic emergency braking to full self-driving. All of these steps have the potential to make driving safer and to perhaps allow people to keep their licences just a little longer as they age. I think we are some time away from mass fully autonomous driving.

I guess we could ask that question about many areas of human endeavour. The question presupposes that the car companies developing these technologies would spend their time and effort in some other area if they ceased working on autonomous vehicles. Tesla and Volvo and all the others are working on a technology that they believe they will have a market for. There are humans working on advancements in many many areas, we can do more than one thing at once. I think the benefits of autonomous cars when sufficiently developed are great. As I mentioned before there is an obvious benefit to the elderly and disabled. Autonomous vehicles will only succeed once they are safer than human drivers, indeed I suspect that they would have to be many times safer. So there is a benefit, less carnage on the road In the more distant future autonomous vehicles that can communicate with each other greatly reducing traffic jams and even the need for traffic lights. OME if you for some medical reason you had your licence revoked would you be able to survive with public transport or friends and relatives driving you everywhere? We can disagree about priorities however I don't think we can write off autonomous vehicles as not improving people's lives. A disabled person being able to use their own private transport rather than perhaps unreliable taxis and Uber and public transport. As I said earlier autonomous vehicles will only be accepted if they are many times safer than human drivers. If they are not safer then they will fail if they are safer then the benefit to humans can be measured in lives saved and injuries avoided.

Yep, having poked around the net I might suggest that planning may be more advanced than you think. There are robot taxis operating in the US so I imagine the issues are being addressed as they occur just like in aviation. Planning is underway in this country. https://www.ntc.gov.au/transport-reform/ntc-projects/av-safety-reform I imagine that the adoption of autonomous cars will be similar to the adoption of EVs. You wont be forced to buy one. At some point in time when autonomous cars have a lower accident rate they will be cheaper to insure. At first, I imagine that many of us won't be able to afford one until the price comes down. It is not just a case of outright bad drivers. My father drove for well over 60 years and did not have one accident, not even a fender bender. When he was 80 I don't believe he still had the ability to drive safely. Sometime later the doctor pulled his licence but because of where he lived I think the doc felt sorry for him and gave it back. All of us will most likely get to this stage. Yes, that is true. I would agree that landing a plane with sensors and logic is probably easier but it is only a matter of time before this technology is safer than a human. We have not reached the limits of technology. Autonomous cars are already operating in some places so it is not impossible.

OME I think that using the current law in relation to self-driving cars of course presents some problems. The thing is that self-driving cars are not yet legal in this country The legal framework is being developed. NTC Policy Paper - regulatory framework for automated vehicles in Australia I have not read this document yet but I will. There have been many times in history when new technologies have presented us with legal and other conundrums. I guess in the earliest days of aviation it would have been hard to imagine the legal framework we now have. I certainly don't think we are ready to put autonomous cars on the road in a widespread way however it will come. Of course, old laws (in all sorts of areas) have to change as technology changes. With the advent of the internet new laws were created and this continues. My understanding is that it is expected that car companies will assume liability. I believe Volvo amongst other companies have stated that it will take responsibility. I am all for autonomous driving although as with any technology, there will be pros and cons. If autonomous vehicles can be built that can operate as safe or safer than a human driver then we surely are smart enough to draw up the rules and regulations to allow it to happen. It is too important not to do. Many people will say that they"like driving" and they don't see the point however many people can't drive perhaps due to disability or age. Many older people should not be driving but have little choice.

According to this video, if true, this guy was a registered Republican and gun rights nut.

Yes, early days, my fear is that this will be to the orange man's advantage.

https://6abc.com/post/donald-trump-escorted-off-stage-secret-service-during/15056992/

I would disagree. There are 2 challenges in Norway, cold and hills. I don't really think for the most part range is a problem here. People even in the country are diving EVs Regional Queenslanders say electric vehicles worth it for fuel savings but challenges remain The point I am trying to make with Norway is that yes it is smaller in size and has a smaller population it is able to provide a comprehensive charging network without the grid melting and without cars bursting into flames all over the place. Obviously, we face different challenges here however I fear we are not good at preparing for the future. Why should we keep importing oil when we have the natural resources to produce electricity? We also have nearly all of the minerals to produce our own batteries. If nothing else simple self-sufficiency is a good reason not to rely on oil from the Middle East. Yes I think the figure as of 2020 was 98% https://www.iea.org/reports/norway-2022/executive-summaryF Anyway bottom line.... don't buy one if you don't want to

Nope

If batteries are so dangerous you would expect this to show up in the statistics of a country like Norway. It is a fact that EV battery fires are much rarer than petrol car fires. It is true that a Lithium Ion battery fire is more tricky to put out it is not a common problem. Many new EVs now use LFP and some are now using Sodium- ion both exceedingly fire-safe.

I am pretty sure that is sales of new fossil fuel cars, not existing cars. Norway has 100% renewable power from hydro and wind, It has built great charging infrastructure so it is a bit of a no brainer really