Comments by "seneca983" (@seneca983) on "Wendover Productions" channel.

  1. "the congestion pricing toll would not be per trip, but per day" Ideally, it should be per hour with different hours having different prices, but maybe that's too complicated to implement.
    2
  2. "which will help lower demand for organ transplants" Will it? By a meaningful amount? How much of the need is due to lack of healthcare rather than e.g. unavoidable genetic conditions?
    2
  3.  @elinoamrichter162  I don't see how the "problem number 1" is a problem at all. There are too many vehicles in Manhattan. How do you decide whether to reduce cars or delivery vehicles? Simple. Once the price increases, the ones that are less valuable will start to not drive into Manhattan first.
    2
  4. Landplanes.
    1
  5. They have some HVDC connections but their capacity is not that large.
    1
  6. @JedStrogan I don't see how it would cause congestion or grouping of vehicles. Rather it should reduce accidents due to there being less of passing other vehicles.
    1
  7.  @Finkelfunk  "First off no one goes the same speed on an Autobahn" I didn't claim they were doing it now. "Generally, it is recommended you stay around 120-130km/h, but that is not a definite" If the limit were 130 km/h (or maybe slightly higher) there should be less passing other vehicles and emissions per km travelled should be lower. "look at these experiments where a bunch of people are told to drive in a circle behind each other at 30km/h" Based on that description that doesn't sound anything like putting a speed limit on the autobahns that currently don't have have one (though I can't say for certain without knowing more details of those experiments).
    1
  8.  @dannypipewrench533  75 mph is fine in a good weather but what about if it's raining or snowing? It would seem a bit bad to require such high speed in bad weather from those who might not feel comfortable with it.
    1
  9. It's not the Taiwanese flag. That flag used to be the flag of Myanmar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Myanmar#/media/File:Flag_of_Myanmar_(1974%E2%80%932010).svg
    1
  10. I think both are used in different dialects of English.
    1
  11.  @x--. : Fair enough, but wouldn't it still make the census easier if a continuous count of most of the people existed all the time and then in the actual census you'd only need to count people who are for some reason missed in that count?
    1
  12.  @x--. : What I was thinking is that idea would still be to actually count all the people, just so that the majority could be counted by simply querying a computer system and only the remainder would have to be counted more expensively "by hand" like described in this video. I didn't mean to suggest that the harder to count people should be skipped. I'm not sure how viable that would actually be but it sounds like an obvious idea.
    1
  13. It's not a bad example but one can counter that we can sometimes see bans as not being very well working. A bit over a century ago some countries banned alcohol but that tended to cause various problems like organized crime and corruption.
    1
  14.  @kevinwpan  "the legal ownership of a gun can potentially save not only your life, but also the lives of people around you" I think that's probably a rarer case than misuse of guns. "It also dissuades a tyrannical govt from stripping you from your rights." I don't think that works in practise.
    1
  15.  @kevinwpan  "The Ulvade shooter [...] A gunman who shot up a church in Texas" This is two examples. Gun homicides in the US exceed 10k per year. Of course, I don't expect you to provide an exhaustive list of cases where a gun saved someone. However, it sounds unlikely that those could number in the thousands per year. "China, for example..." But China is not an example of it (i.e. guns being legal preventing government from taking away rights). I think even if legal gun ownership was easy and prevalent in China the same thing would still happen. The population can't realistically stand up to state power in any case. "This could never happen in America" I don't think it would happen in America even if guns were absent (assuming America was otherwise the same).
    1
  16.  @kevinwpan  "it is an example of what could happen in a nation where there is no gun ownership amongst its citizens" Well, my point was that I don't think gun ownership would prevent it so the example of China doesn't really have a bearing on that claim.
    1
  17.  @kevinwpan  There might not be a lot of direct evidence one way or another but I think I can point to at least one instance where having guns (though not strictly speaking owning them) did not allow the population to successfully stand up to an authoritarian government. I'm talking about the Gwangju Uprising in 1980 in South Korea. Koreans might not have owned guns but in this incident they raided local armories thus getting their hands on military-grade weapons (rather than mere hunting rifles etc.). They had assault rifles, machine guns, bazookas, and even a couple of armored cars. They also knew how to use them because Korea had (and has) a conscription. However, the government just sent paratroopers to besiege the city and later to seize it and the citizen militia wasn't able to stand up to them. If the population had used e.g. pistols or hunting rifles they could have hypothetically owned with laxer gun laws they would have had even less of a chance they had with assault rifles.
    1
  18. For some people, a private jet can be a sign of status.
    1
  19. Do you have a source for this? I tried googling the efficiency of hydroelectric plants and found numbers around 90%.
    1
  20.  @newrenewableenergycontrol5724  Do you have a source for that? I have a hard time believing it.
    1
  21.  @newrenewableenergycontrol5724  You should still give a source or else the claim remains unsubstantiated. I can't go measure those water velocities myself.
    1
  22. Was it stressful?
    1
  23.  @MJer09128  It's comparatively little compared to the alternative of using fossil fuels to power vehicles.
    1
  24. It's the old flag. It was used until 2010. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Myanmar#/media/File:Flag_of_Myanmar_(1974%E2%80%932010).svg
    1
  25. Both doors are safe.
    1
  26.  @jamesmnguyen  I don't think that could be practical even if you had to start from a clean slate anyway. I don't think there's a practical way to step up the voltage of DC other than to first convert it to AC so you can run it through a transformer and convert it back to DC. Basically every transformer would need to be replaced with a full converter station. I don't think that would make economic sense.
    1
  27. Air conditioners are heat pumps.
    1
  28. "which would cause a fall in RPM - if the load were large enough in turn causing a vane to open to allow more water through the turbine" Additional load can also cause additional turbines to be spun up.
    1
  29. Not anymore.
    1
  30.  @lugovoiarena  ""Accounting" total assets figure would not capture the multi-billion valuation of the Mile+ programme." I don't understand what you're saying here. Is this a response to something I said or something else? "we had a company which had zero debt, and the market equity value (based on London market quotations) was significantly less than the available cash balance" I don't think the same is true for the airlines. Their management is likely better than this example (and in any case it would still be a striking result).
    1
  31. "One issue with offshore wind is the extreme variability." I would think that offshore wind is less variable than onshore wind.
    1
  32. Why not?
    1
  33. When will we get a video on bikes?
    1
  34. Even in San Diego / Tijuana?
    1
  35. Almost eliminated. Jet fuel is something like 25 times more expensive per kWh of energy content compared to electricity.
    1
  36.  @bjs301  "And you believe that?" You can very easily google jet fuel price and energy density and compare that to the price of electricity. The result is in the ballpark of a factor of 25.
    1
  37.  @bjs301  Even if the price of electricity were to double it would still be an order of magnitude cheaper than jet fuel per joule.
    1
  38.  @bjs301  You're just speculating.
    1
  39. It still makes sense to connect large areas into a single grid because that brings stability to the system.
    1
  40. "work for peanuts" Which is still an improvement for many.
    1
  41.  @semicolontransistor  Are those camps in Xinjiang BS? Why do they show up in satellite images?
    1
  42. But this is "the news you missed". More people might have heard about that.
    1
  43. "If the feds tax them, they should have congressional representation else be “taxation without representation”" They can vote in federal elections just like (most) other US citizens.
    1
  44. @SwitchedDreams It's not a contradiction. Currently the drivers are paying in time by sitting in slow traffic. But the time they lose isn't gained by anyone else. It's just destroyed value. Paying a congestion charge, however, at least just moves value (money) from one pocket to another instead of just destroying/wasting it.
    1
  45.  @graysmith9218  With a high enough charge, the amount of cars will be less. The drivers are hardly ready to pay unlimited amount of money for the privilege of driving. Also, even if there was no effect, it would still be a good way to raise revenue. Governments typically raise revenue by taxes which can affect people's behaviour in unwanted ways and lead to so called "deadweight loss". Congestion charges either change people's behaviour in a desirable way or don't change it meaning no deadweight loss.
    1
  46. "Which means that it ultimately isn't profitable for airlines to adopt electric anyway?" But it would still be for individual airlines compared to the alternative of being bidded out by a competitor. Also, profit margins can increase temporarily if you're the first one to adopt a cost-cutting technology.
    1
  47. According to Wikipedia, one of the names for the New Guinea Highlands is "Central Cordillera".
    1
  48. Also, countries with "Democratic" in their official names tend to be less democratic.
    1
  49. If I understood correctly, it's not the fluctuation that caused them to not survive at all. The companies had problems with their long-term viability. The fluctuation only affected the timing of the ceasing of operations. If a company is going to go bankrupt at some point, it's not a surprise that that bankruptcy will happen in the season where the short term liquidity is tightest. TL;DR Planning for the fluctuation won't help if the problem is long term viability.
    1
  50.  @kuhluhOG : My interpretation was different but it's of course difficult to know for sure what he intended to say.
    1