• 0 Posts
  • 17 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle













  • I had a setup with a remote Asterisk server, and a Tasker app on my phone.

    If I pressed a button on the phone, it placed a call to the Asterisk server, which dumped the call into a recorded conference room.

    That was simple enough. The fun part happened next. The cops are always shown telling stopped subjects to stop recording and hang up phones. They’ll take the phone out of your hand, and attempt to delete recordings. I wanted to address that.

    I worked out a script on the Asterisk server where if the phone hung up, it would immediately dial back, and dump the call right back in the recorded conference room. Tasker on the phone would silently answer a call from that number.

    That was about as far as I got. I had planned on some way of the asterisk server dialing a contact list and adding them to the conference.


  • The hurdle to this kind of fast charging isn’t the tech in the car nor is it the tech in the charger. It’s powering the fucking things.

    Agreed.

    would require a nuclear reactor sitting out back to supply the required 1.2 Megawatts of power!

    Eh…

    At 5 minutes a car, each charger would be able to accommodate 12 cars per hour. The 12-charger station, fed by that nuclear reactor, would be able to handle 144 per hour.

    A typical gas station that size has an 8500 gallon tank, and refills 2-5 times per week. That amount of fuel will serve somewhere between 1000 to 3000 cars per week, or about 6 to 18 cars per hour.

    This doesn’t call for a nuclear reactor at the station. This calls for a sufficiently large battery pack at each station that can “trickle” charge continuously. I say “trickle” - if I did my math right, it would be about as much power as 15 hot tubs or 60 water heaters. About as much as a grocery store, with all its freezers, refrigerators, lights, HVAC, etc.

    Certainly a lot of power, but certainly not outside the realm of possibility. On-site solar installations could offset a significant percentage of that demand.


  • It was designed to intentionally slow down

    This myth is one of my pet peeves. The rate of typing was not the cause of jamming.

    The proximity of sequential typebars was the problem. Two adjacent typebars pressed simultaneously would jam at the very beginning of their stroke. To type adjacent keys, the first key would have to retract completely before the second key could start to be pressed. Otherwise, they struck eachother in flight.

    Put 3 or 4 bars between sequential letters, and their “flight” paths only intersect at the very end of their strokes: you can start pressing the second key before the first has even hit the paper, because it will bounce out of the way before the second one gets close. QWERTY enabled good typists to have three or four typebars “in flight” simultaneously, greatly increasing their rate of typing.

    QWERTY wasn’t designed to slow down typists. It enabled them to type much faster.

    Your conclusions are correct, of course: It’s not great for modern devices where keystrokes don’t interfere with eachother. It’s just the oft-repeated “intentionally slow down typists” claim that drives me nuts.