Background:

I use Obsidian for journaling and knowledge management. Each page is saved as an individual .txt file rather than in some database which ensures continuity of my data even if I switch applications one day.

I sync the files between my devices using Syncthing. Some of my notes are collaborative with others: by sorting my notes into specific folders and syncing select folders to select devices I have a notes library with a mix of personal and shared notes.

Syncthing is good at managing file conflicts. It surfaces the conflict and lets you select which file should remain. It also has options for very good versioning control.

Answer:

So, to your question, I would love to contribute to Syncthing to provide an optional capability to merge content from two conflicting .txt files rather than selecting one or the other. This would greatly improve the collaborative experience when using Syncthing to manage notes in Obsidian or similar applications.

I think there are a not-insignificant number of people who could get value from this. Syncthing is written in GO, and I’ve never contributed to an open source project before. I’m looking forward to giving it a shot but if someone else starts first that’s just fine with me. :)

Except that wireless headphones have more complexity, points of failure, and usually shorter life. Just avoiding batteries alone should give a longer life and do less environmental harm.

I’ve been thinking about this recently with the heat in my region. Wouldn’t a light cloak, with very light clothing underneath, work well for sun protection (one or two layers over skin) while still keeping fairly cool (due to airflow)?

TL;DR: You’re correct, in my professional opinion.

The catalyst in most hydrogen fuel cells are still too expensive and have a limited life. Hydrogen will mostly be sourced as a waste product from oil and gas extraction (though it could be done with clean electricity and electrolysis), that’s why oil and gas companies are becoming so interested in pushing hydrogen (see the successful “clean” natural gas campaigns, but depending on how you measure it natural gas can result in more emissions than coal and is just a bunch of greenwashing. Same would happen with hydrogen in my opinion). Additionally, we’d have to build out an entire hydrogen delivery infrastructure that serves only that purpose. We’ll just end up with commercial fuel stations like we have now. Fuel cells (for many fuels) can make sense in very remote applications, or industrial applications where specific waste gasses can be turned into supplemental electricity right on site.

Battery-electric on the other hand is much more flexible and fits into our existing infrastructure better. It’s not just power dense batteries for cars; it’s (maybe gravity) batteries for communities, safe and long-lived (maybe salt) batteries for homes, better batteries for our electronics. Research in one area can support improvement of the others. They all connect to the same electricity grid so the energy can be shared among applications. Batteries play a role in decentralizing and democratizing energy (today you can put PV on your house, charge your car or home battery, use your car to power your house in a power outage, etc). As mentioned we can use greener and cleaner batteries (even completely non-chemical) in some applications, and one day we can hopefully get to the point of using ultra- or super-capacitors in place of high-density chemical batteries. In the mean time we have batteries that work and are getting quite affordable, we can transition to this solution now without waiting for a miracle breakthrough, then continue to iterate the technology over time.