Comments by "Zrips" (@Zripas) on "Two Bit da Vinci" channel.

@dionysus2006 wifi users?... Internet isn't wifi.... And most people have ZERO access to internet, quite few from those who does have uses crappy more expensive ones. So this Starlink has potential to have like 4billion+ customers, it's a big pie...
2
@dionysus2006 WiFi... Is wireless internet where in 99.9% instead being referred to home network and not connection between your device and World Wide Web... Damn you are ignorant here... I'm literally sitting in front of pc linked with physical cable to modem which is linked to internet over fiber optics, there is zero wifi here... So again, WiFi isn't internet... By this logic starlink uses WiFi... You look confused as hell here...
2
Doesn't really say much about car's performance, cost to refuel, distance it can drive with full tank, cost of maintenance and so on.
2
@gearheadfabworks If its HICE type engine then 300 miles is not possible with reasonably sized tank. Unless they used liquid hydrogen, but that's completely impractical thing for normal use cases. There are plenty of videos out there claiming miracles, some even claim to be able to use pure water directly to convert it into hydrogen... Because you know, laws of physics can be suspended in some old cars... Cars like that simply doesn't exist or those would be all over the place already. Biggest car companies barely manages to achieve 400 mile range with 3 huge tanks and twice as efficient fuel cell engine.
2
@gearheadfabworks Was it actually properly tested or "they drove 300 miles because they said they drove 300 miles"? And how big was that tank? I could hook up cistern and travel half the world (not really, won't be enough), doesn't really say much about actual efficiency of the car. Well, people lie, basic math doesn't. Tech like this Mike guy says to have simply doesn't exist and basic on basic calculations, can't exist. And just to note here, its NEVER getting actual independent verification when it comes to claims like that, it's always ends up at "Its true, because I said so" just to get those 15 minutes of fame.
2
@gearheadfabworks You can definitely get nice feel while driving any car, but without any actual deep dive it's just that, nice feeling for short time period. I will be really skeptical about people claiming to have revolutionary technology, yet their only evidence is "I said so" in a youtube video while at same time seamingly braking all known laws of physics. Atleast it wasn't "Powered by water" so car might actually run on actual hydrogen, but it's definitely not reaching those ranges with basic hydrogen tank in it. There is a reason why no one from car companies who plans to produce anything relating to combustion hydrogen engines mention any actual ranges or amount and sizes of tanks.
2
It says little to nothing for a CEO of company making around the country by using their own network... Like... What did you expected? For him to fail?...
2
Should we bring back steam engines too? Just for diversity...
1
@JoseRodriguez-rx4ck You do understand that this video is generic propaganda clickbait one? Title alone proves that. Hydrogen combustion engine is most stupid idea ever. We already have hydrogen fuel cell technology which is TWICE the efficiency, so combustion engine is straight away non starter here. There wont be hydrogen combustion engine in any practical way ever. We have cars like Mirai which has 3 huge hydrogen tanks to achieve 400 mile range with TWICE the efficiency technology, mirai itself is already bulky and interior quite cramped, so you can't really go any higher on hydrogen capacity than that, which means that combustion engine car would achieve at best 200mile range. Do you see potential issue here? Car companies might do some real tests and some fakes ones just to tick a box of "We are in a green sphere!!!" and that's that. They are not obligated to actually make it real and honestly making a random hydrogen combustion car concept produces better advertisement for the company than Superbowl one, and its cheaper. When it comes to batteries, its the way to go. We have multiple types of batteries with different capabilities and quite few are really promising tho only in lab settings, some are extremely good like carbon nanotube ones, but scaling production of those is a challenge on its own. At the end of the day, its still battery technology, we know that it works, we know that it works really good, its most efficient one, provides most convenience for the user, cheapest to operate. While hydrogen is just there, as a secondary option which doesn't work and doesnt' scale, so why even bother wasting time and money on it? Hydrogen combustion engine was invented in 1806, more than 200 years ago, it barely increased in efficiency for past who knows how many decades, because its already at its peak performance and it sucks, especially for regular passenger cars. No escaping that. Just like having steam engine in passenger car would make zero sense and would make no sense to invest billions in development when you could invest that money in something better.
1
Too many drawbacks relating to hydrogen which will hardly ever gets resolved. Even now BEV's win over hydrogen cars on multiple fronts and this gap will only increase with better battery technologies.
1
You will either need to back into parking spot or back out of it. Some dont like one or the other. But again, simple solution is to simply have cars with different opposing charging ports, so its either on back left (not right like you said, its on left side) or on front right side, so you approach charging stations both ways depending on your car, but it needs to be standardized anyways.
1
We call those videos: Scam.
1
@aguerra1381 Maybe Toyota simply doesn't care about some random youtube videos?... If you only have those random youtube videos and zero actual confirmations from Toyota itself, well, this is scam 101. There is no such thing as hydrogen on demand, never was and quite likely never will be... Do you even understand that if this was possible then we would not have coal electric power plants but we would have water electric power plants instead?... Water isn't hydrogen, you need twice as much energy to separate hydrogen from water then you will get back by recombining hydrogen with oxygen, this is basic physics 101... Stop being fooled by random youtube channels...
1
Starlink was reported to be cash flow positive in 2022, that only increased this year. So they are making money and they will be. Around 50% of humans don't have ANY access to internet. Market for one is HUGE and there is more than enough customers for it. I pay 16 euros for 300Mbps internet, so yes, Starlink isint for me, because its not made for me... Its made for the areas where reliable fast internet access isint an option and there are bunch of examples even in first world countries where you will be paying less and getting higher speeds by using Starlink than any other alternative.
1
@gearheadfabworks 3kg would be like 180 miles of range for hydrogen fuel cells, which are twice as efficient as hydrogen combustion engines, so realistically Mike's car should be doing under 100 miles in a good day.
1
@gearheadfabworks Just saying that its either multibillion technology made by someone who doesn't know that it is so good, or those numbers have been highly inflated for some reason. I would be more than happy for hydrogen to be a viable solution, but its not. And there are just too many people claiming to have magical technologies relating to hydrogen and none of them ever proves their claims to be actually true. We had hydrogen engines as of 1806, it's nothing new. Like Toyota tries to create some weird advertisement campaign with their V8 hydrogen combustion engine... It's like the worse option you could dream about, you will need sooooo much hydrogen to power that thing just to get half decent range... Not even talking about refueling prices. It's really easy to burn hydrogen, its really hard to do it in efficient and sustainable way.
1
Wait, are you complaining that Tesla put too many charging stations instead of giving those few square meters to you?
1
Not possible. Direct charging will always be more efficient, induction charging is a convenient way to charge your car without doing anything, but this will not beat direct charging, ever, just like phone wireless charging isint beating direct one.
1
@alexl579 Wireless charging for cars quite likely will be a thing which can work quite nicely at mall's where you just drive in and its charging and you get bill at the end of month if you opt into it. But then again... For wireless charging to work you need it to not be covered with metal, it needs to be fairly close between sender and receiver, so actual charging pad would be quite a bit extruded over the surface. It will be as popular as phone wireless charging, nice thing to have, but it's just secondary way to charge your phone. And yes, phones could potentially faze out usb-c slot due to limited space, this isn't an issue with cars and never will be.
1
Adding extra pins to connectors which add extra capables, which increase size of cables and all that jazz isn't lowering price of anything too. Second point is basically goes back to standardization, bugs can be solved if everyone uses same standard. third point is somewhat silly, having card reader on charger will mean that you will need bunch of extra stuff on it, including screen. Which creates bunch of failure points which can cause entire charger to not work. Simplicity is a key. And its allow simpler to just setup your account ONCE and then charge your car without doing any additional work, plug & play Tesla literally opening their charging stations to everyone and opening their chargers for everyone... What else do you want? And you failed to actually mention actual real issues with this, you just complained for the sake of complaining...
1
EV prices are going down, technology improving and all that jazz. Even without government tax exemptions it will be allot smarter choice to get EV instead of ICE car. Currently EV's have only 2 issues: initial price and charge times. Price is going down and battery technology improving drastically, which will minimize first issue too. So soon enough you will have EV which can charge as fast as ICE car can fillup gass. EV's will not die, ICE cars will. Its not a matter of opinion, its a fact.
1
It can't store liquid H2, liquid hydrogen needs -252C or lower temperatures, so no go on liquid hydrogen straight away.
1
Which one is simpler to be used? Tesla or type 2?
1
@manu.yt25 I asked... Which one is simpler... And not how many times you used one particular type... C'mon...
1
So basically generic Hybrid car?
1
It costs arm and legg to refuel, it can drive tiny distances. Yea, good luck with that.
1
We need one bigger improvement in battery technology, like solid state batteries, and its gonna be last nail in a ICE car coffin.
1
But this is the thing, EV adoption is still in early stages and shifting now to a better standard would be allot better than being stuck with some bulky outdated one for decades to come. You like Tesla or you hate it, but you can't argue against their better charger
1
This is why you have electronics all over the place to prevent it. There is no real need to have completely separate capable to transfer current.
1
Third pin could be easily added. Its not an issue with pin count, its issue with actual technology behind it, size of connector and how easy it is to use one.
1
@davidnelson7407 But this is the point, third pin can be added and connector could be slightly bigger, or remain same, to lazy to check if it would even need to increase in size to be able to accommodate another pin. But... It would still remain better option over existing alternatives. Its like having USB-C vs USB-A, one will win at the end of the day.
1
@davidnelson7407 It would... It might be renamed to something like NACS 2.0 or something, but entire idea, entire technology behind it would remain same. Just like we had USB iterations with more and more speed without changing its actual shape and even having backwards compatibility. Its not rockets science you know... Point is that NACS have better approach here than any other connector, you like it or not, its just is. At best what you can argue here is that at this moment in time NACS isn't supporting 3 faze charging, but it's a mute point...
1
Hydrogen cars only sound cool on paper, but those do not work in reality as a practical solution. And by the looks, it will never do. BEV's keep improving every single year with bunch of new battery technologies on horizon already. Some are even exponentially better ones, tho main issue is scaling up their production and driving down costs. While with hydrogen... Well... Those remained basically exactly the same from the moment it got invented.
1
it can be used where energy density is a priority, but regular cars will not become mainly hydrogen, to many drawbacks from this entire thing.
1
When? Because at the moment it's rapidly growing.
1