TIL there is a musician with the moniker of Trash80… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trash80

Sorry to disappoint, but I picked my username because of the TRS-80.

https://techland.time.com/2012/08/03/trs-80/

Please Don’t Call It Trash-80: A 35th Anniversary Salute to Radio Shack’s TRS-80

There’s no way around it unless the engine moves with the suspension

Yes, there is.

Take a conventional front engine, rear wheel drive drivetrain. Rotate the drive train 90 degrees about the rear axle, as if the automobile has its nose in the air, with the driveshaft oriented vertically.

You can steer the vehicle by rotating the entire axle around the axis of the driveshaft, though it isn’t perfect or space efficient, it would require no universal or CV joints. It would behave sort of like a vehicle with an articulated frame.

The axle could be fixed vertically with uni wheels at the ends of the halfshafts allowing the wheels to travel vertically independent from the axle.

Do you understand so far?

I’m not criticizing.

Now imagine there is a handle sticking out of the crankshaft that needs to rotate around the shaft with the hand crank as it gets turned. That is the motor.

What are you referring to as the crankshaft?

Driving the streering wheels exerts a force on the driving surface. That causes the steering wheels to have a tendency to toe in.

Looking from the top, you could run the motor clockwise on the right side and anti-clockwise on the left to cancel some of that, but the motor has very little leverage compared to the wheels.

What for? The axis of the driveshaft would always be parallel to the axis of the wheel and perpendicular to the axis of the motor.

Look at this hand drill:

The hand crank is the electric motor. If you rotate the drill about the hand crank axis, you don’t change any angles between the drivetrain components and don’t need CV or universal joints

How can you steer?

This is a Z-drive:

You can rotate the propeller about the vertical axis of the driveshaft running from B to C.

Now, imagine the propeller is your wheel.

Please elaborate.

This mechanism does not allow angular deflection between the motor and hub, as it’s shown, without a CV joint. Lateral displacement, yes, but not angular - as in it can’t steer.

The axis of the motor doesn’t need to be parallel to the axis of the wheel.

If the axis of the motor is vertical, you could use a ring and pinion gear to transfer the torque to the driveshaft running out to the wheel, and have the steering wheels pivot around the axis of the motor.

The axis of the motor doesn’t need to be parallel to the axis of the wheel.

If the axis of the motor is vertical, you could use a ring and pinion gear to transfer the torque to the driveshaft running out to the wheel, and have the steering wheels pivot around the axis of the motor.

Only the highest quality coverage from VICE.

David Allen is the editor of the BBC Computer Literacy Project. He was using a Tandy TRS Model 100 portable computer with a Sendata Series 700 acoustic computer.

Heh.

circus

What evidence is required?

It’s just people playing politics

Well, it is politics. I understand what you mean though.

The quotes there are pretty funny, Alter doing some warmongering and Klein calling the kettle black.

It’s incredible how differently people viewed the war in Iraq then.

The new regulation would prevent 58 million tons of methane emissions by 2038

An average of ~3,866,666 tons per year.

How does this compare to the total amount of methane currently being released?

While there’s been scientific debate on the cause of the ongoing surge in methane levels, carbon dioxide pollution has always been the primary driver of human-caused climate change. An estimated 36 billion tons of carbon dioxide were emitted into the atmosphere last year by human activity; roughly 640 million tons of methane were emitted during the same period.

https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/increase-in-atmospheric-methane-set-another-record-during-2021

Why was it not a concern until now?

How times have changed. Many people said that Pelosi was too liberal back then.

Given the glee that’s emanating from the conservative commentariat over Nancy Pelosi’s near-certain ascension to House minority leader, you’d think the Democrats were about to turn into acid-dropping Merry Pranksters riding around in the Furthur bus, just because their new leader represents Haight-Ashbury. Cal Thomas wrote that Pelosi’s election “will have given Republicans two major victories in less than 10 days.” An identical message—Nancy Pelosi, good for the Republicans—came from the National Review’s John J. Miller and the Wall Street Journal editorial page. In the Weekly Standard, David Brooks called Pelosi “the most caricaturable politician since Newt Gingrich,” and the term “Pelosi Democrats” has already replaced “Daschle Democrats” as the GOP’s Democratic slur of choice.

And it’s not just Republicans beating up on Pelosi. Although no Democrat has yet to concur with the assertion of a Washington Times columnist that she is a Manchurian Candidate for Socialist International, there’s not a lot of joy in Moderateville. The New Republic’s Peter Beinart worries that Pelosi will lead the Democrats into a “40-60 nation.” Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter says Pelosi’s leadership “makes the Democratic caucus look more dovish than even the French.” In Slate, Joe Klein dubbed Pelosi “the very sort of political anachronism the party should studiously avoid.”

https://web.archive.org/web/20150327142811/http://beta.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/assessment/2002/11/nancy_pelosi.html

There are some slow learners in the legislature.

suicides are half the problem

The majority of firearm-related deaths are suicides.