Curious...

S

server

Guest
https://tinyurl.com/y63rsseg

Cool book. There\'s a lot of stuff about ideas and such, and a lot of
good references.



--

I yam what I yam - Popeye
 
On 12/19/21 7:49 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/y63rsseg

Cool book. There\'s a lot of stuff about ideas and such, and a lot of
good references.
Click to expand...

Would you please share the real URL, not something obfuscated / hidden
behind (at least one) redirect?



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
 
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 20:30:53 -0700, Grant Taylor
<gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

On 12/19/21 7:49 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/y63rsseg

Cool book. There\'s a lot of stuff about ideas and such, and a lot of
good references.

Would you please share the real URL, not something obfuscated / hidden
behind (at least one) redirect?
Click to expand...

It\'s safe. Click it.



--

I yam what I yam - Popeye
 
On Monday, December 20, 2021 at 3:44:15 PM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 20:30:53 -0700, Grant Taylor
gta...@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

On 12/19/21 7:49 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/y63rsseg

Cool book. There\'s a lot of stuff about ideas and such, and a lot of
good references.

Would you please share the real URL, not something obfuscated / hidden
behind (at least one) redirect?

It\'s safe. Click it.
Click to expand...

But the actual link to the Amazon website would be just as safe, and rather more obviously safe.

Our right-wing lunatics keep on hiding their links to nonsense sources like Fox New, Zero hedge and Russia Today by cloaking them as tinyurl links.

I don\'t see any valid reason for doing it that way.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On 12/19/21 9:44 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> It\'s safe. Click it.

No offense intended, but I have no idea who you are. You are some
random person on the Internet.

What\'s more is that two different security systems I have installed
objected / blocked the link.

So that\'s four strikes against it; random source, my own inhibition, the
first security system which I temporarily disabled, and the second
security system that blocked it.

Five if you count your apparent reluctance to provide a real URL.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
 
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 23:30:17 -0700, Grant Taylor
<gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

On 12/19/21 9:44 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
It\'s safe. Click it.

No offense intended, but I have no idea who you are. You are some
random person on the Internet.
Click to expand...

I\'ve been posting here for decades.

What\'s more is that two different security systems I have installed
objected / blocked the link.

So that\'s four strikes against it; random source, my own inhibition, the
first security system which I temporarily disabled, and the second
security system that blocked it.

Five if you count your apparent reluctance to provide a real URL.
Click to expand...

We have an unintended but interesting example of fear overcoming
curiosity.



--

I yam what I yam - Popeye
 
On 12/20/21 8:14 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> I\'ve been posting here for decades.

The length of time you\'ve been posting doesn\'t change the fact that I
don\'t know you in person. Thus you qualify as some random person on the
Internet.

We have an unintended but interesting example of fear overcoming
curiosity.
Click to expand...

Nope.

There\'s no fear involved.

There\'s less interest in the actual item you linked to than there is in
the fact that you are apparently refusing to provide more useful
information.

This really seems to be a Rick Roll type scenario. No thank you.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
 
On Monday, December 20, 2021 at 11:14:40 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 23:30:17 -0700, Grant Taylor
gta...@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

On 12/19/21 9:44 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
It\'s safe. Click it.

No offense intended, but I have no idea who you are. You are some
random person on the Internet.
I\'ve been posting here for decades.

What\'s more is that two different security systems I have installed
objected / blocked the link.

So that\'s four strikes against it; random source, my own inhibition, the
first security system which I temporarily disabled, and the second
security system that blocked it.

Five if you count your apparent reluctance to provide a real URL.
We have an unintended but interesting example of fear overcoming
curiosity.
Click to expand...

Curiosity killed the cat.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
On Monday, December 20, 2021 at 2:30:09 AM UTC-4, Grant Taylor wrote:
On 12/19/21 9:44 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
It\'s safe. Click it.
No offense intended, but I have no idea who you are. You are some
random person on the Internet.

What\'s more is that two different security systems I have installed
objected / blocked the link.

So that\'s four strikes against it; random source, my own inhibition, the
first security system which I temporarily disabled, and the second
security system that blocked it.

Five if you count your apparent reluctance to provide a real URL.
Click to expand...

Maybe it\'s good to not click that link. Here is what I got,

\"uBlock Origin has prevented the following page from loading\"
Because of the following filter:
||viglink.com^
Found in: Peter Lowe’s Ad and tracking server list

Even going to legitimate sites can send your browser down a rabbit hole of redirects.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
On Monday, December 20, 2021 at 2:30:07 PM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 20 Dec 2021 18:19:40 +0100) it happened David Brown
david...@hesbynett.no> wrote in <spqdvc$48t$1...@dont-email.me>:
On 20/12/2021 16:14, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 23:30:17 -0700, Grant Taylor
gta...@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

On 12/19/21 9:44 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
It\'s safe. Click it.

No offense intended, but I have no idea who you are. You are some
random person on the Internet.

I\'ve been posting here for decades.


Do you think that means people can decode your tinyurl\'s ? I think most
regulars here will appreciate that you won\'t intentionally post a
\"dangerous\" link. But a lot might think you\'d post a pointless link.

I would not click your tinyurl links - or those of other regulars here.
Knowing that it is to an Amazon page, I\'d still not click it. I am not
interested in clicking your adverts, nor am I interested in adding to
Amazon\'s massive collection of my data. Why should I contribute to
Amazon\'s promotion of a book I know nothing about, or make them think it
is the kind of book I am interested in? Why would I want to go to the
site of a company that has almost single-handedly destroyed bookshops
around the world, using what can only be described as grossly unethical
methods to gain a near monopoly with the abuse that comes with that?

If this is a book you like, and think it is worth sharing with the
group, then tell us the title of the book. Tell us the author and
publisher. Post a /real/ link to the book\'s webpage (or author\'s page,
or publisher\'s page). Tell us what the book is about, and why you like
it or found it interesting. \"I like this book because it is cool\" might
be acceptable as a book review when you are seven, but it is not really
appropriate here.

(To be clear here - it is very likely that a book you find interesting
will be of interest to others here. I\'m not objecting to you sharing a
book recommendation, merely to the way you are doing it.)
Sure tinyurls are a potential security risk, so is every site these days after the recent hack:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/12/hackers-launch-over-840000-attacks-through-log4j-flaw/
beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep
Your PC is now encrypted click <here> to reboot
Click to expand...

Apache : 1

MS Windows : 5,385,349

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
On 12/20/21 11:14 AM, Rick C wrote:
> Maybe it\'s good to not click that link.

:)

Here is what I got,

\"uBlock Origin has prevented the following page from loading\"
Because of the following filter:
||viglink.com^
Found in: Peter Lowe’s Ad and tracking server list
Click to expand...

Yep.

When using a temporary exception, uMatrix gave a hard block on the
redirect.viglink.com redirector.

\"uMatrix has prevented the following page from loading\"

uMatrix does provide a cleaner URL:


https://www.amazon.com/Curious-Desire-Know-Future-Depends/dp/0465097626/ref=sr_1_1

Which can be further cleaned up to be:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0465097626/

Curious: The Desire to Know and Why Your Future Depends On It by Ian Leslie

Even going to legitimate sites can send your browser down a rabbit
hole of redirects.
Click to expand...

Indeed!

I\'ve seen less questionable behavior from porn and warez sites.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
 
On a sunny day (Mon, 20 Dec 2021 10:35:12 -0800 (PST)) it happened Rick C
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
<6b8f73c0-0a2b-438c-8531-07777703eb77n@googlegroups.com>:

it or found it interesting. \"I like this book because it is cool\" might
be acceptable as a book review when you are seven, but it is not really
appropriate here.

(To be clear here - it is very likely that a book you find interesting
will be of interest to others here. I\'m not objecting to you sharing a
book recommendation, merely to the way you are doing it.)
Sure tinyurls are a potential security risk, so is every site these days after the recent hack:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/12/hackers-launch-over-840000-attacks-through-log4j-flaw/
beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep
Your PC is now encrypted click <here> to reboot

Apache : 1

MS Windows : 5,385,349

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
Click to expand...

Angry owner blows up his Tesla (VIDEO):
https://www.rt.com/news/543738-tesla-explosion-musk-finland/

20,000 Euro for a new battery is a bit much I think.
 
On Monday, December 20, 2021 at 4:44:15 AM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 20:30:53 -0700, Grant Taylor
gta...@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

On 12/19/21 7:49 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/y63rsseg

Cool book. There\'s a lot of stuff about ideas and such, and a lot of
good references.

Would you please share the real URL, not something obfuscated / hidden
behind (at least one) redirect?
It\'s safe. Click it.
--

I yam what I yam - Popeye
Click to expand...

uBlock origin popped up & blocked the redirect
but it allows you to see the URL\'s contents
I take it this is the book?:
https://www.amazon.com/Curious-Desire-Know-Future-Depends/dp/0465097626
 
On Monday, 20 December 2021 at 12:42:21 UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
....
I\'ve seen less questionable behavior from porn and warez sites.
Probably so. This group is about electronic design.
....
Click to expand...

Regardless of how much we trust John Larkin that post may be have been done by somebody else impersonating you and exploiting any trust we have in you.

You are often calling out other people for being jerks, why are you being one on this issue?

You simply needed to post the actual link when you were asked, or preferably the title and author of the book.

kw
 
On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:30:44 -0800 (PST), \"ke...@kjwdesigns.com\"
<keith@kjwdesigns.com> wrote:

On Monday, 20 December 2021 at 12:42:21 UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
...

I\'ve seen less questionable behavior from porn and warez sites.
Probably so. This group is about electronic design.
...

Regardless of how much we trust John Larkin that post may be have been done by somebody else impersonating you and exploiting any trust we have in you.

You are often calling out other people for being jerks, why are you being one on this issue?

You simply needed to post the actual link when you were asked, or preferably the title and author of the book.

kw
Click to expand...

I didn\'t need to do anything, or please anybody.

Feel free to ignore me. I don\'t mind.


--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon
 
On 21/12/2021 02:14, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 23:30:17 -0700, Grant Taylor
gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

On 12/19/21 9:44 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
It\'s safe. Click it.

No offense intended, but I have no idea who you are. You are some
random person on the Internet.

I\'ve been posting here for decades.
Click to expand...

When a malware author starts impersonating you, I\'m sure they will say
that too.
 
On Tuesday, December 21, 2021 at 5:46:27 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
On 20/12/2021 19:52, Jan Panteltje wrote:


Angry owner blows up his Tesla (VIDEO):
https://www.rt.com/news/543738-tesla-explosion-musk-finland/

20,000 Euro for a new battery is a bit much I think.

Tesla battery : 100 kWh
CO₂ per kWh for Li-ion battery manufacturing (estimate) : 73 kg
CO₂ released when make battery : 7300 kg

CO₂ per litre petrol : 2.4 kg

Litres petrol equivalent per Tesla battery : 3041 litres

Fuel consumption Toyota Yaris Hybrid : 3.3 l per 100 km

Total distance for a Yaris to release the same CO₂ from petrol as it
costs to make a Tesla battery : 92,000 km or 57,000 miles.


Of course that doesn\'t take into account the CO₂ equivalent costs of
making the rest of the car, making the charging infrastructure,
generating the electricity, or any of the many other factors involved.
And there are many other environmental factors about mining Lithium.
Any attempt attempt at finding the \"cost to the environment\" for
something is always more complicated than you think, even when taking
into account that it is more complicated than you think. And of course
these are estimates, and of course there are other factors - other kinds
of pollution, comfort, convenience, personal preferences, etc., that
affect suitability of particular types of car.


But it /does/ show the ridiculously high environmental cost of lithium
batteries - and the price of the batteries should reflect that, just as
the price of petrol (in most countries) is artificially high to
discourage CO₂ emissions.

(Roll on sodium, aluminium or carbon based batteries - the sooner we
stop using lithium, the better.)
Click to expand...

I don\'t think it shows any such thing. You compared the impact of making the lithium battery (in the largest car, not the model that sells well). Even then your basis is an estimate you give no basis for. Then you ignore the impact of building the alternative, an ICE vehicle or any other battery.

So your analysis is completely bogus. Did you create this yourself or did you pull it off the web?

--

Rick C.

--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
On 21/12/2021 16:22, Rick C wrote:
On Tuesday, December 21, 2021 at 4:19:11 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
On 20/12/2021 19:32, Rick C wrote:
Hey! Check this out!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

You forgot the < > brackets :)

No brackets required.
Click to expand...

Did you miss the other threads about links? Or the smiley?

Brackets around URLs are not required - but they are a good habit, and
they /are/ required if the URL is long enough to be mangled by line
breaks (and you want people to bother to click on the link).
 
On 21/12/2021 16:20, Rick C wrote:
On Tuesday, December 21, 2021 at 5:46:27 AM UTC-4, David Brown
wrote:
On 20/12/2021 19:52, Jan Panteltje wrote:


Angry owner blows up his Tesla (VIDEO):
https://www.rt.com/news/543738-tesla-explosion-musk-finland/

20,000 Euro for a new battery is a bit much I think.

Tesla battery : 100 kWh CO₂ per kWh for Li-ion battery
manufacturing (estimate) : 73 kg CO₂ released when make battery :
7300 kg

CO₂ per litre petrol : 2.4 kg

Litres petrol equivalent per Tesla battery : 3041 litres

Fuel consumption Toyota Yaris Hybrid : 3.3 l per 100 km

Total distance for a Yaris to release the same CO₂ from petrol as
it costs to make a Tesla battery : 92,000 km or 57,000 miles.


Of course that doesn\'t take into account the CO₂ equivalent costs
of making the rest of the car, making the charging infrastructure,
generating the electricity, or any of the many other factors
involved. And there are many other environmental factors about
mining Lithium. Any attempt attempt at finding the \"cost to the
environment\" for something is always more complicated than you
think, even when taking into account that it is more complicated
than you think. And of course these are estimates, and of course
there are other factors - other kinds of pollution, comfort,
convenience, personal preferences, etc., that affect suitability of
particular types of car.


But it /does/ show the ridiculously high environmental cost of
lithium batteries - and the price of the batteries should reflect
that, just as the price of petrol (in most countries) is
artificially high to discourage CO₂ emissions.

(Roll on sodium, aluminium or carbon based batteries - the sooner
we stop using lithium, the better.)

I don\'t think it shows any such thing. You compared the impact of
making the lithium battery (in the largest car, not the model that
sells well). Even then your basis is an estimate you give no basis
for. Then you ignore the impact of building the alternative, an ICE
vehicle or any other battery.

So your analysis is completely bogus. Did you create this yourself
or did you pull it off the web?
Click to expand...

If you read my post, you\'d have answers to most of these points. My
intention - very clearly stated, I thought - was to point out that
making large lithium-ion batteries has a CO₂ equivalent cost that
matches a very significant driving distance in a modern efficient petrol
car. My analysis is no more and no less than that - since the
discussion was about the battery. Yes, I ignored the cost of making the
petrol car - I also ignored the cost of making the rest of the large
electric car. (It might have been worth getting figures for these too,
as it would probably surprise a lot of people.)

And yes, fairly obviously I got the key figures from the web - that\'s
how you get data in the modern world. You can do some googling of your
own if you like. The 73 kg CO₂ per kWh for the lithium ion battery is,
as I said, an estimate - and you\'ll easily find others ranging from
about 50 kg to about 200 kg, depending on many factors such as the
source of the lithium salts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top