I'm not sure why you'd ding Dell for exactly the same thing you're praising apple for. (well, maybe I can guess)
Batteries ARE consumables. How *fast* they're consumed is another story and varies with the quality, chemistry, and usage. Not voiding the warranty most certainly is still an argument though. Apple will often refuse to replace a battery within warranty unless it's severely degraded. If, however, you don't think missing 25% of your battery capacity is a good thing you're stuck paying apple's price to replace or voiding your warranty. That's certainly a problem in my book. A consumable should be replaceable without voiding the warranty unless the device is intended as limited use (i.e. a toner cart - when it's consumed it's no longer intended to be used at all)
By the way: If that Dell happens to be an E7470 or E7270 or similar, Dell has a known but sporadic issue with the batteries failing around the 1.5 year mark. Contact your Dell rep instead of crying on/. about getting them the permaban.
Do I fail the fanboy test here or does that not make any sense? A (very) small segment of the user population needs a workstation class machine. For those who do and want to run OSX...welp break out the corporate cards. For everyone else, you can get more for less AND not have such a high level of lock-in. Maybe Apple will even let you upgrade this system...!
Bitcoin mining represents.14% of global energy consumption at a cost of $1.5M USD while producing BTC worth $10M USD. (well, based on their info) And a 700% ROI (minus capex) is pretty sweet.
So bitcoin is a rounding error.
The USA along consumes a bit under 300TWh/yr for *street lighting* vs ~30TWh for bitcoin globally. Interesting? Sure. Mind-blowing? Not to me at least.
The compute power required is so vast that BTC has long since moved to ASICs and the larger (largest?) individual mining machine contains close to 200 of them.
A top end CPU gets ~20-30 MHash/sec and the top end GPUs with custom firmware etc. getting ~500 MHash/s. The top end modern ASIC miner (Antminer S9) is rated at 14THash/s or 14,000,000 MHash/s - something like a million times more than a CPU.
Power efficiency is similar. 0.1 MHash/J for CPU, 1-2MHash/J for GPU and 10,000MHash/J for the Antminer S9.
Mining is a one-off capital (hardware/infra) plus run rate (electricity, maint, cooling, internet, support). Just ask anyone who runs a datacenter.
Mining won't stop until all BTC is mined and then moves to a POS model instead of POW.
However, that one-off capital cost gets diminishing returns as the overall compute power grows around you. The value of BTC may go up (as it has) and that will change the multiplier for your income vs. depreciation and run-rate costs.
I don't think you quite understand how crypto-c works.
How does that 1 BTC get into that wallet? (hint: a blockchain transaction)
Then there's the individually small but communally large cost of buying, transporting, and exchanging those USB sticks to make those transactions. AND unless you have an awful lot of trust in people, the only way to ensure that BTC remains yours would be to transact it out of that wallet and into one that only you know the private key for.
There's some exception to that where physical coins were loaded with keys for BTC but the keys aren't exposed until you do something destructive (scratch-off) but those come from the days were people in crypto didn't scam because... well who would bother for 50c or $1?
TF? Why do people insist on using utterly arbitrary and, frankly, stupid measurements? house-days of energy? Seriously?
There's a far less arbitrary standard for measuring power. Several in fact. KWh would be idea. Joules if you're on the physics side of the house and want to be annoying. But house-days of power? Just stop. Measure in an actual standard and, if you really want, THEN translate into arbitrary comparative measurements (football fields, car lengths, fuck-tons, etc.)
I'd ask for a citation, but your arbitrary measurements make that 1) unlikely and 2) meaningless.
I'm not sure referencing a fictional TV series is a completely valid proof of your point, but I do agree with it.
If you remove the 'gubermint' side of the equation to dictate value attached to currency, your fall back to where your currency needs intrinsic value. (e.g. consumables or durable AND useful goods)
Sex and force are not things which can store value - since they're not objects. Indentured hookers, servants, or mercs however WOULD be. Gold is, well, the golden standard for "real currency" except that it has rather limited value beyond "oh shiny" and scarcity. Yes, it's quite useful in many ways but something like 80-90% of it goes into non-productive things (jewelry being the large majority of all gold use).
So BTC? It certainly has scarcity - enforced by the compute-cost. That same process ensures the recording of transactions is nearly impossible to defraud. (the compute power required to to so is prohibitive to anything but a dedicated 1st world government) and the infrastructure is diversified enough that it would be quite difficult to restrict, control, or remove.
I don't think BTC will be a long-term money exchange for individuals, but I do think it will find it's place.
*yawn* More posts about this than useful things said about crypto currency in these threads i think (well, tulips and trump).
We get the point. Many of us remember the 90s tech bubble and almost all know the late 2000s mortgage bubble/financial crisis.
Nowadays, tech stocks are major market players and many of the biggest today were founded in the 90s among all the others which went poof (you may have heard of google, amazon, paypal, ebay, etc). My point being that not everything goes poof with a bubble.
Most of the ICOs are getting money because laymen are speculating with play money. Throw $100 each into a few coins and see what happens...because they know full well if they did that the first time they heard of bitcoin they'd be retiring today. I would too.
They talked it up left right and center. Can't imagine what they paid for advertising but it was significant as well.
Their site promised all kinds of things besides the crazy return rates - the primary one being the ability to move money in and out via a 'plex card' which basically let you spend your plex coins as cash. Mind you, that's a great feature but not the easiest to implement (to say the least). Currently they're 'asking for beta testers' for 20ish of those cards. Give it a few months and they'll roll them out... well probably not since they'll be insolvent and shut down by various gov't agencies.
The exchange facilitates your purchase or sale...and transfer of funds to/from your bank account. They don't hold the cash to buy everything out...
You want to sell, 10BTC...well when theres 10BTC looking to be bought at your asking price, that money goes from the buyer, through the exchange, and to you. Why is this complicated to understand?
A portable generator is not as efficient as a modern, fully integrated, ICE/electric motor combo. No way, no how. Not going to happen unless you literally throw 10's of thousands of dollars at your solution just to say you did.
Oh, and you want to TOW it? Might as well factor in the rolling resistance and (lack of) aerodynamics of that trailer plus generator. Really, it's a stupid idea for 99.999% of people. Either buy an ICE vehicle if you're doing 100's of miles away from civilization at a clip or get an tesla and you really won't have mileage problems...really.
With an EV, the weight has a much smaller impact since (minus the small inefficiencies in the system) you get back the energy required to accelerate your heavier car. The old-school 'lighter car = better gas mileage' thinking doesn't apply enough to really matter.
However, hanging a genrator off your trailer hitch will fuck up your aerodynamics and cost you some highway mileage... food for thought.
Take some xanax and buy a Honda then. The rest of us won't burn any more dinosaurs.
The rest of us will happily drive this where ever we like. My friends drive...a LOT...and still wouldn't have a problem. I can't think of the last time I needed to drive so far and didn't want a break to refuel (myself) during which a supercharger could easily top up the car.
Mind you, I don't normally drive this much in a WEEK and the average commuter (12k/yr) could top up their battery overnight on a standard 110v outlet in normal climate or a 20a 110v outlet in more adverse conditions. All the nonsense about range anxiety is for the once or twice a year most people take long road trips - and even then they're generally covered by the already existing supercharger network much less all the other charge stations.
They will delete the image and keep a one-way hash of it.
They can then log those hashes and, if they see one repeat then they know something fishy is going on. The data level of the hashing determines if they reject after a single match or if they're looking for multiple matches before they consider it a duplicate login attempt.
It's actually a pretty inventive way to prevent bots if you have the data processing capability... and FB/Google/Amazon types DO have it. If you add in some facial recognition you can even help ensure the person logging in belongs on the account (this is good and bad and likely would be optional if they had a brain).
With that said, fuck no I'm not helping their other AI algos they are likely planning to use this data for and an even bigger fuck no to giving them that level of invasive, pervasive view into my life. You aren't going to data mine the background for more reasons to sell targeted adds on my screen.
Depends on the building size, but if it's big enough for a parking lot with a couple spots dedicated to EV charging then it's very unlikely they will notice. You could simply be driving a lot and charging up there (which is...kinda the point) while at work.
100KWh * 10c/KWh = $10. * 20 ish working days a month is $200. And that's if you pulled a full pack charge every day. A business isn't going to notice that.in their power bill and if they do, they're going to say 'hey, those EV charging stations that we paid thousands of dollars to install are actually getting used!'
Well, let's not assume. The Journalist gave Tesla a bunch of shit about how their tester car ran out of gas and they got stranded. I hate the term 'fake news' but this certainly fits...as the car telemetry clearly showed the driver taking a long detour and skipping a charging station as well. Basically he just drove until the battery died on purpose because he was then able to "honestly" claim that the car's range/batter was insufficient and write an article more interesting sounding than "yep, car's great like everyone said...nothing to bitch about with the battery/range".
So yah, they called him out and he totally deserved it. Now if only journalists had one iota of ethics...
Now, the income rates are arbitrary but roughly fit the example and other replies. In the first scenario the university needs to pay the student $100 which is unlikely and an additional $20 in taxes is collected. In the second, the university only lays out $30 and 'gifts' $50 for tuition which, in reality, costs them significantly less. So they save on both ends of it...
If grad students made that much money, they'd skip the school and just take the job. The real problem here is the ridiculous cost of for-profit schools and them taking advantage of the laws to further their bottom line. Unfortunately students get caught in the middle and lose out.
I'd expect there's another available loophole - you simply offer a discount or 'preferred rate' for certain people (e.g. grad students). AFAIK if you buy something at a preferred rate you pay tax on the preferred rate.
Less time than that actually, but the demand was minimal so they scrapped it. Superchargers are easier and cheaper to build and, despite cries otherwise, people WITH EVs don't actually seem to be having all the doomsday charging problems that people WITHOUT EVs keep assuring us exist.
Except for the part where that's how their product gets sold. Give or take a rounding error, zero consumers buy gas from anywhere other than a gas station. Or that's to say, virtually 100% of consumer (and a large portion of commercial) gas sales are via gas stations.
So while they don't 'care' they also can't exist without them or some alternative.
"Frequently" drive to vacation...3 or 4 times a year? This straw-man has been covered countless times.
Also, do feel free to document 2500 fill-ups per hour. That's 100+ pumps assuming a highly-efficient 2-3 minutes total per car. Even if so, that's a highly unusual situation to have a single rest stop mid-way between two 600km distant points.
And when EVs are commonplace enough, I highly suspect it won't be a problem. Instead of having to centralize a huge tank of flammable fuel, individual businesses can also offer charging in their own private lots to draw travelers in.
Yes, the grid needs upgrading for that, but in return all the fuel creation/distribution cost/waste/pollution/etc. winds down
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure why you'd ding Dell for exactly the same thing you're praising apple for. (well, maybe I can guess)
Batteries ARE consumables. How *fast* they're consumed is another story and varies with the quality, chemistry, and usage. Not voiding the warranty most certainly is still an argument though. Apple will often refuse to replace a battery within warranty unless it's severely degraded. If, however, you don't think missing 25% of your battery capacity is a good thing you're stuck paying apple's price to replace or voiding your warranty. That's certainly a problem in my book. A consumable should be replaceable without voiding the warranty unless the device is intended as limited use (i.e. a toner cart - when it's consumed it's no longer intended to be used at all)
By the way: If that Dell happens to be an E7470 or E7270 or similar, Dell has a known but sporadic issue with the batteries failing around the 1.5 year mark. Contact your Dell rep instead of crying on /. about getting them the permaban.
No courage went into building this machine I see. I'll have to pass then!
Needs beefy machine.
Runs 2011 MBP.
Do I fail the fanboy test here or does that not make any sense? A (very) small segment of the user population needs a workstation class machine. For those who do and want to run OSX...welp break out the corporate cards. For everyone else, you can get more for less AND not have such a high level of lock-in. Maybe Apple will even let you upgrade this system...!
Mind-blowingly alarmist maybe.
Bitcoin mining represents .14% of global energy consumption at a cost of $1.5M USD while producing BTC worth $10M USD. (well, based on their info) And a 700% ROI (minus capex) is pretty sweet.
So bitcoin is a rounding error.
The USA along consumes a bit under 300TWh/yr for *street lighting* vs ~30TWh for bitcoin globally. Interesting? Sure. Mind-blowing? Not to me at least.
Yes, much. It's also much, MUCH more specialized.
The compute power required is so vast that BTC has long since moved to ASICs and the larger (largest?) individual mining machine contains close to 200 of them.
A top end CPU gets ~20-30 MHash/sec and the top end GPUs with custom firmware etc. getting ~500 MHash/s.
The top end modern ASIC miner (Antminer S9) is rated at 14THash/s or 14,000,000 MHash/s - something like a million times more than a CPU.
Power efficiency is similar. 0.1 MHash/J for CPU, 1-2MHash/J for GPU and 10,000MHash/J for the Antminer S9.
Mining is a one-off capital (hardware/infra) plus run rate (electricity, maint, cooling, internet, support). Just ask anyone who runs a datacenter.
Mining won't stop until all BTC is mined and then moves to a POS model instead of POW.
However, that one-off capital cost gets diminishing returns as the overall compute power grows around you. The value of BTC may go up (as it has) and that will change the multiplier for your income vs. depreciation and run-rate costs.
I don't think you quite understand how crypto-c works.
How does that 1 BTC get into that wallet? (hint: a blockchain transaction)
Then there's the individually small but communally large cost of buying, transporting, and exchanging those USB sticks to make those transactions. AND unless you have an awful lot of trust in people, the only way to ensure that BTC remains yours would be to transact it out of that wallet and into one that only you know the private key for.
There's some exception to that where physical coins were loaded with keys for BTC but the keys aren't exposed until you do something destructive (scratch-off) but those come from the days were people in crypto didn't scam because ... well who would bother for 50c or $1?
TF? Why do people insist on using utterly arbitrary and, frankly, stupid measurements? house-days of energy? Seriously?
There's a far less arbitrary standard for measuring power. Several in fact. KWh would be idea. Joules if you're on the physics side of the house and want to be annoying. But house-days of power? Just stop. Measure in an actual standard and, if you really want, THEN translate into arbitrary comparative measurements (football fields, car lengths, fuck-tons, etc.)
I'd ask for a citation, but your arbitrary measurements make that 1) unlikely and 2) meaningless.
I'm not sure referencing a fictional TV series is a completely valid proof of your point, but I do agree with it.
If you remove the 'gubermint' side of the equation to dictate value attached to currency, your fall back to where your currency needs intrinsic value. (e.g. consumables or durable AND useful goods)
Sex and force are not things which can store value - since they're not objects. Indentured hookers, servants, or mercs however WOULD be. Gold is, well, the golden standard for "real currency" except that it has rather limited value beyond "oh shiny" and scarcity. Yes, it's quite useful in many ways but something like 80-90% of it goes into non-productive things (jewelry being the large majority of all gold use).
So BTC? It certainly has scarcity - enforced by the compute-cost. That same process ensures the recording of transactions is nearly impossible to defraud. (the compute power required to to so is prohibitive to anything but a dedicated 1st world government) and the infrastructure is diversified enough that it would be quite difficult to restrict, control, or remove.
I don't think BTC will be a long-term money exchange for individuals, but I do think it will find it's place.
*yawn* More posts about this than useful things said about crypto currency in these threads i think (well, tulips and trump).
We get the point. Many of us remember the 90s tech bubble and almost all know the late 2000s mortgage bubble/financial crisis.
Nowadays, tech stocks are major market players and many of the biggest today were founded in the 90s among all the others which went poof (you may have heard of google, amazon, paypal, ebay, etc). My point being that not everything goes poof with a bubble.
Most of the ICOs are getting money because laymen are speculating with play money. Throw $100 each into a few coins and see what happens...because they know full well if they did that the first time they heard of bitcoin they'd be retiring today. I would too.
I watched this one from the beginning...
They talked it up left right and center. Can't imagine what they paid for advertising but it was significant as well.
Their site promised all kinds of things besides the crazy return rates - the primary one being the ability to move money in and out via a 'plex card' which basically let you spend your plex coins as cash. Mind you, that's a great feature but not the easiest to implement (to say the least). Currently they're 'asking for beta testers' for 20ish of those cards. Give it a few months and they'll roll them out ... well probably not since they'll be insolvent and shut down by various gov't agencies.
The exchange facilitates your purchase or sale...and transfer of funds to/from your bank account. They don't hold the cash to buy everything out...
You want to sell, 10BTC...well when theres 10BTC looking to be bought at your asking price, that money goes from the buyer, through the exchange, and to you. Why is this complicated to understand?
A portable generator is not as efficient as a modern, fully integrated, ICE/electric motor combo. No way, no how. Not going to happen unless you literally throw 10's of thousands of dollars at your solution just to say you did.
Oh, and you want to TOW it? Might as well factor in the rolling resistance and (lack of) aerodynamics of that trailer plus generator. Really, it's a stupid idea for 99.999% of people. Either buy an ICE vehicle if you're doing 100's of miles away from civilization at a clip or get an tesla and you really won't have mileage problems...really.
That's ... a very long way to say 'compare MPG with MPGe'
The tesla, at 130MPGe, is over 3x more energy efficient than even your 40 MPG hybrid. Done and done.
With an EV, the weight has a much smaller impact since (minus the small inefficiencies in the system) you get back the energy required to accelerate your heavier car. The old-school 'lighter car = better gas mileage' thinking doesn't apply enough to really matter.
However, hanging a genrator off your trailer hitch will fuck up your aerodynamics and cost you some highway mileage ... food for thought.
Take some xanax and buy a Honda then. The rest of us won't burn any more dinosaurs.
The rest of us will happily drive this where ever we like. My friends drive...a LOT...and still wouldn't have a problem. I can't think of the last time I needed to drive so far and didn't want a break to refuel (myself) during which a supercharger could easily top up the car.
Mind you, I don't normally drive this much in a WEEK and the average commuter (12k/yr) could top up their battery overnight on a standard 110v outlet in normal climate or a 20a 110v outlet in more adverse conditions. All the nonsense about range anxiety is for the once or twice a year most people take long road trips - and even then they're generally covered by the already existing supercharger network much less all the other charge stations.
They will delete the image and keep a one-way hash of it.
They can then log those hashes and, if they see one repeat then they know something fishy is going on. The data level of the hashing determines if they reject after a single match or if they're looking for multiple matches before they consider it a duplicate login attempt.
It's actually a pretty inventive way to prevent bots if you have the data processing capability ... and FB/Google/Amazon types DO have it. If you add in some facial recognition you can even help ensure the person logging in belongs on the account (this is good and bad and likely would be optional if they had a brain).
With that said, fuck no I'm not helping their other AI algos they are likely planning to use this data for and an even bigger fuck no to giving them that level of invasive, pervasive view into my life. You aren't going to data mine the background for more reasons to sell targeted adds on my screen.
Depends on the building size, but if it's big enough for a parking lot with a couple spots dedicated to EV charging then it's very unlikely they will notice. You could simply be driving a lot and charging up there (which is...kinda the point) while at work.
100KWh * 10c/KWh = $10. * 20 ish working days a month is $200. And that's if you pulled a full pack charge every day. A business isn't going to notice that.in their power bill and if they do, they're going to say 'hey, those EV charging stations that we paid thousands of dollars to install are actually getting used!'
I assume you're trying to be funny...
Well, let's not assume. The Journalist gave Tesla a bunch of shit about how their tester car ran out of gas and they got stranded. I hate the term 'fake news' but this certainly fits...as the car telemetry clearly showed the driver taking a long detour and skipping a charging station as well. Basically he just drove until the battery died on purpose because he was then able to "honestly" claim that the car's range/batter was insufficient and write an article more interesting sounding than "yep, car's great like everyone said...nothing to bitch about with the battery/range".
So yah, they called him out and he totally deserved it. Now if only journalists had one iota of ethics...
I think the point is more that a major smartphone OS is having broadly noticeable problems with a basic UI feature.
Something went badly wrong in the QA rounds. Or...something.
This seems to be a math-order problem.
$100 income - 30% taxes = $70 spendable money + $30k taxes
$50 tuition = $20 remaining money
-------------OR-----------
$30k income - 30% taxes = $20k spendable money + $10k taxes
$0 tuition = $20k remaining money
Now, the income rates are arbitrary but roughly fit the example and other replies. In the first scenario the university needs to pay the student $100 which is unlikely and an additional $20 in taxes is collected. In the second, the university only lays out $30 and 'gifts' $50 for tuition which, in reality, costs them significantly less. So they save on both ends of it...
If grad students made that much money, they'd skip the school and just take the job. The real problem here is the ridiculous cost of for-profit schools and them taking advantage of the laws to further their bottom line. Unfortunately students get caught in the middle and lose out.
I'd expect there's another available loophole - you simply offer a discount or 'preferred rate' for certain people (e.g. grad students). AFAIK if you buy something at a preferred rate you pay tax on the preferred rate.
Well that's the funny thing! My EV never HAS been to a gas station.
You see, I can charge it at home.
Less time than that actually, but the demand was minimal so they scrapped it. Superchargers are easier and cheaper to build and, despite cries otherwise, people WITH EVs don't actually seem to be having all the doomsday charging problems that people WITHOUT EVs keep assuring us exist.
Except for the part where that's how their product gets sold. Give or take a rounding error, zero consumers buy gas from anywhere other than a gas station. Or that's to say, virtually 100% of consumer (and a large portion of commercial) gas sales are via gas stations.
So while they don't 'care' they also can't exist without them or some alternative.
"Frequently" drive to vacation...3 or 4 times a year? This straw-man has been covered countless times.
Also, do feel free to document 2500 fill-ups per hour. That's 100+ pumps assuming a highly-efficient 2-3 minutes total per car. Even if so, that's a highly unusual situation to have a single rest stop mid-way between two 600km distant points.
And when EVs are commonplace enough, I highly suspect it won't be a problem. Instead of having to centralize a huge tank of flammable fuel, individual businesses can also offer charging in their own private lots to draw travelers in.
Yes, the grid needs upgrading for that, but in return all the fuel creation/distribution cost/waste/pollution/etc. winds down