do git commit -v and then just summarize the diff you have in your editor in a human readable form.

Nah, not really interested in motorsports. More about the physics of driving and how that comes up when driving on a road. For example, the "How to Drive" book I mentioned goes into detail about how your weight shifts as you accelerate and decelerate and tells you how to take that into account as you are turning.

I want to improve my mental model about what the car is doing.

I'm also currently exploring options for travel routers and am particularly interested in their interaction with captive portals.

My main question is: Are there any travel routers out there that offer the ability to automatically log into captive portals? This feature would be incredibly convenient for frequent travelers like me, eliminating the need to manually enter credentials each time.

Additionally, I'm curious if there are any plugins or software modifications that can be added to existing travel routers to enable this functionality. If anyone has experience with setting up a travel router to automatically handle captive portals, your insights would be highly valuable.

I’m using firefly iii now and mentioned it in the post.

I used to be a GNUCash user for 5+ years but I don't think it did budgeting very well either, let alone via the envelope method. Am I missing something there in the newest versions?

I'm having trouble figuring it out still. A lot of results are using appplescript and seem to interact with iterm2 different than I would with joplin. As an aside, I did learn a neat trick for configuring iterm2 to open a file in vim after clicking a filename in a terminal while holding down ctl. (https://tosbourn.com/iterm2-open-files-paths-in-vim/)

Yikes, left off a crucial detail. I meant setting up iterm2/vim as an external editor. Updated my post.

Or was this what you were talking about? Under linux, I just have it launching gnome-terminal with "-- vim" as the command line flags.

https://www.cc.com/video/wy1v8x/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-helms-ready-willing-and-cable

I don't think there's any point on spamming articles just for points since there's no algorithm that would weight their future posts higher. Please just assume the poster had good intentions and found it interesting and wanted to share.

yeah, exactly. I don't know enough about the implementation details to know if it is actually consuming 0 fuel though but there's not much work the engine is actually doing.

I'm not exactly sure how it worked in practice, but if it's anything like simple aircraft engines with carbs, there's a mixture control that you'd use in addition to the throttle to control air intake.

When you're engine braking—like when you downshift and let off the gas—the ECU often cuts off fuel to the cylinders. The throttle valve is also closed. In this scenario, your RPMs are maintained by the car's forward motion, which is connected through the drivetrain back to the engine.

So yeah, you're not using any fuel in that case, but you're still turning the engine over. The wheels are essentially driving the engine instead of the other way around. That's how you can have RPMs but no fuel flow during engine braking. The energy to keep the engine turning is coming from the car's inertia.

A common example would be going downhill. You downshift to a lower gear, take your foot off the gas, and let the engine do the work to help slow you down. You'll see the tachometer showing RPMs, but fuel flow is minimal or even cut off, thanks to our friend the ECU.

Any reason why y'all as a community don't like this content? Is it because it's old? I indicated that in the title. I think it captures an interesting historical time and reminds us of things we take for granted now a days.

Do you have a graphics card or are you using the extensions on a CPU?

Any one have any information about why the wing came off? Was the pilot maneuvering out of the legal envelope?

I think I like this guide much better:

https://www.aopa.org/-/media/files/aopa/home/go-flying/cross-border-flying_v8.pdf

Sorry, I meant to mention in the scenario that you were already in climb out phase and potentially close to running out of runway if you try to land straight ahead.

One thing I found interesting here was a comment on the YT video from a CFI who taught his students rejected takeoffs using this method to successfully execute them in an emergency setting. However, they did it for a hitting a goose with the wing. Obviously I wasn't there so I couldn't see what happens and make the call, but what are y'alls thoughts on that? It seems like it would be better to keep flying and maybe do a lap in the pattern instead of risking running out of runway and rejecting the take off.

Here's a video with some more related comment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoMJcOrgcEw