Slashdot Mirror

We don't have a ZEV mandate in Texas. The state even goes out of their way to make it difficult to buy a Tesla (cannot discuss price in the "gallery", must order online, must pay in full before it can be shipped to Texas, etc), recently tried to pass a bill that would have forced Tesla to close service centers, and even prevents Tesla owners from taking advantage of the Texas $2500 EV incentive as it's only available if vehicle was purchased from a Texas Dealer.

And despite all that, if you take a look at Tesla's Carbon Impact you'll find Houston, Austin, and Dallas coming in at 11, 12, and 13 for US cities.

n fact in order to pay money to these people you basically have to break the law.

No, that does not really work... well, maybe, unless you need to Park your Car; or you just somehow happen to be near the camera's view after someone else recently made a violation.

Donald Schultz provides the latest example of municipal malfeasance: A speed camera has issued at least ten speeding citations since 2011 to the Nissan Frontier that Schultz parks in front of his house. A car doing more than the posted 35-mph limit triggers the camera, located in the median of Canal Boulevard, but the camera reads the stationary Frontier's license plate instead of the one on the speeding vehicle.

The issue has been a seven-year hassle for Schultz because he has to go to City Hall to get each ticket overturned. He told Fox News, "It got so bad that years ago I even had a [telephone] number of a person [in the traffic violations office] so that if I called them directly I didn't have to go down there." The problem ended for a time - in 2016 a contractor repositioned the speed camera away from Schultz's car. When city workers moved the camera back to its original position at the end of last month, Schultz received two citations in early April, the most recent one due to a speeding New Orleans Police Department vehicle.
....

The city told WWL-TV that each citation must be approved by a technician, and then by an NOPD officer, meaning two pairs of eyes repeatedly ignoring the details on the citation.

Just another example of people using higher math to back up some crackpot idea, like claiming a Prius pollutes more than a Hummer.

OMG, a car caught fire - quick, get breathless overcoverage of it! Wait, you already did? Good!

There's one car fire in the US for every 20 million miles driven and one fatality per 85 million miles.

Teslas have been driven 9 billion miles. This should correspond to 450 fires and 106 deaths.

Where are they?

Concerning fires, here's a list of Tesla fires between 1 January 2013 and 11 March 2018, which is the vast majority of Tesla miles. The total count? 14. Vs. an expected 450.

Concerning fatalities, three months ago an anti-Tesla Twitter account added up the number of deaths in Teslas and arrived at 34. Note that many of these occurred in other countries like China that have a much higher road fatality rate than the US. It's still a third of the expected number for US-only driving of that many miles.

Let's look at the newest Teslas, shall we - the Model 3? So far there have been no fatalities and no reports of fires in customer cars (there was one Model 3 found up for scrap that had been gutted by fire, but it was "Location: Fremont" with 1 mile on the odometer, so clearly something that happened at the factory. Also, the fire damage was heaviest on the bumper, where it had melted the alumium - but hadn't managed to do so over the pack itself. So it's not clear that a battery fire was actually involved). But how many miles have been driven for this rate of "0/1 fires and 0 deaths"?

Lacking specific numbers, the best we can do is estimate. The average driver drives around 12k miles per year. Owners of new cars put significantly more miles on them during their first year, and particularly first few months because - obviously - it's a new car that they bought because they wanted to drive it. Bloomberg says there were around 25k made in the past month (0-1m ago), 19k in the previous month (1-2m ago), then 13,5k (2-3m ago), then 9k (3-4m ago), the 9k (4-5m ago), then 6,5k (5-6m ago), and 9k earlier than that. So around 19k*(30k/12)*0,5 + 13,5k*(30k/12)*1,5 + 9k*(26k/12)*2,5 + 9k*(23k/12)*3,5 + 6,5k*(21k/12)*4,5 + 9k*(18k/12)*6 = ~315M miles. Meaning if they were gasoline cars we should expect 16 fires and 3 1/2 deaths. Where are they?

It's the cost. There was a hybrid Durango for a moment, it started at ~$85k.

If they can do a passenger sedan like the Volt it doesn't compute that they couldn't do it for a truck. I realize cost is a factor but I don't think that is the full story. I think for trucks they are simply afraid to tinker with a successful formula given that EVs and hybrids tend to have a bit of an (unjustified) hippie vibe to them thanks to econoboxes like the Prius. I think it's probably more of a marketing problem than an engineering issue.

FCA has never taken EVs seriously and their late CEO basically said publicly not many years ago they were only doing enough to meet legal requirements. I'm aware they are working on some hybrid stuff (including the Ram and reportedly the Wrangler) but I'm not convinced FCA is really taking them electrification seriously yet. I want a pickup with at least 50 miles of all electric range - not so half hearted mild hybrid.

Don't be deceived by the fact that automakers are selling very expensive pickups; they still need to have cheap models in order to be viable.

That doesn't have anything to do with the fact that they could offer a hybrid power train in the high end models. There are estimates that Ford averages as much as $13K in profit per F150 sold. The real number is probably a lower but it's a big number for sure. There is no doubt that it's the biggest driver in Ford's profits. Certainly there is margin there to be experimenting with power train options. Ford made $7.6 billion in profit last year. That's almost as much profit as Tesla had revenue.

There are multiple technical standards. But in Europe, the government mandated Type 2.

https://www.autoblog.com/2013/...

And so creating a third zone of differentness, instead of the USA, Japan, China and Europe all getting together at ISO and picking a single one.

There are multiple technical standards. But in Europe, the government mandated Type 2.

https://www.autoblog.com/2013/...

The car industry is FIGHTING the government's capriciousness.

Where do you get your "facts" from? Fox news?

https://www.autoblog.com/2018/...

A VW Touareg did this several years ago. And no wimpy-ass Dreamliner, but a 747. https://www.autoblog.com/2006/...

General rule with Musk projects: Increase estimated timelines by roughly 20-100%, depending on the project and how far ahead you're talking; he always sets ridiculously short timelines for himself. But he generally delivers in the end.

People love to complain about Musk's timelines. But put things into perspective. SpaceShipTwo is still under development. We're still waiting for a mid-engine Corvette.

That isn't quite what happened.

Tesla owners are mostly rich Democrats who voted for those overly broad laws.

No, it doesn't work that way. These are to be sold as actual product, and you can't equate this to R&D through funny logic.

Yes, it very much does work that way. It works exactly that way, especially in the auto industry. For example, right now Honda is selling (well, leasing) an unprofitable fuel cell vehicle in California (where the infrastructure is) and then going on to pay for customers' fuel . If you manage to use all the fuel they will give you, then you will be effectively paying something like $99/mo for the lease. Dealers will make a trivial amount of money, just enough to bother with getting the vehicle in the door, and Honda will actually lose money given the cost of supporting the venture and doing the R&D, but the R&D is what the project is actually about.

The next generation of Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle is going to actually be profitable due to a joint venture between GM and Honda to pool their knowledge (and patents) and build a cost-effective fuel cell. GM took the tack of taking their HFCV technology to the military with the Colorado ZH2 technology demonstrator program. Instead of commuter sedans, they built a handful of million-dollar military test vehicles. They're taking the approach that you imagine automakers have to take, while Honda is taking the other approach that they can choose to take. But GM has [in?]famously gone the other way on that, as well. Perhaps they're just a little leery now, when it comes to advanced technology vehicles. Regardless, by the time it's actually profitable to sell a HFCV to the public, Honda will be the automaker with the most experience with them.

That's actually a good point, in that vehicle performance matters a lot less when the occupant does not directly operate the vehicle. Performance is no unimportant; most people want to be conveyed to their destinations in reasonable amounts of time and don't like unnecessary waiting, but if one looks back on the late seventies during the fallout from the OPEC oil embargo, most full-sized cars had less than 200 horsepower while weighing in at over two tons and they still managed to sell. Even what were considered mainstream performance or sports cars of the '60s and early '70s have acceleration rates that can be met by most mid-market, "boring" cars today.

If true autonomous vehicles become the norm, I fully expect that the entire nature of auto body design will change. The traditional three-box design of sedans and coupes and two-box design of wagons, SUVs, vans will almost undoubtedly be re-examined as there will no longer be a need for the driver to face forward, and if powertrain efficiency continues to improve then there may be less need to continue streamlining. While autonomous vehicles and driver-controlled vehicles are mixed on the road I expect that autonomous vehicles will still have to pass crash-safety testing, but it may not be unrealistic to see fully autonomous vehicles start to re-examine traditional carriage design where occupants are able to face each other instead of everyone facing forward, and you could even see tabletops inside of vehicles that are intended for long over-the-road travel.

If petroleum-burning powertrains continune to increase in efficiency, then it's not unreasonble to consider relocating a smaller, barely-adequate powertrain to under the passenger compartment rather than in front of it, similar to the old Skateboard concept that GM worked on in the early noughties, especially if they do a more thorough job of divorcing the duties of the body control module and the powertrain control module such that some bolts and a single umbilicle connect the passenger body from the chassis. Service would be rolling the car into a bay, securing the lift to the body, unbolting the body and the umbilicle, lifting the body off, and having room to work on the chassis. Boxer-type horizontally-opposed engines would fit this chassis well. Obviously electric drivetrains would be even easier.

Future vehicle development would probably center on the configuration of the passenger compartment along with amenities, while attempting to define vehicle exteriors that meet expectations but don't necessarily have to exceed them for most buyers. If one looks at vehicle design now and historically, everyone follows each others' leads anyway, so it would be no stretch to assume that future autonomous passenger cars would continue to follow suit where everyone mimicks everyone else with the occasional halo-car coming out to stir-up interest.

It'll be interesting to see what happens long-term.

I am with you on that one. None of the recalls other than Tesla's gets mentioned on Slashdot. Here's a nice compilation of recalls in the US

Electric cars have significantly lower failure rates because they have significantly fewer parts.

Statement not supported by facts.

From the previous slashdot post your cars are already reporting back to the mothership.

The other set of data is generated by the people in the car; a massive amount of information flowing in and out about where they're going and what they're doing. Last year in the U.S. market alone Chevrolet collected 4,220 terabytes of data from customer's cars. McKinsey forecasts that this could grow into a $450 to 750 billion market by 2030. Retailers, advertisers, marketers, product planners, financial analysts, government agencies, and so many others will eagerly pay to get access to that information. And it's a gift that keeps on giving. You can sell the same data again, again and again to a variety of different customers.

link
The thing that scared me was combining that amount of data collection, with a Watson like AI doing data analysis. Businesses and Governments would kill for those kind of results.

Wikipedia lists it as the largest building in the world by area. And from this:

The original plans for the Tesla Gigafactory call for a facility with a footprint of 5.8 million square feet, on two stories for 10 million square feet of floor space. That would already give it the largest footprint of any building in the world. But that could just end up proving the starting point.

The Gigafactory is being built in a modular fashion, and Tesla is reportedly buying up adjacent plots of land in order to expand the facility. Another 1,200 acres have reportedly already been acquired, with an additional 350 or more on top of that also being looked into. Three modular blocks in addition to the original four could take it up to 24 million square feet of floor space.

In normal-people-units that's 539k m^2, 929k m^2, og 2,2m m^2, respectively.

It's catchy to slide in Tesla in unrelated articles but just because it uses batteries doesn't mean they are prone to fires.

The one that famously caught fire and torched a supercharger in Europe was caused by a genuine one-off assembly line defect.
The one that caught fire in France during a test drive was found to have a a faulty electrical connection.
The one that crashed on autopilot and "battery caught fire" actually didn't burned down: it smashed into a tree separating the front of the vehicle from the cabine, tearing the battery apart where a small number of cells separated from the rest and autopilot tesla crash fire caught fire, away from the vehicle and the rest of the battery pack. Driver dies of impact.
Another one caught fire due to hitting debris where car alerted driver to pull aside.

Complete list of EV fires exonerate batteries for the most part, as most EVs (Tesla and Chevy Volt) have liquid-cooled battery packs, unlike consumer electronics (esp. handheld devices).

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/0...

You do realize that some of the cases were actually fraudulent? Just because some of them were real does not mean that all of them were real, there were a couple of high profile cases of fraud involved with the Toyota thing.

Well, 2+ weeks of burning phones before recalling them isn't quite 'honest'.

Also, they did more than just burn up phones.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/0...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/6-o...

And more batteries than what you state.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news...
"Incidents/Injuries: Samsung has received 92 reports of the batteries overheating in the U.S., including 26 reports of burns and 55 reports of property damage, including fires in cars and a garage."

Don't forget the battery replacement after about 100 K miles at a cost of $3,000. That's what my niece's Prius required.

Battery technology has improved.There are lots of people whose Prius cars have gone much further on the original battery.

Also, are you 100% sure it needed a new battery? Like this guy whose Prius battery "failed" and the dealer wanted a similar amount to replace it, but it turned out to be just a dirty connector.

Like this ? ---> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8n5K... http://www.autoblog.com/2007/0...

Airstream did a test with being towed by the Model X. While the range was reduced, it wasn't a huge amount, something like 30% reduction in range. By the time they phase out ICE vehicles, EVs should have plenty of towing capacity and even greater range.

The assumption that "by the time they phase out ICE vehicles, EVs should have plenty of towing capacity and even greater range" is a HUGE assumption. Battery technology hasn't progressed much over the last decade. We have used different materials to decrease charging times, but battery capacity has changed very little. The only reason why battery life has been getting better for electronics is because we have been able to continually improve energy efficiency and shrink circuits (which made room for bigger batteries in the same form factor). I just don't see this happening for EVs.

The nice thing with electrics is they have an insane amount of torque that puts diesels to shame.

As it is, I'm taking my model S camping next week out in the middle of nowhere. While I'm not towing anything, I have no problem getting there and back. Hell, I decided to go up early and stay at a nearby tiny hotel for a night until the rest of the group arrives. I asked about a 220v outlet and they said they have a tesla charger there, and it is literally in the middle of nowhere. The closest town has a population of 500 and most of the roads in the county aren't paved. It won't even add a significant amount of time charging to reach there, and no, I don't even need to charge at the hotel.

And if the charger is broken down? It's not like a fellow camper can run to the gas station to pick up a battery for you, but they can do that with gas. You would have to call roadside assistance and they would have to send out a mobile charging truck, if such a thing exists, or tow your car to the nearest charge point. It appears that Tesla does not support charging from a portable generator, so that option is out.

Personally, I would have a lot of concerns with camping, etc. in the middle of nowhere with an EV. You wouldn't be able to be spontaneous. You would have to plan around charge stops and each stop would require significant down time.

If they can build an EV with enough range and with alternative methods of charging (i.e. solar, generator, etc.) I would be interested. I'm just being realistic that an EV has too many drawbacks in regards to camping and towing to remote areas in the US and Canada.

Airstream did a test with being towed by the Model X. While the range was reduced, it wasn't a huge amount, something like 30% reduction in range. By the time they phase out ICE vehicles, EVs should have plenty of towing capacity and even greater range.

The nice thing with electrics is they have an insane amount of torque that puts diesels to shame.

As it is, I'm taking my model S camping next week out in the middle of nowhere. While I'm not towing anything, I have no problem getting there and back. Hell, I decided to go up early and stay at a nearby tiny hotel for a night until the rest of the group arrives. I asked about a 220v outlet and they said they have a tesla charger there, and it is literally in the middle of nowhere. The closest town has a population of 500 and most of the roads in the county aren't paved. It won't even add a significant amount of time charging to reach there, and no, I don't even need to charge at the hotel.

I remember that story on all the major media outlets, but remember few that actually covered the follow up where the NHTSA said Tesla made up the numbers and that it never broke any machines.

Here & here covered it. Was a PR stunt probably concocted by Musk.

downright cromulent.

There isn't any additional net electricity. It takes more than 4 KWh to refine a gallon of gasoline. 4 is the lowest number you will hear. Some say 6, some say 8 if they add more elements in the chain than just refining. An average car will go further on the 4KWh than the gallon of gas. So the more electric cars we have the less electricity we will be using. best explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... http://www.autoblog.com/2011/1...

The debate about "autopilot" versus "fully autonomous" is a very real concern, validated by Tesla drivers themselves. You have drivers that stop paying attention to the speed limit, abuse autodrive to violate traffic laws, take their hands off the steering wheel, or just climb into the back seat and let the car drive itself creates not just a danger for the Tesla driver but for every car on the road. This despite Tesla's insistence that people must still stay at the wheel and drive; the technology has advanced enough that people get a false sense of confidence to push the limits even if the technology is not truly ready for it. That's the point that the Volvo engineer is making.

Good question : http://www.autoblog.com/2014/0...

That's because you aren't looking.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/0...

http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-ec...

http://www.cartalk.com/blogs/t...

AT&T will be shutting down 2G (EDGE) at the end of the year. And they (claim they) will not grandfather any device until December that didn't specifically ask to be grandfathered before the end of June.

This is affecting multiple companies. Nissan handled it rather poorly, forcing their customers to pay for a modem upgrade in their cars.

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/0...

Don;t forget that internal combustion engines are terribly inefficient, returning maybe 40% of the energy input in work output.

You only, for my car, need to fill with 16 gallons, so that 534+/-kW only results in 213+/-kW of useful work.

Note the Tesla Model S battery is rated at 85kW, and range is estimated at 265 miles. My Impala would seem to be half as efficient as a Model S. I can see that.

So a 40kW charger can recharge my car to full capacity in what, 5 hours? And that 16 gallon equivalent gets me at least 360 miles, as my car is terribly inefficient beyond even the IC engine limitations?

No, the limitation is the battery. It doubles the cost of the car in small, 'affordable' vehicles. The premium for higher-priced vehicles is tolerable even without subsidies.

Fix batteries, or more correctly the storage, and things make sense. If I could get 100 mile range for a 5 hour charge, and do so with a mechanism that is safe to use in hard rain, disconnects automatically, prevents theft, and is reliable in the 5 year term, I'm in. And that's my home charger. At work they could, maybe, build those covered spaces we love in Arizona and the tops are solar cells harvesting the fusion reactor (Sun) output we largely fail to leverage now.

Dorman is selling Prius packs for just shy of $3k ($1.9K-$900 core). I should be toting up the cost of a motor, drive train, controller, charger, and accessory drive, and buy an '04- Ralliart with a blown motor/trans and a good blend door. Or a Saab with a good convertible top, the subframe just screams for an electric conversion. Delete the exhaust, ECU wiring, fuel piping, etc, and this is pretty doable. Finding a spot for the battery pack

Conversions are possible. Even better platforms exist, though I'm not interested in a Metro or Echo.

"The license plate's identifiers are ignored most of the time by law enforcement."

Are automated plate scanners implemented/common yet? When they are, ALL visible plates will be queried.

You'd think that a senior DHS official would know that his organization tried to build a nationwide network of license plate scanners (and now is trying to contract out a commercial network that will let it do the same thing):

        http://www.autoblog.com/2015/0...

"If this goes forward," Gregory T. Nojeim, senior counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology tells the Washington Post, "DHS will have warrantless access to location information going back at least five years about virtually every adult driver in the U.S."

To my original point... http://www.autoblog.com/2015/0...

Luddites you say? "less is more" is actually quite rational and is a sister to KISS Sure technology changes, cars get updated but nobody is advocating going back to points, manual chokes et al. If it doesn't need to be there, why put it in? Why does a car need "dozens of computers?" Maybe it's to be able to massage your ass? That's a human machine interface problem, not my field.

Oh bullshit. You can replace headlights on any car; that's completely stupid. They might not make it completely easy with HIDs, you might have to disassemble some plastic paneling or something, but it's not like you *have* to have dealer equipment to do it. HIDs all use standard D2S and D4S bulbs.

Really? Change the bulb maybe but not the housing. Not if you're a BMW owner at least.

And why the hell would you need "service" at a licensed dealer for your stereo?

In the name of anti-theft if you're keeping things OE. I've blown out amps, speakers and head units. In the case of three cars I've owned the only place I could get them fixed was at a dealer without replacing the entire system. Are there ways around it? Sure but you can't just plug in an OE radio unless it's programmed with the car. If you're going aftermarket you can chuck the OE unit in the garbage or EBay it which is precisely what the manufacturers don't want you doing. They'd rather you pay full price for a new one.

If you have regular problems with your stereo needing servicing, you're doing something wrong.

What if I want to upgrade and resell my old unit? The buyer of my OE equipment has to make provisions with a dealer or a tech who knows how to get around
the anti-theft protection.

TPMS? Why would that need service, unless you're changing a tire (and personally I've never met any backyard mechanic who changed their own tires)? All the carmakers use standard TPMS sensors anyway, and all the tire shops will sell you new ones if you need them (like for a second set of wheels, for people who switch between winter and summer wheels/tires). And that's just for cars which actually use TPMS sensors; a lot of cars just reuse the ABS wheelspeed sensors to detect differences in tire pressure. To reset the system when you inflate the tires, you just press and hold the TPMS button.

Honestly, I'm really sick of all the new-car paranoia from luddite morons who want to go back to the days of carburetors and distributor points and manual chokes.

Really? I think you're oversimplifying a bit. Maybe consumer reports is more your style?

For this model, the reprogramming process uses a handheld device that records each sensor's output and then feeds those into the car's computer. The sequence usually takes about five minutes or so. But at this dealership, the technicians fiddled around for more than two hours and finally threw in the towel. They said the problem was that the aftermarket sensors were no good. Their official programming tool didn't recognize the signals the sensors were transmitting.

What was needed, they said, was original-equipment Toyota TPM sensors. They'd be happy to remove all four "faulty" sensors, install new ones, and program them to the car. All this for a mere $640.

They obviously see a problem with TPMS sensors and compatibility. I've had personal experience with this one during a 36,000 mile service the dealer wanted to charge me $800 for new TPMS sensors. The solution for me was to tell the dealer to stick it up their ass. Why were t

Faraday Future's plan appears to be autonomous limousines - cars you don't typcially drive, or may not even own.
At least that's what Nick Sampson's talking about in his interview with The Verge

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/1...

I owned a '99 Accord V6 from 1999 to 2007 which was really bulletproof. I think EGR valve and the alternator went out, but both were replaced under some special extended warranty.

I expected the tranny to go out on that car, but I sold it to a guy who drove it for a year and then sold it to someone he knew who was still driving it as of a year or two ago, no tranny issues.

I also owned a 2003 CR-V for about two years -- no problems with that vehicle, but it got sold when we upgraded to a 2005 Pilot. The Pilot was equally reliable, but I think some part of the front end drive system got worked on -- it was my wife's car, so I don't remember the details. We sold it for decent money last summer when she bought an Acura MDX.

Honda actually settled a class action lawsuit regarding oil consumption -- http://www.autoblog.com/2013/1...

I know a guy who owned two VWs with quart-a-month oil consumption, told by the dealer that was normal. How that's normal for anything that's not two cycle I'll never know.

Except, BRZ is a popular car. The original .bro extension is quite memorable and catchy (like .zip) -- good for marketing. Good luck with coming up with something better.

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/1...

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/1...

Because google is writing a car operating system? Why the hell would you go with apple when they just started developing car tech? http://www.autoblog.com/2014/1...

Tesla does not sell Model S sedans for more than it cost them to build it. That 4K number includes their capital investments in other projects such as the Model X which have nothing to do with Model S sales: http://www.autoblog.com/2015/0...

Hey!
Meant no disrespect, was simply trying to provide helpful suggestions from my personal experience. Note that laying the bike down towards the sensor only works if your bike is ferrous, not aluminum or carbon fiber. That being said, there's no fixing a sensor that just doesn't work well. You might want to keep an ear out for an Indiana law like the one where I live, letting scooters / cycles cross against the red legally.

In 2013, the average price for a new car was $32K. Many EVs available right now are below that even *before* any state or federal incentives, and many more hit that point after incentives.

Meanwhile, the average price for a used car was $16.8K. I don't know where you'd get a sub-$10K used vehicle from a reputable source (versus a cash transaction in someone's driveway...)
=Smidge=

Are you even trying anymore, editors?

Link to TFA.

EVs don't need a transmission at all.

"Don't need" is highly debatable since even bicycles have gears for the sake of efficiency. The Tesla roadster removed its transmission because they were having problems getting it to work correctly. Imagine driving your ICE car on the freeway in the 3rd gear -- that's going to cause a lot of engine wear and tear due to high engine RPM and drastically reduce mileage.

We might be arguing semantics here, but... I think so?

If I'm not allowed to modify a car or computer that I own, right.

If I can't sell a ticket with my name on it... well maybe I can technically sell it, but that wouldn't be of much use to the person buying it, unless they literally just want the piece of paper because it has my name on it. (And there's good reasons to put names on tickets... invitation-only or other events not open to the general public.)

But if someone actually slaps a lawsuit on me for selling the ticket, then... wat.

What if this 'spider silk' attracts spiders?
Can you imagine wear a piece of clothing made of it and suddenly spiders are coming out of the woodwork and crawling all over you?

This is exactly why I will automatically boycott any product made with spider silk and Mazda cars.

It's not MY car. I own a Pontiac. I'm only licensing it.

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/0...

use Cadillac as an example

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/0...