Okay, but that's not inherently tied to being electric.
You are correct that there's no engineering reason that mechanical features should be tied to being electric, but the part you're missing is that "should" doesn't matter. Drive-by-wire IS tied to EVs and will always be so because EVs are fundamentally a political construction designed as a battering ram against ICE.* They're only manufactured due to a combination of regulation and subsidies, and every mover and shaker in the industry looks at them ideologically. They're not particularly shy about it either. Elon has bragged about high EV adoption rates in Norway when he knows full well that EVs have been made almost mandatory there.
*the politics lean towards automation with the goal of banning manually driven cars.
So while it's technically possible to design an EV with mechanical features, I doubt it will ever be a strong competitor (if it will even be designed).
again, same with an ICE engine with some basic precautions. Also what's with this bizare fear of ten minute cities? Out of all of our concerns that's among the lowest.
It's one of our lowest concerns in large part because it's logistically infeasible to control mass numbers of people with technology. That's where mass EV adoption would come in.
Setting aside OS updates to cars, the logistics of controlling the electric grid are far superior to the gas system and have already been used to control people's behavior on a mass scale.
most driving takes place at low throttle anyway, it wouldn't be in the wrong RPM range, you just wouldn't have much as much power. a throttle is basically an adjustable restrictor plate.
Gearing makes throttle restrictions difficult. Without enough RPM you'll be lugging the engine when switching gears, or just lugging the engine in normal operation under different conditions like an overtake.
Most turbos are designed for low end fuel economy now days so no real concern there, and for the sports cars thats just extra incentive to pay for the throttle unlock subscription and there's no reason that the software couldn't be designed to still allow the computers to blip the throttle past the usual limit to shift.
Sports car turbos would be undrivable under that system with the inconsistent boost kick you would get.
Drive by wire is a new angle you're going to and the necessity of being drive by wire is because of the fact that any method of electronic power control could be considered drive by wire, even a binary switch, that's completely unrelated to political agendas and drive by wire is the standard on basically every car made in the last 30 years.
I don't really know where you're going with this, but I see a couple different directions. One, you're saying that drive-by-wire isn't that bad and it's apolitical. I can't agree with that. The full realization of drive-by-wire is autopiloted smart cars.
Two, you might be saying that the drive-by-wire trend is just as accelerated in ICE cars as EV. We've already established that's not the case.
You're retarded then, people will comply or they will die, control of movement isn't needed for that and it's been proven that survielance, control of transactions and a police force is all that is needed, limiting transportation just creates logistics problems that weren't a concern before.
"Why would they employ this method when I (some pleb) think THIS method is much more effective" is a silly line of argument. "They" obviously think EVs and electric appliances will be effective in pursuing their goals since they very bluntly moved to mandate them in the next decade, even going after gas stoves. If you think that's just because they're Sierra Club whackos, that's hilarious.
It's kind of like the Ukraine war when it broke out. Did I know how it would help globohomo down to the last detail? No, but I knew they were all pulling for it.
Even though AI and CDBC are much more powerful tools in controlling people, they're not going to leave anything on the table. By the same token you could echo Biden and argue that they don't care about going after the 2nd Amendment because they have F15s.
Yeah because hundreds of people being unable to make it to work because a powerline got knocked down certainly sounds like an improvement in logistics over being able to ship gas through pipelines, ships and trucks.
They're not interested in actually making anything more efficient. What are you talking about? The "logistical superiority" is being able to instantly throttle an area's power consumption (and instantly restore if necessary) without worrying about supply chain lag, black market pricing, outside actors, etc.
Peoples behavior can be controlled in many different ways and if the goal is to control movement then limiting electricity would be a retarded way of doing that as it would interfere with many other things when it could be done as simply as updating the software.
This isn't a hypothetical. California is already trying to normalize electricity rationing and cars and large appliances are the first things that get hit. "But it would interfere with many other things" yeah they don't really care.
depends on how limited, something like a 75% limit wouldn't really even have an effect on the low end power so it wouldn't get bogged down on an upshift and yes overtakes would be less feasible but that's fine, people still drive 25hp Beetles and they get around just fine.
The point is not that it's impossible. But there are many more barriers the engineers have to negotiate, balancing drivability, fueling, gear ratio, etc, whereas with an iPhone on wheels you don't even have to think. Just set the motors to 25% less torque. A monkey could do it.
Many turbo systems have a bypass valve, make the entire turbo operation a separate subscription service, want more power and better fuel economy? better pay up.
edit: I misunderstood this part.
The bypass valve doesn't matter. Setting the boost to 0 would be the ECU opening an internal wastegate and redirecting the exhaust to the normal piping, which is totally possible. Then you're spending money putting a turbo, intercooler, wastegate, piping, bypass valve, and boost control solenoid in your car, plus strengthening the block for the forced induction and writing a tune for the turbo as well as NA driving, hoping that your subscription plan will retain enough monopolistic power to make up for all the money and R&D you could've saved with an NA design.
even a lightswitch on a closed circuit as your throttle would still be fly by wire.
No, we never established that as the case and you won't find a single car sold in america in the last 30 years that doesn't utilize an electronically controlled throttle.
OK cool, I'm not talking about that concept
Has already proven to be effective you mean. Look at the covid lockdowns, the only people who were able to refuse were those on welfare and they could have easily been targetted as well, you overestimate your freedom. we're already effectively slaves.
Or just an attempt at market manipulation. I'm really not seeing much difference in the level of control offered.
I agree with him, gun rights are effectively a security blanket used to pacify the population and nothing more otherwise arms would have been confiscated long ago and by keeping them as a prominent political talking point it keeps the focus off of other important issues such as white genocide and women's mating habits.
Given your perspective this is a pointless discussion
You're really overestimating the difficulty involved. it wouldn't be hard to implement a low power and an unlocked mode, most modern cars already have a limp mode.
Limp mode and valet mode are horrible for your car long term, but no one would think of even driving them short term anyway.
that was still just one hypothetical option to deal with a possible edge case, doesn't really disprove my point about how all the same levels of control can be implemented on ICE vehicles.
It costs more to set multiple tunes for ICE vehicles and you're not guaranteed to make up that cost. That's the point.
You are correct that there's no engineering reason that mechanical features should be tied to being electric, but the part you're missing is that "should" doesn't matter. Drive-by-wire IS tied to EVs and will always be so because EVs are fundamentally a political construction designed as a battering ram against ICE.* They're only manufactured due to a combination of regulation and subsidies, and every mover and shaker in the industry looks at them ideologically. They're not particularly shy about it either. Elon has bragged about high EV adoption rates in Norway when he knows full well that EVs have been made almost mandatory there.
*the politics lean towards automation with the goal of banning manually driven cars.
So while it's technically possible to design an EV with mechanical features, I doubt it will ever be a strong competitor (if it will even be designed).
It's one of our lowest concerns in large part because it's logistically infeasible to control mass numbers of people with technology. That's where mass EV adoption would come in.
Setting aside OS updates to cars, the logistics of controlling the electric grid are far superior to the gas system and have already been used to control people's behavior on a mass scale.
Gearing makes throttle restrictions difficult. Without enough RPM you'll be lugging the engine when switching gears, or just lugging the engine in normal operation under different conditions like an overtake.
Sports car turbos would be undrivable under that system with the inconsistent boost kick you would get.
I don't really know where you're going with this, but I see a couple different directions. One, you're saying that drive-by-wire isn't that bad and it's apolitical. I can't agree with that. The full realization of drive-by-wire is autopiloted smart cars.
Two, you might be saying that the drive-by-wire trend is just as accelerated in ICE cars as EV. We've already established that's not the case.
"Why would they employ this method when I (some pleb) think THIS method is much more effective" is a silly line of argument. "They" obviously think EVs and electric appliances will be effective in pursuing their goals since they very bluntly moved to mandate them in the next decade, even going after gas stoves. If you think that's just because they're Sierra Club whackos, that's hilarious.
It's kind of like the Ukraine war when it broke out. Did I know how it would help globohomo down to the last detail? No, but I knew they were all pulling for it.
Even though AI and CDBC are much more powerful tools in controlling people, they're not going to leave anything on the table. By the same token you could echo Biden and argue that they don't care about going after the 2nd Amendment because they have F15s.
They're not interested in actually making anything more efficient. What are you talking about? The "logistical superiority" is being able to instantly throttle an area's power consumption (and instantly restore if necessary) without worrying about supply chain lag, black market pricing, outside actors, etc.
This isn't a hypothetical. California is already trying to normalize electricity rationing and cars and large appliances are the first things that get hit. "But it would interfere with many other things" yeah they don't really care.
The point is not that it's impossible. But there are many more barriers the engineers have to negotiate, balancing drivability, fueling, gear ratio, etc, whereas with an iPhone on wheels you don't even have to think. Just set the motors to 25% less torque. A monkey could do it.
edit: I misunderstood this part.
The bypass valve doesn't matter. Setting the boost to 0 would be the ECU opening an internal wastegate and redirecting the exhaust to the normal piping, which is totally possible. Then you're spending money putting a turbo, intercooler, wastegate, piping, bypass valve, and boost control solenoid in your car, plus strengthening the block for the forced induction and writing a tune for the turbo as well as NA driving, hoping that your subscription plan will retain enough monopolistic power to make up for all the money and R&D you could've saved with an NA design.
Will it work? Maybe. But it's inherently riskier.
OK cool, I'm not talking about that concept
Given your perspective this is a pointless discussion
Limp mode and valet mode are horrible for your car long term, but no one would think of even driving them short term anyway.
It costs more to set multiple tunes for ICE vehicles and you're not guaranteed to make up that cost. That's the point.