On Thu, 04 Apr 2024 23:02:06 +1100, Colin Bignell
<cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:

> On 03/04/2024 23:24, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Apr 2024 07:00:33 +1100, Colin Bignell
>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/04/2024 18:58, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 03 Apr 2024 21:14:47 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
> ...
>>>>> By definition, any law passed by a country is legal.

>>>> Wrong, most obviously when the law is unconstitutional.

>>> Most of the laws passed by the Nazis were unconstitutional,

>> Bullshit.

>>> but they had managed to get the 1933 Enabling Act passed, which
>>> legally allowed them to ignore it.

>> More bullshit.

>>> The occupying powers needed to get another law passed in 1945 to
>>> repeal it.

>> More bullshit.

> I see I have triggered your standard response to anything you cannot
> counter by any other means.

More bullshit.

>> Irrelevant to the current situation with a US law.

> The US Constitution is an excellent example of the mutability of a
> written constitution. There have been 33 amendments, 27 of which have
> been ratified, two of which have failed and four of which are, as yet,
> unratified.

All completely irrelevant to your ignorant claim that if
the the country passes a law, that makes the law legal.

There is the tiny matter of the presidential veto and the
law's status if the supremes find it is unconstitutional.

> However, I can't see anything in it that prevents the prosecution of
> foreigners for crimes committed againstthe USA. Perhaps you could
> clarify what part you think applies?

Never said it did. That was a general comment on your
ignorant claim that if a country passes a law, that
makes it legal. That is complete and utter bullshit.

And we arent discussing the prosecution of foreigners
for crimes committed against the USA. We are discussing
the prosecution of foreigners for crimes committed
against the USA OUTSIDE THE USA.

It is completely dishonest to claim that Assange
did any ESPIONAGE at all. The most he did is
make available what Manning stole.

And there is also the tiny matter that no one
involved in the newspapers that published
what Assange gave them access to has ever
been charged or convicted for doing that.

>>>>>>> Enforcing that law outside their own territory is the problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and I would expect a law against hackingto cover actions
>>>>>>>>> anywhere in the world.
>>>>>>>> He never did any hacking. He RECIEVED information and
>>>>>>>> made it publicly available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He is charged, among other things, with conspiracy to commit
>>>>>>> computer intrusion, i.e. hacking.
>>>>
>>>>>> He never did anything like that. That's just the usual stupid ambit
>>>>>> claim that the yank legal system gets up to so they can plea
>>>>>> bargain.
>>>>
>>>>> That was the first charge brought against him and it alleges thathe
>>>>> helped Chelsea Manning crack a password hash, to allowManning to use
>>>>> a different user name to download the documents.
>>
>>>> That's not hacking.
>>
>>> It is,

>> Bullshit.

> Another of your techniques, splitting text, to take it out of context.

Nothing has been taken out of context and YOU
did that yourself when you waved around what
the Nazis did which you claim is unconstitutional.

>>> however, conspiracy to commit computer
>>> intrusion, which is what he is charged with.

>> That is not what Assange did...

> It is what he is accused of.

Just another example of an ambit claim that the USA system
always does, so they can plea bargain back from that.

> However, as that has yet to be proven in Court he is, of course,
> currently innocent,pending a possible proof of guilt.

Duh.

On 04/04/2024 17:56, Rod Speed wrote:
....
> All completely irrelevant to your ignorant claim that if
> the the country passes a law, that makes the law legal.
>
> There is the tiny matter of the presidential veto and the
> law's status if the supremes find it is unconstitutional.
>
....

If a law is vetoed by a president, or fails to get royal assent etc.
then that law has not been passed.

If a supreme court decides that the law is not lawful or is
unconstitutional or similar, it is still law until that decision is made.

--
Colin Bignell

On 4 Apr 2024 at 15:58:20 BST, "Colin Bignell" <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk>
wrote:

> On 04/04/2024 15:33, Tim Streater wrote:
>> On 4 Apr 2024 at 13:02:06 BST, "Colin Bignell" <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The US Constitution is an excellent example of the mutability of a
>>> written constitution There have been 33 amendments, 27 of which have
>>> been ratified ...
>>
>> I would take issue with this. It's an 18thC constitution, and very hard to
>> modify. IIRC, most of the amendments to which you refer, occurred very soon
>> after the iniital adoption of the document.
>
> 1-10 and 27 were all proposed at the same time, although the last took
> over 200 years to ratify. 12-15 were 19th century and the remainder 20th
> century. However, my point was that a constitution is not written in
> stone. It can be amended by the very people who make laws under it.
>
>> By contrast, our constitution (which is mostly written, no matter what anyone
>> says),
>
> Although not in a single document, headed 'Constitution of the United
> Kingdom'

Correct. The problem with a short, written constitution is that in order to be
as short as it is, it has to deal in generalities. If instead, as in our case,
you can accrete documents (acts) to it as needed, then it can be as long as is
needed. The Yanks have to get round that by having a Supreme Court whose
nominal job is to "interpret" what the "Founding Fathers" meant in a
particular case, as if that were ever going to be possible to know. Result is
that you have a small unelected body making decisions about major policy
issues such as abortion. Whether you allow abortion or not is a policy matter,
a political matter, not a constitutional one, and should be decided by the
legislature, not by a court. So we have judicial overreach, and we're beinning
to see that here, too.

>> has been able to be modified over the years, so that it has morphed
>> from our being ruled by a monarch, one with considerable powers), to a
>> constitutional monarchy. And without a civil war, too (yes I know we had one,
>> but that was earlier and led to important constitutional change and new
>> constitutional documents, such as the Bill of Rights, etc).
>
> Also demonstrating that a constitution is mutable, so saying that
> something is unconstitutional, can only be accurate at a specific point
> in time, if at all.
>
>> In the 18thC, if the King disliked the French - then we were at war with the
>> French. Not long ago, Dubbya didn't like Saddam - so the US was at war with
>> Iraq.
>
> I thought that was more to do with his friends wanting the oil concessions.

That's as may be. My point is that structurally, Dubbya could just decide to
do it, which is an 18thC approach.

--
"I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a friend.... if you have one." - GB Shaw to Churchill. "Cannot possibly attend first night, will attend second... if there is one." - Winston Churchill, in response.

Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
...
>> All completely irrelevant to your ignorant claim that if
>> the the country passes a law, that makes the law legal.
>> There is the tiny matter of the presidential veto and the
>> law's status if the supremes find it is unconstitutional.

> If a law is vetoed by a president, or fails to get royalassent etc.
> then that law has not been passed.

Pity about passed laws which are found
by the supremes to be unconstitutional.

> If a supreme court decides that the law is not lawful or is
> unconstitutional or similar, it is still law until that decision is made.

But isnt after it has been found to be unconstitutional.

On 4 Apr 2024 17:43:07 GMT
Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

> Result is that you
> have a small unelected body making decisions about major policy
> issues such as abortion. Whether you allow abortion or not is a
> policy matter, a political matter, not a constitutional one, and
> should be decided by the legislature, not by a court. So we have
> judicial overreach, and we're beinning to see that here, too.

If you are referring to the recent Supreme Court decision concerning
abortion, it was *not* to do with whether abortion should be permitted
or not. The question was whether such permission was a legitimate matter
which the US Federal Government should decide for the entire country, or
whether it was a matter for the individual States, and it ruled the
latter. If every State chose to operate the same rule as the Federal
Government had done, there would be no change.

As we have seen with the EU 'competences', (what an inappropriate word)
a federal government will extend its powers over its member states
indefinitely if permitted. In the USA, one of the jobs of the Supreme
Court is to resist that encroachment, which is exactly what it did
here.

>
> That's as may be. My point is that structurally, Dubbya could just
> decide to do it, which is an 18thC approach.
>

Indeed. The President of the USA has powers considerably greater than
most Heads of State. He/she/it cannot, however, overrule the
Constitution, and any attempt to do so should be prevented. Only
Congress can amend the Constitution, and any such amendment must be
ratified by the individual States.

--
Joe

Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross Berlin
>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist regime is
>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>
>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>  You are wrong.
>>>>
>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>  Yes
>>>>
>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>  But has had no trial.
>>>
>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>
>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>
> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of the
> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as required
> under Article 6.

I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that Assange is in prison without having been tried. It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how long he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about five years.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792

It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.

On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 06:11:40 +1100, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:

> On 4 Apr 2024 17:43:07 GMT
> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>
>
>> Result is that you
>> have a small unelected body making decisions about major policy
>> issues such as abortion. Whether you allow abortion or not is a
>> policy matter, a political matter, not a constitutional one, and
>> should be decided by the legislature, not by a court. So we have
>> judicial overreach, and we're beinning to see that here, too.
>
> If you are referring to the recent Supreme Court decision concerning
> abortion, it was *not* to do with whether abortion should be permitted
> or not. The question was whether such permission was a legitimate matter
> which the US Federal Government should decide for the entire country, or
> whether it was a matter for the individual States, and it ruled the
> latter. If every State chose to operate the same rule as the Federal
> Government had done, there would be no change.
>
> As we have seen with the EU 'competences', (what an inappropriate word)
> a federal government will extend its powers over its member states
> indefinitely if permitted. In the USA, one of the jobs of the Supreme
> Court is to resist that encroachment, which is exactly what it did
> here.
>
>>
>> That's as may be. My point is that structurally, Dubbya could just
>> decide to do it, which is an 18thC approach.
>>
>
> Indeed. The President of the USA has powers considerably greater than
> most Heads of State. He/she/it cannot, however, overrule the
> Constitution, and any attempt to do so should be prevented.

> Only Congress can amend the Constitution,

And the voters have to approve that amendment.

> and any such amendment must be
> ratified by the individual States.

On 4 Apr 2024 at 20:11:40 BST, "Joe" <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:

> If you are referring to the recent Supreme Court decision concerning
> abortion, it was *not* to do with whether abortion should be permitted
> or not.

Indeed, but that's not the way it was painted. People's perceptions in the US
seem to be that the SC decided the question of legality rather than, as you
say, the question of whose job it is to decide. That seems to be what's
splitting the country.

--
Bessie Braddock: "Winston, you are drunk!"
Churchill: "And you, madam, are ugly. But I shall be sober in the morning."

On 4 Apr 2024 at 20:30:47 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack> wrote:

> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross Berlin
>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist regime is
>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>> You are wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>> Yes
>>>>>
>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>> But has had no trial.
>>>>
>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>
>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>
>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of the
>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as required
>> under Article 6.
>
> I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that Assange is in
> prison without having been tried. It only remains to agree on the other matter
> I raised, of how long he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be
> about five years.
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>
> It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison without
> trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.

He imprisoned himself.

--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in someone else's pocket.

On 4/3/2024 8:08 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/04/2024 12:21, AnthonyL wrote:
>> On 31 Mar 2024 09:47:46 GMT, Tim+ <timdownieuk@yahoo.co.youkay> wrote:
>>
>>> Andy Bennett <aben@ben37j.com> wrote:
>>>> On 30/03/2024 22:21, Cursitor Doom wrote:
>>>>> This EV owner has appealed for his unfortunate experience to be a
>>>>> warning to others contemplating buying an electric car. Take heed, and
>>>>> learn from his experience if you are wise....
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77Yo4LpksWM
>>>>>
>>>> That guy is renowned for his stupid youtube videos - buys a top end
>>>> luxury EV and then makes money to pay for it by knocking his purchase.
>>>> Very entertaining for the tin foil hat brigade.
>>>> Personally having owned EVs for the last 7 years I would never go back
>>>> to a primitive oil burning appliance.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ditto. I’ve just looked at my fuel cost for my EV last year. 16,000 miles
>>> for under £300.
>>>
>>
>> Surely you need to add to that the percentage battery life/cost used?
>>
>> Any idea what that might be?
>>
>>
> If you Believe in EVs, the fact that the numbers simply don't add up is not a subject of great interest.
>
> Only companies that run car fleets tend to do total cost of ownership calculations.
> Or, if they are to lazy, simply lease the cars for a fixed annual cost.
>
> Try looking at a lease cost of any EV versus a similar IC to get an idea. Its also a good way to insulate yourself from ownership hassles, and always drive the latest models
>
>

At the moment, I don't think a belief system is involved.

The middle class don't want a ten year loan to pay for the car.

As always, people shop on price.

One of the questions here, is "whether a variant is actually in production".
I think on of the companies on the chart, is out of business.

https://ev.dteenergy.com/comparison-graph

Lots of cars are missing from the graph. Not all are represented.
Couldn't find the Taycan.

Paul

On 04/04/2024 20:30, Handsome Jack wrote:
> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross Berlin
>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist regime is
>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>  You are wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>  Yes
>>>>>
>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>  But has had no trial.
>>>>
>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>
>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>
>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of the
>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as required
>> under Article 6.
>
> I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that Assange is in prison without having been tried.

He is only there because of his previous actions of trying to flee justice.

> It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how long he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about five years.
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>
> It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.
>

He brought that on himself by absconding while on bail.

--
Colin Bignell

On 3/31/2024 4:56 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2024 at 12:15:36 BST, "Colin Bignell" <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 31/03/2024 08:13, Andy Bennett wrote:
>>> On 30/03/2024 22:21, Cursitor Doom wrote:
>>>> This EV owner has appealed for his unfortunate experience to be a
>>>> warning to others contemplating buying an electric car. Take heed, and
>>>> learn from his experience if you are wise....
>>>>
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77Yo4LpksWM
>>>>
>>> That guy is renowned for his stupid youtube videos - buys a top end
>>> luxury EV and then makes money to pay for it by knocking his purchase.
>>> Very entertaining for the tin foil hat brigade.
>>> Personally having owned EVs for the last 7 years I would never go back
>>> to a primitive oil burning appliance.
>>
>> My primitive oil burning appliance has a 600+ mile range and can
>> recharge in minutes. When an EV can match that, I might consider one,
>> but I will probably be dead long before that happens.
>
> Nothing beats a tank of diesel for energy density. And the recharge rate is
> around 6MW. Which is going to be 6kV at 1000 amps.
>

Or a module that plugs into a hole in the vehicle.

That's another way to "get 6MW", a module that charges in the storage
room on a line cord, and when full, is put on display at the service station.

There was one French offering, of a battery in a two-wheel cart,
that you tow behind the vehicle. This might be a practical option
for one of those low-end EVs that don't have a big battery inside.
Of course, they might not have towing capacity either.

https://europe.autonews.com/blogs/french-startup-uses-battery-trailers-cure-ev-range-angst

Maybe a rental cart with 450-600 kWh on wheels, would do the job.

Or chop the cab down a bit on this one, and make a personal
vehicle out of it :-) The batteries seem to fit into trays
that slide into that thing behind the cab.

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/who-says-heavy-duty-evs-wont-work-170-tonne-620-kwh-battery-electric-truck-hits-the-road-in-australia/

Paul

On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:08:09 +1100, Colin Bignell
<cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:

> On 04/04/2024 20:30, Handsome Jack wrote:
>> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater
>>>>>> <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross Berlin
>>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist
>>>>>>>> regime is
>>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>> You are wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>> But has had no trial.
>>>>>
>>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>>
>>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>>
>>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of the
>>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as required
>>> under Article 6.
>> I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that Assange
>> is in prison without having been tried.
>
> He is only there because of his previous actions of trying to flee
> justice.

That's not the reason for the 5 year delay in deciding whether to
extradite him.

>> It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how long he
>> has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about five years.
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>> It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison
>> without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.

> He brought that on himself by absconding while on bail.

On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:10:10 +1100, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

> On 3/31/2024 4:56 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
>> On 31 Mar 2024 at 12:15:36 BST, "Colin Bignell"
>> <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 31/03/2024 08:13, Andy Bennett wrote:
>>>> On 30/03/2024 22:21, Cursitor Doom wrote:
>>>>> This EV owner has appealed for his unfortunate experience to be a
>>>>> warning to others contemplating buying an electric car. Take heed,
>>>>> and
>>>>> learn from his experience if you are wise....
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77Yo4LpksWM
>>>>>
>>>> That guy is renowned for his stupid youtube videos - buys a top end
>>>> luxury EV and then makes money to pay for it by knocking his purchase.
>>>> Very entertaining for the tin foil hat brigade.
>>>> Personally having owned EVs for the last 7 years I would never go back
>>>> to a primitive oil burning appliance.
>>>
>>> My primitive oil burning appliance has a 600+ mile range and can
>>> recharge in minutes. When an EV can match that, I might consider one,
>>> but I will probably be dead long before that happens.
>>
>> Nothing beats a tank of diesel for energy density. And the recharge
>> rate is
>> around 6MW. Which is going to be 6kV at 1000 amps.
>>
>
> Or a module that plugs into a hole in the vehicle.
>
> That's another way to "get 6MW", a module that charges in the storage
> room on a line cord, and when full, is put on display at the service
> station.
>
> There was one French offering, of a battery in a two-wheel cart,
> that you tow behind the vehicle. This might be a practical option
> for one of those low-end EVs that don't have a big battery inside.
> Of course, they might not have towing capacity either.

And not parkable by most drivers, let alone reversing.

> https://europe.autonews.com/blogs/french-startup-uses-battery-trailers-cure-ev-range-angst

> Maybe a rental cart with 450-600 kWh on wheels, would do the job.

> Or chop the cab down a bit on this one, and make a personal
> vehicle out of it :-) The batteries seem to fit into trays
> that slide into that thing behind the cab.

> https://chargedevs.com/newswire/who-says-heavy-duty-evs-wont-work-170-tonne-620-kwh-battery-electric-truck-hits-the-road-in-australia/
>
> Paul

On 04/04/2024 23:33, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:08:09 +1100, Colin Bignell
> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 04/04/2024 20:30, Handsome Jack wrote:
>>> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater
>>>>>>> <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross Berlin
>>>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist
>>>>>>>>> regime is
>>>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>>>   You are wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>>>   Yes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>>>   But has had no trial.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>>>
>>>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of the
>>>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as required
>>>> under Article 6.
>>>  I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that
>>> Assange is in prison without having been tried.
>>
>> He is only there because of his previous actions of trying to flee
>> justice.
>
> That's not the reason for the 5 year delay in deciding whether to
> extradite him.

Much of that is due to negotiations with the USA to ensure that he gets
the same rights at trial as a US citizen and that does not face the
death penalty if he is extradited.

>
>>> It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how long he
>>> has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about five years.
>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>>>  It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison
>>> without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.
>
>> He brought that on himself by absconding while on bail.

--
Colin Bignell

On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 10:06:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
<cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:

> On 04/04/2024 23:33, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:08:09 +1100, Colin Bignell
>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/04/2024 20:30, Handsome Jack wrote:
>>>> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater
>>>>>>>> <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross
>>>>>>>>>> Berlin
>>>>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist
>>>>>>>>>> regime is
>>>>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>>>> You are wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>>>> But has had no trial.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>>>>
>>>>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of
>>>>> the
>>>>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as required
>>>>> under Article 6.
>>>> I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that
>>>> Assange is in prison without having been tried.
>>>
>>> He is only there because of his previous actions of trying to flee
>>> justice.

>> That's not the reason for the 5 year delay in deciding whether to
>> extradite him.
>
> Much of that is due to negotiations with the USA to ensure that he gets
> the same rights at trial as a US citizen and that does not face the
> death penalty if he is extradited.

So nothing to do with his previous actions of trying to flee justice.

>>>> It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how long he
>>>> has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about five years.
>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>>>> It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison
>>>> without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.
>>
>>> He brought that on himself by absconding while on bail.

On 04/04/2024 22:07, Paul wrote:
> On 4/3/2024 8:08 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 03/04/2024 12:21, AnthonyL wrote:
>>> On 31 Mar 2024 09:47:46 GMT, Tim+ <timdownieuk@yahoo.co.youkay> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andy Bennett <aben@ben37j.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 30/03/2024 22:21, Cursitor Doom wrote:
>>>>>> This EV owner has appealed for his unfortunate experience to be a
>>>>>> warning to others contemplating buying an electric car. Take heed, and
>>>>>> learn from his experience if you are wise....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77Yo4LpksWM
>>>>>>
>>>>> That guy is renowned for his stupid youtube videos - buys a top end
>>>>> luxury EV and then makes money to pay for it by knocking his purchase.
>>>>> Very entertaining for the tin foil hat brigade.
>>>>> Personally having owned EVs for the last 7 years I would never go back
>>>>> to a primitive oil burning appliance.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ditto. I’ve just looked at my fuel cost for my EV last year. 16,000 miles
>>>> for under £300.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Surely you need to add to that the percentage battery life/cost used?
>>>
>>> Any idea what that might be?
>>>
>>>
>> If you Believe in EVs, the fact that the numbers simply don't add up is not a subject of great interest.
>>
>> Only companies that run car fleets tend to do total cost of ownership calculations.
>> Or, if they are to lazy, simply lease the cars for a fixed annual cost.
>>
>> Try looking at a lease cost of any EV versus a similar IC to get an idea. Its also a good way to insulate yourself from ownership hassles, and always drive the latest models
>>
>>
>
> At the moment, I don't think a belief system is involved.
>
> The middle class don't want a ten year loan to pay for the car.
>
> As always, people shop on price.
>
> One of the questions here, is "whether a variant is actually in production".
> I think on of the companies on the chart, is out of business.
>
> https://ev.dteenergy.com/comparison-graph
>
> Lots of cars are missing from the graph. Not all are represented.
> Couldn't find the Taycan.
>
> Paul
Why did you completely ignore the post which you responded to?
Cognitive dissonance?

--
“it should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalin’s Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.”

Vaclav Klaus

On 05/04/2024 01:57, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 10:06:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 04/04/2024 23:33, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:08:09 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 04/04/2024 20:30, Handsome Jack wrote:
>>>>> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater
>>>>>>>>> <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross
>>>>>>>>>>> Berlin
>>>>>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist
>>>>>>>>>>> regime is
>>>>>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>>>>>   You are wrong.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>>>>>   Yes
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>>>>>   But has had no trial.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as required
>>>>>> under Article 6.
>>>>>  I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that
>>>>> Assange is in prison without having been tried.
>>>>
>>>> He is only there because of his previous actions of trying to flee
>>>> justice.
>
>>>  That's not the reason for the 5 year delay in deciding whether to
>>> extradite him.
>>
>> Much of that is due to negotiations with the USA to ensure that he
>> gets the same rights at trial as a US citizen and that does not face
>> the death penalty if he is extradited.
>
> So nothing to do with his previous actions of trying to flee  justice.

It is everything to do with it. Most people would be out on bail
instead. However, having broken his previous bail conditions, first he
was tried for that offence and sentenced to 50 weeks imprisonment. When
that ended, he was remanded in custody precisely because he had proven
that he was a flight risk. The length of time held on remand is a factor
of the complexity of the extradition process.

>
>>>>> It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how long
>>>>> he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about five years.
>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>>>>>  It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison
>>>>> without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.
>>>
>>>> He brought that on himself by absconding while on bail.

--
Colin Bignell

On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 18:53:25 +1100, Colin Bignell
<cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:

> On 05/04/2024 01:57, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 10:06:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/04/2024 23:33, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:08:09 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 04/04/2024 20:30, Handsome Jack wrote:
>>>>>> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater
>>>>>>>>>> <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross
>>>>>>>>>>>> Berlin
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist
>>>>>>>>>>>> regime is
>>>>>>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>>>>>> You are wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>>>>>> But has had no trial.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as
>>>>>>> required
>>>>>>> under Article 6.
>>>>>> I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that
>>>>>> Assange is in prison without having been tried.
>>>>>
>>>>> He is only there because of his previous actions of trying to flee
>>>>> justice.
>>
>>>> That's not the reason for the 5 year delay in deciding whether to
>>>> extradite him.
>>>
>>> Much of that is due to negotiations with the USA to ensure that he
>>> gets the same rights at trial as a US citizen and that does not face
>>> the death penalty if he is extradited.

>> So nothing to do with his previous actions of trying to flee justice.

> It is everything to do with it.

Bullshit.

> Most people would be out on bail instead. However, having broken his
> previous bail conditions, first he was tried for that offence and
> sentenced to 50 weeks imprisonment. When that ended, he was remanded in
> custody precisely because he had proven that he was a flight risk. The
> length of time held on remand is a factor of the complexity of the
> extradition process.

50 weeks is fuck all of the FIVE YEARS

>>>>>> It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how long
>>>>>> he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about five
>>>>>> years.
>>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>>>>>> It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison
>>>>>> without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.
>>>>
>>>>> He brought that on himself by absconding while on bail.

On 05/04/2024 09:29, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 18:53:25 +1100, Colin Bignell
> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 05/04/2024 01:57, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 10:06:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 04/04/2024 23:33, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:08:09 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 04/04/2024 20:30, Handsome Jack wrote:
>>>>>>> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater
>>>>>>>>>>> <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jack> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Berlin
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist
>>>>>>>>>>>>> regime is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>>>>>>>   You are wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>>>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>>>>>>>   Yes
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>>>>>>>   But has had no trial.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c)
>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as
>>>>>>>> required
>>>>>>>> under Article 6.
>>>>>>>  I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that
>>>>>>> Assange is in prison without having been tried.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He is only there because of his previous actions of trying to flee
>>>>>> justice.
>>>
>>>>>  That's not the reason for the 5 year delay in deciding whether to
>>>>> extradite him.
>>>>
>>>> Much of that is due to negotiations with the USA to ensure that he
>>>> gets the same rights at trial as a US citizen and that does not face
>>>> the death penalty if he is extradited.
>
>>>  So nothing to do with his previous actions of trying to flee  justice.
>
>> It is everything to do with it.
>
> Bullshit.
>
>> Most people would be out on bail instead. However, having broken his
>> previous bail conditions, first he was tried for that offence and
>> sentenced to 50 weeks imprisonment. When that ended, he was remanded
>> in custody precisely because he had proven that he was a flight risk.
>> The length of time held on remand is a factor of the complexity of the
>> extradition process.
>
> 50 weeks is fuck all of the FIVE YEARS

It is nearly 20% of it and he could have been out on bail, had he not
skipped bail before. It is all his own fault.

>
>>>>>>> It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how
>>>>>>> long he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about
>>>>>>> five years.
>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>>>>>>>  It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in
>>>>>>> prison without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.
>>>>>
>>>>>> He brought that on himself by absconding while on bail.

--
Colin Bignell

On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 19:37:28 +1100, Colin Bignell
<cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:

> On 05/04/2024 09:29, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 18:53:25 +1100, Colin Bignell
>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/04/2024 01:57, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 10:06:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 04/04/2024 23:33, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:08:09 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 04/04/2024 20:30, Handsome Jack wrote:
>>>>>>>> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>>>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater
>>>>>>>>>>>> <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jack> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Berlin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regime is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>>>>>>>> You are wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>>>>>>>> But has had no trial.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before
>>>>>>>>>>> magistrates.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c)
>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as
>>>>>>>>> required
>>>>>>>>> under Article 6.
>>>>>>>> I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that
>>>>>>>> Assange is in prison without having been tried.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He is only there because of his previous actions of trying to flee
>>>>>>> justice.
>>>>
>>>>>> That's not the reason for the 5 year delay in deciding whether to
>>>>>> extradite him.
>>>>>
>>>>> Much of that is due to negotiations with the USA to ensure that he
>>>>> gets the same rights at trial as a US citizen and that does not face
>>>>> the death penalty if he is extradited.
>>
>>>> So nothing to do with his previous actions of trying to flee
>>>> justice.
>>
>>> It is everything to do with it.
>> Bullshit.
>>
>>> Most people would be out on bail instead. However, having broken his
>>> previous bail conditions, first he was tried for that offence and
>>> sentenced to 50 weeks imprisonment. When that ended, he was remanded
>>> in custody precisely because he had proven that he was a flight risk.
>>> The length of time held on remand is a factor of the complexity of the
>>> extradition process.

>> 50 weeks is fuck all of the FIVE YEARS

> It is nearly 20% of it

Like I said, fuck all.

> and he could have been out on bail, had henot skipped bail before. It
> is all his own fault.

Bullshit a stupid 5 year delay is.

>>>>>>>> It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how
>>>>>>>> long he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about
>>>>>>>> five years.
>>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>>>>>>>> It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in
>>>>>>>> prison without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He brought that on himself by absconding while on bail.

On 4/5/2024 3:26 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Why did you completely ignore the post which you responded to?
> Cognitive dissonance?
>

Look at the graph, spot the patterns.

There aren't really a lot of differences between BEV and ICE/PHEV.
You can waste money on expensive ones if you want. Bloodbath.

The cars "last ten years", in the sense that maintenance is low
for at least the first ten years. BEV cars that were poorly designed
and sit dead-in-the-drive today, will be the subject of a class action,
the class action may decide what the penalty for failing to support
a warranty will be. (Battery pack is supposed to be replaced
under warranty, company "does not want to".) These were
cars without active cooling of the battery pack.

The battery pack presents a problem for either trade-in value
at the ten year mark, or the "street price" if you try to sell
it privately. Buyer and seller don't know what the battery
pack holds in the future, for the used-buyer.

On an ICE, between 10 years and 20 years tow-to-junkyard,
you can spend as much on repairs, as the original purchase
price of the car. Automatic transmissions always need to be
replaced (manuals, not so much). The PHEV should have more
repairs just because of the additional amount of components.

Could a BEV last past 20 years, for the basic platform ?
This seems unlikely when an engineer can run a finger
across a table, and select components that will be
mushy at the 20 year mark. Consumer automobiles will never
be constructed with the same care as public transit buses
(aluminium upper, steel lower). Virtually every transit
bus has rotting suspension. But on the uppers, you can have rust
free viewing out the window of a bus.

The BEV then, the owners collectively might have to pay for
one or two battery packs, before the car-lowers are rusted out.

If you use the above graph, and select a bargain vehicle
with a seemingly unusually long range, your next step
would be determining whether the range rating is "real" or not.
Your battery pack conservation strategy, your penalty for
cold weather come out of that excess of range. And that
determines whether a reasonably priced BEV could
ever function as a city car at least.

The after-market parts industry, is lacking for BEV. It's not mature.
With after-market, we could have competition on battery pack
replacement price. This could make quite a difference to the
current lumpy behavior financially at trade-in time. The buyer
still has to "time" the battery replacement, because replacement
packs will not be available in year 19.

Our future hinges on the construction of battery plants.
So that CATL does not corner the market.

The truck example I found, shows how you can have fast charging.
And range (vehicle has multiple tray-mounted packs). That does
not mean it's affordable to *buy* packs to fill the vehicle.
But it might mean you could *rent* packs for a long trip.
You could drive a vehicle like that around the city with
only one pack in the tray thing.

It's early times for BEV, and still room for improvement
and maturing. Would you ever expect first generation technology
to be a winner from the get-go ? I wouldn't. You'll remember
a time when an ICE car, wouldn't idle properly. On really early
cars, there was no synchromesh when you shifted. On a modern
ICE, when was the last time you worried about idle behavior ?
They fixed it. It took decades. But they fixed it across
the fleet. No more manual choke knobs. They fixed windshield
wipers. It took decades. But they fixed it. You can drive
a car 20 years, without replacing a wiper motor. It doesn't
even rust where the wiper motor fastens to the car. Can you
drive an ICE for 20 years without three alternators. NO!
Still not fixed.

The vulture capitalism around BEVs right now, is the
single biggest impediment. The automotive companies
are not on a mission to cure cancer. They just want
the money thanks. Competition is what will pistol whip
these idiots back into their seats. The Chinese are coming.
Then we'll see if they really have engineering talent or not
(to compete with the Chinese).

Will the Chinese arrive, before the cutoff date for all-BEV sales ?
That's a political decision. I bet the Chinese car companies
will be ready for that date. They'll have the product.
And not with a ten year loan to pay for it.

But as it currently stands, with a lot of gaming going on,
I don't expect anything "rational" to happen. What happens
today, is whatever the game fixers decide. Until they're
kicked to the curb. It's like when I pay too much today
for a loaf of bread. Do I lament "oh, bread is so fucking expensive,
who thought that a few grains of wheat would cost so much" ?
Will the price fixers *ever* be punished. There's no
Chinese bread on offer. The bread companies do not compete
with one another. They were *caught* price fixing (evidence trail).
And they still seem to be doing it. Because they know (demonstrated)
that the law is toothless.

The single biggest impediment to a transition, is weak-kneed
behavior on the drop-dead date for the transition. If
they selected 2035, they must stick to it. If they
don't stick to it, by induction, they can go to their
next conference of world leaders and say "we are not
participating, sorry". You only get one chance to
establish a drop-dead date. Because all the gamers
know, when push comes to shove, you will just push the
date out again.

The product COULD be better. Just a question of applying
the right degree of pain. The price of battery packs
is falling. Does the price of cars carefully track this trend ?
No ? My surprised face.

Paul

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 19:30:47 -0000 (UTC), Jack@handsome.com (Handsome
Jack) wrote:

>Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross Berlin
>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist regime is
>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>  You are wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>  Yes
>>>>>
>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>  But has had no trial.
>>>>
>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>
>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>
>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of the
>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as required
>> under Article 6.
>
>I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that Assange is in prison without having been tried. It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how long he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about five years.
>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>
>It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 19:30:47 -0000 (UTC), Jack@handsome.com (Handsome
Jack) wrote:

>Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome Jack> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross Berlin
>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist regime is
>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>  You are wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>  Yes
>>>>>
>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>  But has had no trial.
>>>>
>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before magistrates.
>>>
>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>
>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article 5(c) of the
>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as required
>> under Article 6.
>
>I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that Assange is in prison without having been tried. It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how long he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about five years.
>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>
>It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in prison without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.

Sadly it is *not* unprecedented. There was a Malaysian chap wanted in
Malaysia on fraud charges who spent 7 years detained without trial in
the roughest London prisons. When he was *eventually* deported back to
Malaysia, they felt so sorry for the poor cunt they released him
immediately due to the time served in England and no further action
was taken against him. This was about 30 years ago now, so it's
probable - or at least possible - someone else now holds this
unfortunate record. And perhaps Assange may beat it again. We like to
think we're so liberal and progressive in the UK and that kind of
thing only happens in places like Iran or North Korea, but the ugly
truth is that we are not much better than those places. It should be a
cause of deep national shame, but it all goes largely unreported and
no one would give a shit anyway - until it happens to them, of course.

On 05/04/2024 18:14, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 19:37:28 +1100, Colin Bignell
> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 05/04/2024 09:29, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 18:53:25 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/04/2024 01:57, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 10:06:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 04/04/2024 23:33, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:08:09 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 04/04/2024 20:30, Handsome Jack wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 23:07, Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2024 08:27:23 +1100, Colin Bignell
>>>>>>>>>>> <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 01/04/2024 19:40, blacky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Apr 2024 21:43:53 +1100, Tim Streater
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <tim@streater.me.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1 Apr 2024 at 09:38:19 BST, "Handsome Jack" <Handsome
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jack> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cross Berlin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wall.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "A reminder that the defining characteristic of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> socialist regime is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coercion, not equality."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How long has Julian Assange been imprisoned without trial?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No time at all, AFAIK.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>   You are wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He spent some years in a foreign embassy avoiding the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> judicial process,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>   Yes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and is currently in extradition proceedings.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>   But has had no trial.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> He is on remand, which means he has appeared before
>>>>>>>>>>>> magistrates.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But that is not a TRIAL.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It does, however, make it a lawful detention under Article
>>>>>>>>>> 5(c) of the
>>>>>>>>>> European Convention on Human Rights, pending a fair trial as
>>>>>>>>>> required
>>>>>>>>>> under Article 6.
>>>>>>>>>  I am at least glad that we have agreed on the two points that
>>>>>>>>> Assange is in prison without having been tried.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He is only there because of his previous actions of trying to
>>>>>>>> flee justice.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>  That's not the reason for the 5 year delay in deciding whether
>>>>>>> to extradite him.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Much of that is due to negotiations with the USA to ensure that he
>>>>>> gets the same rights at trial as a US citizen and that does not
>>>>>> face the death penalty if he is extradited.
>>>
>>>>>  So nothing to do with his previous actions of trying to flee
>>>>> justice.
>>>
>>>> It is everything to do with it.
>>>  Bullshit.
>>>
>>>> Most people would be out on bail instead. However, having broken his
>>>> previous bail conditions, first he was tried for that offence and
>>>> sentenced to 50 weeks imprisonment. When that ended, he was remanded
>>>> in custody precisely because he had proven that he was a flight
>>>> risk. The length of time held on remand is a factor of the
>>>> complexity of the extradition process.
>
>>>  50 weeks is fuck all of the FIVE YEARS
>
>> It is nearly 20% of it
>
> Like I said, fuck all.
>
>> and he could have been out on bail, had henot  skipped bail before. It
>> is all his own fault.
>
> Bullshit a stupid 5 year delay is.

In round figures, the first year was when he was imprisoned after having
been found guilty of breaking his bail conditions. The second year was
due to Covid restrictions shutting down much of the justice system. The
next year was spent in considering his extradition and the last two
years have been spent by his lawyers fighting the decision to extradite.
He probably can't beheld responsible for Covid, but being held on remand
for four years after his prison sentence is definitely down to his
previous behaviour.

>
>>>>>>>>> It only remains to agree on the other matter I raised, of how
>>>>>>>>> long he has been so imprisoned. The answer appears to be about
>>>>>>>>> five years.
>>>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473792
>>>>>>>>>  It is of course open to anyone to argue that five years in
>>>>>>>>> prison without trial is a fair and reasonable judicial process.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He brought that on himself by absconding while on bail.

--
Colin Bignell