This won't happen unless they outright ban non-EV vehicles which is unlikely considering how many people are still using old cars and cannot afford new cars, how many car enthusiasts are there, and not to mention potential lobbying from big oil.

For example, I have 2 gas stations within a mile of my home. They stay pretty busy because people around me constantly need to fill up. I, on the other hand, basically never visit either of those stations since I switched to an EV. I charge at home.

If everyone around me switched to EVs, those stations could not stay in business. There's a grocery store in the same area which makes anything those stations offer obsolete.

Those are the majority of gas stations that die with a mass switch over to EVs. There's a gas station for my hometown without an attached convenience store with 300 people there. There's no way that station stays in service if a significant portion of the community switches to EVs. It already struggles to be profitable as is (I know the owner).

Where I live (Spain) that's not the case at all - our towns are very dense. People in big cities tend to live mostly in flats (Europe's highest elevators-per-capita). Even people in the countryside, where it's more common to have a 1-family homes, often don't have a dedicated garage.

Also, with Chinese manufacturers increasingly pushing out batteries capable of 1000+ km, you'll be able to charge fully at home for increasingly long road trips.

- Gas Station = retail outlet that sells and dispenses gasoline and other petroleum-based fuel products

- Charging station = place to charge your EV

Could be an interesting long bet. Will the number of retail locations selling gasoline in the UK in the year 2045 be higher or lower than in 2026?

I don't see how this is an interesting bet. No new petrol car will have been sold for 10 years. Places selling fuel for large lorries etc will last a bit longer, but these are already a fraction of the total.

Poor people don't buy new cars. New EVs being expensive is not a poor person problem.

The lowest end of the market won’t have electric cars unless the batteries are shagged (early Leafs)

And given how insanely cheap petrol is (15p a mile, so £450 for a low mileage runaround) the savings even if electric was free and they weren’t introducing a 3p/mile charge isn’t there.

And, as it turns out, a brand new 50kWh battery costs around £4000 to manufacture. Used will be cheaper.

Saying "It costs a lot of money to replace the battery" doesn't mean much as the battery, even if it has 70% of it's original capacity, is still perfectly functional. Very much the same as the engine which also costs a lot of money to replace.

Newsflash: you simply cannot "readout" the status of an engine, transmission, ...

But you can/could/should for a battery.

Now, someone hammer that into peoples brains...

Really not true at all. Care to share your sources for this claim? Anecdotally, I've (plus friend and family) owned plenty of beater cars in that ballpark price, and none had failures needing to replace engine or transmission. Most of their faults came in the electronics (sensors, actuators, fuse box, wire harness) plus suspension, body rust, etc basically the same parts EVs also have.

Meanwhile, if you look up 'EV clinic' postings online, you'll see they find plenty of design failures with European and Korean EVs that are basically ticking timebombs(sometimes literally, hello Stellantis) where electric motors, inverters or battery packs are guarantee to fail in a short timeframe due to various design faults that were entirely preventable. Most common faults with poor EV designs I saw, seem to be the seal of the electric motor stator cooling which fails quickly leading coolant to flood the motor rotor killing it, needing a rebuild.

From what I gather from their analysis', the crux of this issue seems to be that some modern EVs, especially those less premium ones, are cost cut to the extreme in a race to the bottom to maintain shareholder value, both at manufacturing but also at design phase, leading to cut corners everywhere and such issues being a common occurrence and manifesting en-masse after their warranty runs out. From their analysis, IIRC Tesla's powertrains seem to be some of the most reliable and well designed, with the likes of Audi, VW, BMW, Mercedes being less so and Stellantis being trash tier.

Meanwhile, plenty of older ICEs are largely immune form such massive reliability faults, because they benefited from decades of industrial design and development experience done in a past era where race to the bottom cost cutting and planned obsolescence weren't yet a thing. So I wouldn't be surprised when an older 1500$ ICE car will last longer than a 1500$ EV.

A logical future market is battery-refurbished EVs, just a question of where the crossover point is.

In contrast, my cheaper 'leccy rate is now about 25% less at 5.2p per kWh than it was. Electricity is weird in the UK - its pinned to the price of gas and is currently (lol) rather expensive "on peak" at 27.87p per kWh and there is a day standing charge of 47.71p. That's from Octopus.

We also have a petrol car - an elderly Renault Clio. It does just run and run and is pretty economic for a pretty shagged out ICE.

My EV is cheaper to run, by far. However, its unlikely the battery will last 20 odd years. I haven't yet sat down and done some whole life costs for ICE vs EV yet.

My Saic MG4 can do 300+ miles on a 100% charge of its 78kWh battery. After two years, it still manages to exceed its WLTP (with care, when required) and I quite like the ridiculous 0-30 acceleration etc.

This was my first thought too but apparently you can just use Claude Code within VSC: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/vs-code

    float accum = 0;
    while (running) {
        poll_input();
        poll_network();

        accum += delta_time;

        while (accum >= tick_time) {
            accum -= tick_time;

            update_ui(tick_time);
            update_anims(tick_time);

            if (!paused) {
                update_entities(tick_time);
            }
        }

        render();
    }

It's a simulation; why should clock time be involved to begin with? The only things that should care about clock time are those that exist outside the sim, e.g audio

But I’m not 100% that’s even true; in the context of replay, I imagine it’d be more appropriately part of the sim for it to scrub properly.

In the context of networked games with client-side prediction, I think it’d probably be key frames tied to logical time and intermediate frames tied to wallclock

That's how Warcraft 3's fully deterministic save files would work. Old replay files would only work tied to one specific patch patch of the game.

But here's the thing: it's still a godsend while in development and it was still a godsend to players too. "Battlenet user spiritwolf beat me even though I had the upper hand, how did he do it? Let's check the replay immediately".

Also if you really think about it: if you plan for it from day one, there's not much preventing your game engine from having a pluggable system where you could have the various different patches of the game engine ship with every subsequent release of the game.

So when 1.03c is out but you want to play a replay meant for version 1.02b, the game automatically just use that version of the game engine.

The only case where this basically ain't working is if there's a patch for a security exploit: that'd probably need to be patched for good.

But for all other cases, backward compatibility for replay files / deterministic game engines is totally doable. It may not be how things are done, but it's totally doable.

Starcraft 2 does that. It's still quite an achievement.

    MariaDB > SELECT SUBSTRING_INDEX(email, '@', -1) AS domain, COUNT(*) AS cnt FROM accounts GROUP BY domain HAVING domain != '' ORDER BY cnt DESC LIMIT 10;
    +-------------+-------+
    | domain      | cnt   |
    +-------------+-------+
    | hotmail.com | 38015 |
    | gmail.com   | 16280 |
    | yahoo.com   |  4080 |
    | o2.pl       |  2321 |
    | wp.pl       |  2206 |
    | live.com    |  1415 |
    | outlook.com |   814 |
    | interia.pl  |   609 |
    | hotmail.es  |   590 |
    | live.se     |   521 |
    +-------------+-------+
    10 rows in set (0.044 sec)

We are in a thread discussing a Rust library, logically, I was referring to the current approach in GUI rendering in the Rust space (such as Tauri and Dioxus).

> and plenty of reasons to not want to use Blink/WebKit.

Such as? Can you name a few objective reasons against Blink/WebKit (the technology) that does not involve just not liking Google/Apple?

Tauri itself doesn't render web views. It uses wry under the hood. Dioxus isn't a web view at all and deserves a fundamentally different purpose.

> Can you name a few objective reasons against Blink/WebKit (the technology) that does not involve just not liking Google/Apple?

If you have a cross platform application, it sucks having to worry about which features work or don't work based on which engine is available and how old it is. You also don't know if there are user scripts being injected that are affecting the experience. It's impossible to debug and many users don't even know what browser engine is being used, they just know your app doesn't work.

If you build for Servo, it works exactly the same on every platform. You could use wry and test that Edge is good on Windows, WebKit works on the past few versions of Macos, gtk WebKit works, etc etc, or you can just use Servo.

Not to mention, Servo is probably much lighter than whatever flavor of chromium the user has installed under the hood.

As a user of a desktop environment other than gnome-shell, I only have webkitgtk-6.0 installed because I chose to install Epiphany—it’s a good proxy for testing on Safari, which Apple makes ridiculously expensive.

With some cachés set for my audio player I could even listen to some odd Avant Gardé radio streams -think Frank Zappa like- at http://dir.xiph.org with 16 KBPS quality in OPUS format. Not totally robotic, it sounded better than old MP3's at 32KBPS.