While there's some difference in design for compressive vs. expansive forces it's not significant at the minor pressures we're discussing here. ~15PSI is not going to cause any difficulties.
Waste heat management without air as a heat sink is going to be another story and probably one of the main technical difficulties
Engineering problems of building a long tube capable of withstanding 1 ATM?
That's not even rocket science...which they've done a pretty good job on already.
Jokes aside, the science behind doing so is not exceptionally complex and far greater pressures are routinely handled. Doing it economically over hundreds of miles will be harder, but it's essentially a fixed, one-time cost. If you include tunnels in areas not seismically active then you further insulate yourself from the environment and potential issues.
I expect thermal management will be a much larger issue. Without air to use as a heat sink things will get interesting for climate control (even assuming all the active drive components are part of the maglev bed and the car is entirely passive in that regard) and general heat management.
You do realize that every few minutes somewhere between 10,000 and 30,000 BTC are exchanged right? What's life-changing money? $500k? That's less than 200 BTC and not something which would significantly (or even noticeably TBH) alter the market.
People thought $1000 was ridiculous, shortly after they thought that $300 was insane which wasn't that long after $1 seemed farfetched.
$5000 is impossible much less $20,000 or whatever is next...but they'll either happen or BTC will be forked to something that scales to suit the pricing.
But if you actually consider paypal a better alternative than bitcoin, eth, etc. then your qualifications are different than most. You know, paypal that's been known to seize accounts for arbitrary reasons - or none at all - and refuse to return funds unless you jump through a very exact set of hoops if you're lucky enough for them to not just lock down the account entirely and keep everything.
At least with BTC or ETH there's no higher authority to decide your ETH should be invalidated/refunded because some buyer lied and claimed your produce was counterfeit. Talk to people who sell on ebay and you'll quickly find out how bad the situation is.
Transactions are typically in the few cents range, easily on par with what credit cards cost (the merchant) for use, though the cost is currently sender-loaded.
ETH still doesn't process confirm as fast as a credit card...but it's easily quick enough for most transactions outside POS.
It's a gamble for sure, but so is playing lotto...and that gamble is far, far less likely to pay out.
It's definitely a bubble of some sort and I fully expect to lost 3/4 or more of the money I have in. However if one in 10 stabs in the dark pays off, the return at this junction is still in the more than adequate to cover the other losses and turn a very nice profit.
If you have enough to day-trade then even that is fairly easy to turn a profit on. Either in the penny stock coins or the bigger players. The death of this will come when actual market players and hedge funds put a HFT equivalent in the mix and drive out the little players.
Volumetric efficiency, and battery cost is king. Charge/discharge rates and battery life (capacity loss rate) are secondary but important
An EV being somewhat heavier isn't a significant hinderance (within bounds of course, a 5000kg sedan isn't going to go over well) since the energy normally lost to accelerate a heavier car comes back via regenerative braking.
However, fitting enough battery capacity for good range at a reasonable cost is what it comes down to. If the batteries were a few 100's of kh heavier it would make very little difference - especially if that provided a boost to range or lowered cost.
At that point it stands to argue that he sued the wrong entity.
Sue the holding company that owns the subsidiary which wronged you. Always sue where the money is.... and this is why having a lawyer for these things helps. They know all the ins and outs of the game and stuff that seems ridiculous (naming 15 defendants in this bad PC sale case for example) is quite normal and the only way to get paid*.
* I'm somewhat making things up to underline the point...but i've seem equally ridiculous things in various court cases.
I assume that you cannot sue in small claims court if Equifax says your data/credit report/personal information wasn't affected in the hack?
To sue someone on a small claim court, you need to 1) have damages that can be quantify to an amount of money (not imaginary amount) and 2) can prove that the damages are done by their action (not circumstantial evidence or very likely to lose). If you are sure you have both, then go for it; otherwise, don't waste your time.
This.
I need go to thru the chatbot to see what it comes up with, but small claims court (at least in NY) requires tangible damages or loss.
If my credit got FUBAR because my identity was stolen in this hack and i lost a deposit on a house, i'd have a tangible loss to sue them for. Having my PII (along with virtually every adult in the US) leaked by itself doesn't actually damage me in any direct way.
Collecting may require a return to court for an enforcement order, but collecting from a multi-billion dollar company isn't all that difficult and judges have very wide latitude when it comes to enforcement actions. Plus they generally don't like their rulings to be ignored so...
Apple wouldn't be stupid enough to go and re-design a changing method when there are already standards and hardware all over the environment. They wouldn't throw away everything the entire industry has built before they decided to jump on the bandwagon just so they can have a proprietary standard unique to them.
Now...am I talking about lightning or wireless charging? (or headphones ports)
It's a car. With a battery and some other fancy crap.
When you buy it, you buy access to either 60kwh or 75kwh of capacity...and whatever other fancy crap you elect.
Yes, software is used to handle this access...and even allows people to upgrade to accessing 75kwh without having to buy a (very expensive) new battery.
Let me be clear: instead of paying tesla for the extra capacity, people didn't. They got EXACTLY what their paid for when they bought their car.
Then tesla went and gave them something for free because 'zomg hurricane...evacuate!'... yeah. Fuck tesla for helping people evacuate. I mean, what the hell...those assholes even refused to extort anyone for the upgrade fee and didn't even wait for some illegal court order mandating they provide access.
Fuck tesla for doing what they could to help people fleeing a disaster area.
You can manage it yourself easily: buy the 75d model from tesla right from the start.
This isn't a 'might act of god' but instead a company doing the right thing to help people in a disaster area. They could have done nothing at all and simply left people with the car options they bought and paid for...or suggested to people trying to get out that they had to spend the extra $5k for to use the extra range in their travel...but no. Tesla did this all on their own.... and with that i'm realizing how many trolls are in this/. article.
So...tesla makes more money if you buy a higher capacity battery pack. If you don't pay them more, they save a bit on warranty costs and you get a battery that has less capacity but lasts somewhat longer.
Remind me again why everyone is shedding tears here?
Tesla is willingly unlocking features FOR FREE to assist people in a disaster area and people are complaining???
If tesla had a physically smaller battery pack in the 60D...would people be decrying them for not providing a big enough battery to escape the hurricane? SMH. If you want to bash a company for stupid reasons, at least make up something plausible.
First sale doctrine means you can do what you wish with something you purchase. This includes custom firmware, part replacement, or destructive testing.
Things you can't do: expect your warranty to remain intact in many cases, share DRM circumvention techniques, share code derived from or including copyrighted code...and some others.
Apple does that because they operate on an utterly different scale from Tesla.
Tesla hopes to break 100,000 car sales in 2017.
Apple sells 10's of millions of iphones a year.
The quantity sold and incremental cost make it worth apple having three separate system board configurations (with the bonus that it's simply a single chip substitution/addition difference) instead of down-rating a single SKU.
For tesla it's a ~25% change in battery volume/weight which likely would require a whole separate set of impact tests, and certifications.
Besides, this is an inverse-car analogy...and it still sucks.
A lot of it is even simpler than what you go into.
It costs a significant amount of money to design, build and stock a second, similar-but-different model of your product. It's often less expensive to disable features than build two fully separate models.
This is not analogous, but I will answer. If you sell software I think it's fair to come up with your own business model on how it's licensed. Per site, per user, per device, etc. What I don't think is fair is selling the software, and then adding on additional costs to use it. For example: Microsoft likes to sell you a server, and then sell you client access licenses on top of that, and I think that is profiteering. Either sell the software at a fixed price, or sell it at a fixed per user price, and maybe even give the customer the option between the two, but not both at the same time.
For one, microsoft does not sell servers. You need to look up some definitions of profiteering because your example is completely off the mark.
Beyond that, your 'fair' solution is to lock people into a single type of licensing agreement and what, force them to... remove and install different but functionally identical software if they want to change licensing schemes? I really try to avoid blunt derogatory language but... that's fucking stupid as all hell.
Using license keys to unlock features instead of requiring a separate install (be it physical or digital) is a long-standing, normal practice across countless business lines and products. You're making irrelevant and simply factually incorrect arguments against something that both end users and businesses get great benefit from.
Slashdot Mirror
You need to read some better physicists.
While there's some difference in design for compressive vs. expansive forces it's not significant at the minor pressures we're discussing here. ~15PSI is not going to cause any difficulties.
Waste heat management without air as a heat sink is going to be another story and probably one of the main technical difficulties
Engineering problems of building a long tube capable of withstanding 1 ATM?
That's not even rocket science...which they've done a pretty good job on already.
Jokes aside, the science behind doing so is not exceptionally complex and far greater pressures are routinely handled. Doing it economically over hundreds of miles will be harder, but it's essentially a fixed, one-time cost. If you include tunnels in areas not seismically active then you further insulate yourself from the environment and potential issues.
I expect thermal management will be a much larger issue. Without air to use as a heat sink things will get interesting for climate control (even assuming all the active drive components are part of the maglev bed and the car is entirely passive in that regard) and general heat management.
You do realize that every few minutes somewhere between 10,000 and 30,000 BTC are exchanged right? What's life-changing money? $500k? That's less than 200 BTC and not something which would significantly (or even noticeably TBH) alter the market.
People thought $1000 was ridiculous, shortly after they thought that $300 was insane which wasn't that long after $1 seemed farfetched.
$5000 is impossible much less $20,000 or whatever is next...but they'll either happen or BTC will be forked to something that scales to suit the pricing.
I love the investment advice here on /. almost as much as the corny and poorly analyzed predictions in various blockchain news outlets.
To each their own of course...
But if you actually consider paypal a better alternative than bitcoin, eth, etc. then your qualifications are different than most. You know, paypal that's been known to seize accounts for arbitrary reasons - or none at all - and refuse to return funds unless you jump through a very exact set of hoops if you're lucky enough for them to not just lock down the account entirely and keep everything.
At least with BTC or ETH there's no higher authority to decide your ETH should be invalidated/refunded because some buyer lied and claimed your produce was counterfeit. Talk to people who sell on ebay and you'll quickly find out how bad the situation is.
That's where ETH comes in.
Transactions are typically in the few cents range, easily on par with what credit cards cost (the merchant) for use, though the cost is currently sender-loaded.
ETH still doesn't process confirm as fast as a credit card...but it's easily quick enough for most transactions outside POS.
It's a gamble for sure, but so is playing lotto...and that gamble is far, far less likely to pay out.
It's definitely a bubble of some sort and I fully expect to lost 3/4 or more of the money I have in. However if one in 10 stabs in the dark pays off, the return at this junction is still in the more than adequate to cover the other losses and turn a very nice profit.
If you have enough to day-trade then even that is fairly easy to turn a profit on. Either in the penny stock coins or the bigger players. The death of this will come when actual market players and hedge funds put a HFT equivalent in the mix and drive out the little players.
Volumetric efficiency, and battery cost is king. Charge/discharge rates and battery life (capacity loss rate) are secondary but important
An EV being somewhat heavier isn't a significant hinderance (within bounds of course, a 5000kg sedan isn't going to go over well) since the energy normally lost to accelerate a heavier car comes back via regenerative braking.
However, fitting enough battery capacity for good range at a reasonable cost is what it comes down to. If the batteries were a few 100's of kh heavier it would make very little difference - especially if that provided a boost to range or lowered cost.
Samsung S8 has depth effect selfies?
No and neither does Apple.
However the Note 8 DOES have dual BACK camera with faux-bokeh (i.e. 'professional portraits' or depth effect) for the same as Apple.
None of them have dual front cameras for this...and TBH you could do it entirely in software anyway.
At best, the only thing it does is force users to enter their passcode so they don't forget it
You answered your own question. That is very much why this is in place.
At that point it stands to argue that he sued the wrong entity.
Sue the holding company that owns the subsidiary which wronged you. Always sue where the money is. ... and this is why having a lawyer for these things helps. They know all the ins and outs of the game and stuff that seems ridiculous (naming 15 defendants in this bad PC sale case for example) is quite normal and the only way to get paid*.
* I'm somewhat making things up to underline the point...but i've seem equally ridiculous things in various court cases.
I assume that you cannot sue in small claims court if Equifax says your data/credit report/personal information wasn't affected in the hack?
To sue someone on a small claim court, you need to 1) have damages that can be quantify to an amount of money (not imaginary amount) and 2) can prove that the damages are done by their action (not circumstantial evidence or very likely to lose). If you are sure you have both, then go for it; otherwise, don't waste your time.
This.
I need go to thru the chatbot to see what it comes up with, but small claims court (at least in NY) requires tangible damages or loss.
If my credit got FUBAR because my identity was stolen in this hack and i lost a deposit on a house, i'd have a tangible loss to sue them for. Having my PII (along with virtually every adult in the US) leaked by itself doesn't actually damage me in any direct way.
Collecting may require a return to court for an enforcement order, but collecting from a multi-billion dollar company isn't all that difficult and judges have very wide latitude when it comes to enforcement actions. Plus they generally don't like their rulings to be ignored so...
Apple wouldn't be stupid enough to go and re-design a changing method when there are already standards and hardware all over the environment. They wouldn't throw away everything the entire industry has built before they decided to jump on the bandwagon just so they can have a proprietary standard unique to them.
Now...am I talking about lightning or wireless charging? (or headphones ports)
Good luck on not buying from a manufacturer that sells an intentionally limited or locked product.
It's extremely common...every new/modern car has a REV limiter. And a top speed governor. And so on.
It's a car. With a battery and some other fancy crap.
When you buy it, you buy access to either 60kwh or 75kwh of capacity...and whatever other fancy crap you elect.
Yes, software is used to handle this access...and even allows people to upgrade to accessing 75kwh without having to buy a (very expensive) new battery.
Not even.
Tesla sold a car with 75kw (plus reserve) of physical battery and the option to use either 60 or 75kw of that.
Folks got access to what they paid for under normal circumstances. In an emergency, Tesla circumvented the restrictions for people.
Let me be clear: instead of paying tesla for the extra capacity, people didn't. They got EXACTLY what their paid for when they bought their car.
Then tesla went and gave them something for free because 'zomg hurricane...evacuate!' ... yeah. Fuck tesla for helping people evacuate. I mean, what the hell...those assholes even refused to extort anyone for the upgrade fee and didn't even wait for some illegal court order mandating they provide access.
Fuck tesla for doing what they could to help people fleeing a disaster area.
You can manage it yourself easily: buy the 75d model from tesla right from the start.
This isn't a 'might act of god' but instead a company doing the right thing to help people in a disaster area. They could have done nothing at all and simply left people with the car options they bought and paid for...or suggested to people trying to get out that they had to spend the extra $5k for to use the extra range in their travel...but no. Tesla did this all on their own. ... and with that i'm realizing how many trolls are in this /. article.
So...tesla makes more money if you buy a higher capacity battery pack. If you don't pay them more, they save a bit on warranty costs and you get a battery that has less capacity but lasts somewhat longer.
Remind me again why everyone is shedding tears here?
Tesla is willingly unlocking features FOR FREE to assist people in a disaster area and people are complaining???
If tesla had a physically smaller battery pack in the 60D...would people be decrying them for not providing a big enough battery to escape the hurricane? SMH. If you want to bash a company for stupid reasons, at least make up something plausible.
Not quite true.
First sale doctrine means you can do what you wish with something you purchase. This includes custom firmware, part replacement, or destructive testing.
Things you can't do: expect your warranty to remain intact in many cases, share DRM circumvention techniques, share code derived from or including copyrighted code...and some others.
Apple does that because they operate on an utterly different scale from Tesla.
Tesla hopes to break 100,000 car sales in 2017.
Apple sells 10's of millions of iphones a year.
The quantity sold and incremental cost make it worth apple having three separate system board configurations (with the bonus that it's simply a single chip substitution/addition difference) instead of down-rating a single SKU.
For tesla it's a ~25% change in battery volume/weight which likely would require a whole separate set of impact tests, and certifications.
Besides, this is an inverse-car analogy...and it still sucks.
A lot of it is even simpler than what you go into.
It costs a significant amount of money to design, build and stock a second, similar-but-different model of your product. It's often less expensive to disable features than build two fully separate models.
This is not analogous, but I will answer. If you sell software I think it's fair to come up with your own business model on how it's licensed. Per site, per user, per device, etc. What I don't think is fair is selling the software, and then adding on additional costs to use it. For example: Microsoft likes to sell you a server, and then sell you client access licenses on top of that, and I think that is profiteering. Either sell the software at a fixed price, or sell it at a fixed per user price, and maybe even give the customer the option between the two, but not both at the same time.
For one, microsoft does not sell servers. You need to look up some definitions of profiteering because your example is completely off the mark.
Beyond that, your 'fair' solution is to lock people into a single type of licensing agreement and what, force them to ... remove and install different but functionally identical software if they want to change licensing schemes? I really try to avoid blunt derogatory language but ... that's fucking stupid as all hell.
Using license keys to unlock features instead of requiring a separate install (be it physical or digital) is a long-standing, normal practice across countless business lines and products. You're making irrelevant and simply factually incorrect arguments against something that both end users and businesses get great benefit from.