Puppy via USB was one of my first. My real first was SUSE distributed via CD-ROM in a GNU/Linux magazine. I used to run Puppy from not a usb drive but a hard drive in an external closure plugged into the USB port. I was a poor college kid and that's all I had.
The big AI companies already have all of the cheap hardware to run on. It's more like if Denny's bought up all of the eggs when prices were normal, held onto them, then kept buying to keep egg prices up.
>The big AI companies already have all of the cheap hardware to run on.
Have they? Aren't they doing a massive datacenter build-out right now? Moreover the massive profits for Micron and Nvidia must be coming from somewhere, and I doubt it's price-sensitive consumers.
The range is fine. Did you overlook that it has an LFP battery? LFP batteries do not suffer increased degradation at either end of their charge range. You can charge to 100% daily and run them down to 0% (although if you leave them at 0% parasitic drain could drain them below the built in below-0% buffer which can be bad).
The other common EV batteries suffer increased degradation at the high and low ends and it is generally recommended to stay in the 20-80% range except on road trips. Then charging to 100% just before you start and driving down to 10% if you are going to recharge soon after back to above 20% is OK.
Let's first consider non-road trips. With level 2 home charging and a 200 mile range LFP EV like the Slate, I could actually get 200 miles between charges. I'd be cautious though and try not to let it go below 10%.
That's 180 miles of usable range.
On a non-LFP where I only get to use 60% between charges (80-20%) I'd need a 300 mile range EV. That's more than the 262 mile range of the 2027 Chevy Bolt which is doing fine and costs more than Slate. That's also better than or close to the most popular non-Tesla EVs in recent sales, namely the Chevy Equinox, Ford Mustang Mach-E, and Hyundai Ioniq 5.
For road trips it is a little different because even though LFP won't be harmed going to 100% it, like non-LFP, slows down when you are trying to charge with high power DC chargers, so it is almost always faster to just charge to 80 and get back on the road than charge to 100 to get maximum distance before the next stop. The LFP still punches above its weight on road trips, but not by as large an amount as it does for around town use.
On a road trip, past the initial segment when running on home charge, if we assume the Slate will be going from 80 to 5% and the non-LFP is doing 80-10%, the Slate would be equivalent to a non-LFP with around 215 miles of range.
For people who won't want to use it for long road trips (road trips long enough that you would have to charge before reaching your destination) it should be fine.
BTW, for long road trips charging speed is generally quite a bit more important than range as long as you have enough range to cross the gaps between charging stations. The Ioniq 5 is widely considered to be one of the best long road trip EVs because of its fast charging even though its range is smaller than many competitors. It is 800 V so can accept very high power without excessive heating, and its charging curve stays high for longer than most others. (But you need a trip that has high power chargers, which most Tesla Supercharger stations lack).
> On a non-LFP where I only get to use 60% between charges (80-20%) I'd need a 300 mile range EV. That's more than the 262 mile range of the 2027 Chevy Bolt which is doing fine and costs more than Slate. That's also better than or close to the most popular non-Tesla EVs in recent sales, namely the Chevy Equinox, Ford Mustang Mach-E, and Hyundai Ioniq 5.
Thank you! I’m a casual user of Wikipedia but after this thread I went through the history of edits on the article and...oh my.
I have a greater appreciation for folks like you and the other editors who seem to be constantly removing this type of stuf. Some truly horrendous slurs there.
The Wikipedia edit that this thread is discussing was as follows. I think it's worth printing it here to make the point that the commenter above you is completely right about the prevalence of anti-semitism in online discourse today:
> Michael Oser Rabin (Hebrew: מִיכָאֵל עוזר רַבִּין; September 1, 1931 – April 14, 2026) was a Jew (a.k.a. kike) rat computer scientist who was co-recipient, with Dana Scott, of the 1976 ACM Turing Award for their military research on efficiently culling goycattle in "Greater Israel".
Nothing about this edit is legitimate criticism of Israeli policy. It is pure anti-semitism. Rabin spent most of his career in the United States and worked in abstract mathematics.
I generally agree that legitimate criticism of Israel is often unfairly criticized as anti-semitic. I would like you to also acknowledge that many people on the left summarily dismiss blatant and rank anti-semitism, as you did here.
I commend you for the attempt, even if it’s clear that it’s falling on deaf ears to who you’re replying to.
The rest of us Jews appreciate that you didn’t let it slide.
It’s hard not to wonder why they even bothered clicking into this thread other than “oh the name sounds Jewish, I can push my narrative” especially with respect to their comment history.
That’s quite a take to assume willful blindness to widespread suffering.
What is pretty clear though: your obsession with constantly minimizing the lived experience of a minority with “no ackshually they deserve it because they really are this way” warrants a look in the mirror.
Who the heck sets it as their antisemitism campaign to edit “vile X” and “X (aka rat)” on Jewish biographies. Normalizing slurs? I thought the goal of antisemites was to spread propaganda about how Jews are bad. Writing “X (aka BAD)” seems like the weakest possible attempt at that.
I don’t know what people elsewhere in this thread are going on about Israel for.
I think racists, sexists, homophobes, transphobes, etc. who do that sort of thing aren’t doing it to convince anyone - it’s partially for shock value, partially to help normalize their attitudes and make other bigots feel more comfortable expressing their views, and partially to make the members of the group that they hate upset and feel unsafe.
One can oppose Israel and the virulent Jewish hate that has exploded in the last few years. It’s not as if massive violence against Jews has never happened.
There’s no real way around BVLOS regs right now. The real problem is BVLOS + need to recharge. If you only solve one, you get limited value. Distributed charging without BVLOS is kind of useless. If a human still has to be there to maintain visual line of sight, it doesn't make much of a difference if the drone can recharge itself in the field. BVLOS without distributed charging also hits a value ceiling. You’re still constrained by battery swaps.
So the solution here is a deep understanding of FAA BVLOS waiver processes + a drone/pad network that is actually scalable.
That said, this is another benefit of working with utilities. When you’re inspecting power line corridors, you’re often operating in what the FAA calls “shielded area.” In practice, that just means you’re flying close to infrastructure that other aircraft tend to avoid anyway. That makes deconfliction much simpler, which in turn makes BVLOS waivers more attainable under Part 107.
The bigger shift is Part 108, which is expected to be finalized relatively soon, and should lower the barrier to BVLOS at scale.
Follow up question, why aerial drones? Couldn't crawler drones work and avoid FAA regulations? Though obviously would be limited in speed and where lines have been damaged, though perhaps they could be managed to go around the damage via remote control.
Not all lines are on nice level land. Transmission lines go through some rugged terrain. I've seen some distribution lines that are in pretty rugged areas as well. They also mentioned the top down view was advantageous compared to a ground pounder's view, so a crawler would loose that view as well.
Delivery drones are leaving line of sight and yet they are operating. The Walmart near me started delivery late last year, and they are buzzing my area many times a day. I'd hope with enough testing these guys can work with the FAA to get certified to remove this limit.
Crawler drones are not a bad idea! They're just a bit slow and limiting. Also doesn't drive our long term plan (can't leave power lines)
It's also mechanically complex and there's many line & pole types that make it challenging to build for.
When we let go of distribution line charging, we considered this idea. Off some rough calcs we thought there would be lines that we'd get 'stuck' on so that was hard to overcome...
I quit software, though I never made it very far in it it was my profession for 16 years. I'm a corrections officer now. My new career is drastically less stressful.
When I read about the culture at Google, and similarly YouTube, I am constantly reminded of how (and probably why) their products have stagnated/gotten worse over time despite having top engineers. I believe Google has the talent to build anything in their wildest dreams. So why do their products suck? YouTube sucks from the user POV, Google classroom sucks, the user experience in their office suite leaves a tremendous amount to be desired for even a basic user like me, Android never improves, their voice recognition and assistant are trash. There's so much room for competition, I wonder where it is? What are they spending their money and talent on (besides AI)? I feel like it must primarily be on reliability, speed, and delivering more ads.
