Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more pornel's commentslogin

EVs can be charged while parked, and there are nicer destinations to park at.

Shopping malls usually are in a better position to add charging, because they already have high-power grid connections, more parking space, and more things to do while the car is charging.


You can create a charging station with solar panels and a battery.

Gas stations don't fill up themselves out of thin air — a massive infrastructure has been built (and wars fought for) for extraction, refining, and supplying the fuel.


I’m pretty sure you would need a huge, extremely expensive battery and it could only charge one or two cars a day, and take multiple days to recharge.


You're saying as if it was hypothetical. This is already being done.

UK's gridserve has solar farms producing 62GWh/year, that's over 2000 full recharges per day.

Their "Electric Forecourts" have 6MWh of battery storage (~100 cars).

https://www.gridserve.com/electric-vehicle-charging/electric...

Battery storage is common in charging stations, because it allows peak charging speeds higher than the grid connection, plus use of renewable and off-peak electricity.


Fast DC chargers add 7 to 13 miles of range per minute (charging is fastest when the battery is almost empty).

Competent charging networks also accept contactless cards or even automatically bill your account when you plug in.


In the UK supermarkets have fast chargers. You park, plug in, go shopping, return to a fully charged car (similarly at pubs, cafes, gyms, etc.)

BEVs don't have to be plugged in like cellphones. In city driving one full charge can suffice for a whole week of commuting and errands.


How is the price for fast chargers in the UK?

In the Netherlands it's crazy, something like 3-4x the price of home charging and close to 10x what you would "loose" on using your own solar power instead of selling it to the grid.

For most hybrids using a fast charger is over 2x more expensive per mile than using petrol.


• BEVs need to be plugged in about once a week (for a median US commute). If you forget one day, you can plug in another day, or day after.

• DC fast chargers can add 100 miles of range in 10 minutes.


Batteries are common even in permanent charger installations, because they enable use of cheaper off-peak electricity, and peak charging rates higher than the grid connection.


Chargers don't have to have higher amps for larger batteries. It's nice to have, but not necessary, and nothing gets worse with a bigger capacity.

Rate of charging can stay the same, and it will add about the same range in the same amount of time.


> and it will add about the same range in the same amount of time.

So the spots get used more, or the drivers charge at more stations along the way, meaning "some cars only need to charge once" is not a consequence free conclusion.


It is possible to split one long charge into two charging stops that take half of the time, but that doesn't increase overall utilization of chargers.

EVs are not filled up to full like gas tanks, so a larger "tank" doesn't make people stay for longer. Charging to full is slow and unhealthy for the battery. EVs charge what is minimum required for the next leg of the journey, and leave with the rest of the battery empty.


> EVs charge what is minimum required for the next leg of the journey

If you put the route in there and it has access to the weather. I imagine this is a standard feature on a few luxury models but my guess it's not in most of the EVs sold on the market. It also requires the user to know this and to remember to do this on long journeys when they're likely not in the habit of it on short ones.

> and leave with the rest of the battery empty.

This compromise does not exist in current fueling stations. I can get a full 300 miles in my 30mpg vehicle in 60 seconds. You've very effectively summed up "range anxiety" in two sentences.

I mean.. I get that people want EV infrastructure to replace petroleum infrastructure. I am one of those people. I simply think it's unrealistic to expect this hyper fast infrastructure change and I think it's bad practice to ignore the obvious factors or user experience when plotting out the roadmap of the future.

I would personally plan on a 25 to 50 year cycle for complete replacement of petroleum. In the scale of human ventures, this is a heartbeat, and I genuinely don't understand the reluctance to simply admit it and be a small part of it.

The only reason to broadcast a "revolution" prematurely is to profit off of peoples ignorance. It's nice to believe /we/ could be a part of that revolution but I honestly think it sets the whole market back. It's far more successful and ethical to make the small incremental steps towards a true progress that you may never witness (or profit from) in your lifetime.


Cloudflare's internal release tool suggests revert when monitoring detects failures during deployment, so this question doesn't describe Cloudflare's practices. There must have been something more to it, or it was a misunderstanding.


In response to this incident Cloudflare has made big engineering changes, including huge work to move away from C as much as possible.

The offending parsers were rewritten in Rust (https://github.com/cloudflare/lol-html), as well as WAF, image optimization, and a few others. Nginx is being replaced with a custom cache server.

New implementations are using either the Workers platform, or are written in Rust or Golang.


Memory safety doesn't fix fundamental design flaws.


This is an empty tautology. You have no insight into the actual design, so I presume your fundamental design flaw is the CDN existing.


This article is 15 years old now, and nothing has changed:

https://digitalmars.com/articles/C-biggest-mistake.html

(and of course the problem wasn't new 15 years ago either.)

It wasn't fixed then. It won't be fixed now.

C is valued for not changing. C is valued for backwards compatibility with the most obscure platforms with unmaintained compilers.

The C userbase is self-selected to like C exactly the way it is.


The irony is that C does change, we are at C23 now, but not in the ways that would actually improve its safety.


Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: