I'd be interested to see the reference for that. The Toyota hybrid drivechain by design assumes that there are two prime movers because it is designed to split power generation. Obviously a 100% electric drive doesn't need to do that. There is no "Tesla's tech": it just uses very ordinary electric drive; battery, electronics, motor, transmission. Totota have built millions of these, millions of reliable units with liquid cooled motors and electronics. Tesla have built hundreds.
The moderation on this thread shows how badly the fanboys want Tesla to succeed - but the example of other niche manufacturers is that you either have to be extremely niche and conservative (Morgan) or get bought out by a sugar daddy (Lamborghini) - it's reckoned you need a project team of 300-500 engineers juust to design a new volume car, depending on how much work you have to do on customising the powertrain. And yes, I have worked in vehicle R&D.
As a Minister he is not allowed to tread on the toes of his colleagues. Our MP is now a Minister and apologises for this - but he didn't make the system.
Tesla will fail, no matter how much people want them to succeed. Why? Economies of scale.
Toyota have already delivered something like 3 million of their hybrid drivechains. The latest Prius is the biggest, heaviest, fastest and most economical to date, and now they will produce a small hybrid (Yaris). They have nearly 20 years of hybrid development. GM has what is in reality a plug in hybrid. Mercedes planned the original A-class to be electric; they have lots of development, as yet unused, probably over 20 years. Nissan has the Leaf entering volume production. Mitsubishi is ramping up its city car. The simple fact is that the moment batteries are good enough to go it alone - and they are not, yet, except for niches - these manufacturers can do it all over Tesla because they can crank out reliable, proven designs in volume. The sheer amount of development it takes nowadays to build a car reliably and economically is staggering, and Tesla cannot amortise that over large production runs. Their products are always likely to be way overpriced - and although some people will pay for a badge, the total number as a percentage of the market is very small indeed.
Toyota is in the strongest position because they can vary the relative amount of electric and gasoline power according to the state of energy costs. As gasoline gets more expensive, the gas engine can shrink and the battery can grow. As a result they can sell vehicles people actually want to buy. (OK, I admit it, I ended my support for Diesels and bought a Prius this year.)
Ken Clarke is having all his sensible proposals stomped on by the Tory Right, who are increasingly resembling the Republican nutjobs. Nadine Dorries resembles Bachmann more and more every day (is that libellous?). Just like the US, the far right is actually a minority - but very vocal and supported by Murdoch.
In the course of a working day I use maybe 4 or 5 programs, with a dozen others getting occasional use. Exactly what are all these things you need to do, that you can't and would expect to, on a tiny computer?
You really do seem muddled as to what constitutes science. How could a theory not tolerate errors? It is an artificial explanatory construct, not a measurement, and none of our explanatory constructs for significant phenomena are anywhere like complete. At any given time a theory usually cannot explain some phenomena, or indeed has contradictions, but continues to be used because there is no alternative. For instance, classical wave theory could not explain the ultra-violet catastrophe, but continued to be used because it worked for just about all practical applications. Quantum theory then explained electron behaviour, but Maxwell's equations continued to work. So in the first part of the 20th century, on your claim, just about all working physicists were morons.
I suggest you stop reading - or half reading - Popper (who is way out of date and now mainly part of history of philosophy of science) and at least read Kuhn, who my director of studies described as the "least wrong philosopher of science". It may open your eyes a bit.
I think, however, you give your lack of understanding away even more with your comments like "real astronomers don't really look at the sky" and "a theory like optics". Real physics and chemistry are surprisingly "dirty". It is sometimes necessary to do real, experimental research to understand where the numbers come from, or theories are simply being built on blind faith.
Rubbish. Look at the history of the size of Pluto. When originally discovered it was greatly overestimated - placed at the very top of the error band. Gradually the estimates reduced with time until Pluto was demoted - it wasn't even a proper planet. Why did it take so long? Pluto was the only planet discovered by a US citizen, and US astronomers are even now trying to restore its planetary status. The "Exact" sciences can be just as political as sociology. What you are commenting on, rather ignorantly, is that what most people call "hard" science (e.g. classical mechanics) is actually "easy" science that is amenable to precomputer mathematics - yes, even QED. Climate science, like modern particle physics, is hard science. Look at the desire to find the Higgs with an American accelerator - it is a difficult search and premature publication seems to result from the political desire to find something.
Climate science and particle physics both depend on large amounts of data, theoretical models, and lots of computer power. They are at the leading edge of their disciplines and their standards are more or less identical. Are you saying that, pari passu, particle physics doesn't meet the standards set by classical mechanics?
I conclude that you are not really a physicist or a chemist, or you would not be so ignorant of the kind of research that goes on nowadays.
If that's so, why do so many neocons and religious nutters in the US have German or Polish surnames? - though to be fair the Mormons were founded by someone with a British surname, and to my enormous embarrassment a member of my family was on the Great Trek.
The problem with Australia, strangely, is very different. It is not at all about criminals; it is because Australia is a society based on working class British culture which used to be highly unionised. Australians see high incomes and profligate use of energy as their "rights" - and, as we know, Trade Unionists would demand the suspension of the Laws of Thermodynamics if it infringed their members' "rights". They have got away with it because China has an insatiable demand for Australian minerals, but they are failing to develop a goods and service economy based on those minerals, which means the boom will eventually collapse. (Before anyone mods this flamebait, I have numerous Australian relatives, and the views described above come from my Australian uncle, who founded a successful business and yet used to ride a bicycle around Perth. He felt that the Australian economy was in the long term unsustainable - and his descendants have squandered his fortune.
"All power tends to corrupt. Absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely." Acton, of course, didn't know about psychopaths and malignant narcissists. Neither class is "mentally weak and easily corruptible"; both seek power to use it for their own, corrupt ends. Acton, however, was referring to people who started out with good intentions. Interestingly, the Palin emails seem to suggest that she is one of those - initially she meant well but now seems to be on a full-blown narcissist power trip.
...and a whole lot of others. Turing would the last person to approve - he was notably modest about his own contributions. Flowers' contribution was that of a technology enabler - he identified ways that thermionic valves (tubes) could be made reliable (the main one being not switching the heaters on and off.) This was a very important contribution - but without Tutte, Turing and Newman there would have been nothing to contribute to.
It is actually a lot more complicated than a watch, though. It is an analogue time representation machine relying on planetary gear systems. It is also completely deterministic, i.e. it can be wound backwards as well as forwards, so it is in no sense a computer.
However, its existence asks a big question - did the Roman Empire hold technical progress up for nearly 1500 years? It seems likely that it was the Roman takeover of the Hellenic world that put paid to the skills and thought needed to produce things like this. The maker(s) of the Antikythera mechanism were as skilled as Galileo, and about as capable astronomically. The Romans were militarily effective, but otherwise uncivilised, like the Normans.
I guess you must have done some antics that he didn't like.
Some years ago I was blocked in traffic by an idiot and when he eventually moved, I mouthed "thank you" at him. He proceeded to follow me home, knocked on my door, and screamed at me that I had called him a "wanker". Well, I might have thought it...a universal gesture for "thank you" is surely needed.
Obviously a parameterised[sic] query prevents the most obvious forms of injection attack, but it alone does not protect against everything. Although it can be tedious, all data returned in forms should really be checked for syntactical legitimacy. Apart from anything else, this makes it easy to distinguish between accident and malice, and so know when to pop up a box saying "please check that the contents of each box make sense before clicking Submit" and when to put up a 404 and block the IP for a while. On a large commercial website, the development cost per submission is quite low, and failing to validate data is a stupid corner to cut.
I don't play with computers; never have really, since my job has usually provided all the computing entertainment I need. But as I've got older, I want to do more physical stuff. A few years ago, I restored a boat. Then I sold it and have spent nearly two years making our house as eco-friendly as possible (carbon footprint down by over 40%.) My next project is designing and building a boat from scratch, teaching myself CAD and marine engineering in the process. It will just be a little 3-tonner, but it's going to be my design from keel to boottop.
I've given away, sold or scrapped more old computers than I care to think about. In the end, it's what's in your head, what you have done and what you have made that matters. Letting other people's creations define you is something I find inadequate.
As the soldier, diplomat and historian John Bagot Glubb pointed out, the Arab problem is that they are unable, for cultural reasons, to avoid their states fragmenting through tribal clashes and the mechanisms of gaining power. A global caliphate is as probable as a world union of all C programmers with a set of common beliefs and goals.
I think you may be missing a point. From the point of view of Bin Laden, a totalitarian US would actually be easier to subsume into Islam. It is very hard to take over a truly pluralist society. Hitler was able to take over Germany because it was actually run by a military junta. He had only to persuade, by force and a significant minority at the ballot box, the military rulers that they should make him Chancellor. Once he was at the top of the pyramid, there was no effective opposition.
For Al Queda, the US reverting to Christian fundamentalism is a good thing, because the power structure of Christian fundamentalism is similar to fundamentalist Islam, and so it is easier to take over from within. It is exactly the same mechanism by which German communists were among the most likely to become fanatical Nazis - people who are already fanatics are ripe for conversion to a different brand of fanaticism.
Among the most reliable vehicles on the road are the Toyota Prius, and the various BMW and VW Diesels, all of which have good or very good fuel consumption. In the past, high MPG went with small engines and bottom-end gearboxes which were cheaper and less well made than the more expensive ones further up the range. Now it's likely to be the mid range powertrains that are older designs and less reliable, while the most modern and high spec powertrains also use less fuel.
Linux is not worse than Windows in terms of user experience. Perhaps Gnome or KDE are worse than Windows XP desktop (I personally prefer Gnome of the three). But Linux the operating system is not worse than Windows the operating system; most users never really come into contact with either of them, at least, not in a well run corporate environment. However, the point about Chrome is that it is Linux with a Google Chrome like front end. That's not stupid; webOS is a similar concept and a lot of people who try it like it very much. The user experience is defined by the quality of the applications that run in Chrome.
It is similar in design to the reactors that malfunctioned at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant in Japan after a massive earthquake and tsunami earlier this year.
This shows that the (American-designed) Fukushima plant has design faults replicated in other plants of similar design. The British regulator is now re-examining proposals for new build in the light of the Japanese disaster. It is not at all clear that other designs of reactor have the same problems.
A number of posters above are suggesting solutions which have, in the past, been shown not to work (in Moby Dick, despite having small arms on board, Ahab decides to outrun the pirates. Think for a while about why. But then Melville had actually crewed on a whaler.)
The problem of the US Navy is that it is not set up to combat piracy economically. Its ships and munitions are too expensive to operate, and its systems are intended to detect tactical level threats, not identify which of a hundred similar fishing boats is in fact a pirate boat. It would probably be cheaper and more effective just to give the pirates reasonably well paid jobs, lack of which explains why they are involved in piracy in the first place.
In this country, General Wade was once despatched with an army to deal with the rebellious, raiding Highlanders. When he got there he decided that the problem was poverty. He set them to building roads in the Highlands, bringing trade to the area. It worked. Later, the Caledonian Canal was built for much the same reason: it wasn't economic as a canal but it brought employment and opportunity. These are the examples that the US should be looking at.
I think his website is pretty hopeless, he has adopted a name which is already well used and he has an email link rather than a proper form submission linked to a database. Also, what's with the "Somerset"? There's no address on the website, but he quotes a 15 mile radius of Bristol - which is in Bristol, thank you very much. (I live on the Somerset/Wilts border.)
I can't help but think that what he really needs is some good business advice, though as he may possibly now end up having to go into hiding from creditors, it could be a bit late.
In fruit flies and bacteria you can do evolutionary experiments in months to a few years. Strict creationism (i.e. species are unique and created by (a) god) has been repeatedly disproven.
Slashdot Mirror
The moderation on this thread shows how badly the fanboys want Tesla to succeed - but the example of other niche manufacturers is that you either have to be extremely niche and conservative (Morgan) or get bought out by a sugar daddy (Lamborghini) - it's reckoned you need a project team of 300-500 engineers juust to design a new volume car, depending on how much work you have to do on customising the powertrain. And yes, I have worked in vehicle R&D.
As a Minister he is not allowed to tread on the toes of his colleagues. Our MP is now a Minister and apologises for this - but he didn't make the system.
Toyota have already delivered something like 3 million of their hybrid drivechains. The latest Prius is the biggest, heaviest, fastest and most economical to date, and now they will produce a small hybrid (Yaris). They have nearly 20 years of hybrid development. GM has what is in reality a plug in hybrid. Mercedes planned the original A-class to be electric; they have lots of development, as yet unused, probably over 20 years. Nissan has the Leaf entering volume production. Mitsubishi is ramping up its city car. The simple fact is that the moment batteries are good enough to go it alone - and they are not, yet, except for niches - these manufacturers can do it all over Tesla because they can crank out reliable, proven designs in volume. The sheer amount of development it takes nowadays to build a car reliably and economically is staggering, and Tesla cannot amortise that over large production runs. Their products are always likely to be way overpriced - and although some people will pay for a badge, the total number as a percentage of the market is very small indeed.
Toyota is in the strongest position because they can vary the relative amount of electric and gasoline power according to the state of energy costs. As gasoline gets more expensive, the gas engine can shrink and the battery can grow. As a result they can sell vehicles people actually want to buy. (OK, I admit it, I ended my support for Diesels and bought a Prius this year.)
Ken Clarke is having all his sensible proposals stomped on by the Tory Right, who are increasingly resembling the Republican nutjobs. Nadine Dorries resembles Bachmann more and more every day (is that libellous?). Just like the US, the far right is actually a minority - but very vocal and supported by Murdoch.
In the course of a working day I use maybe 4 or 5 programs, with a dozen others getting occasional use. Exactly what are all these things you need to do, that you can't and would expect to, on a tiny computer?
I suggest you stop reading - or half reading - Popper (who is way out of date and now mainly part of history of philosophy of science) and at least read Kuhn, who my director of studies described as the "least wrong philosopher of science". It may open your eyes a bit.
I think, however, you give your lack of understanding away even more with your comments like "real astronomers don't really look at the sky" and "a theory like optics". Real physics and chemistry are surprisingly "dirty". It is sometimes necessary to do real, experimental research to understand where the numbers come from, or theories are simply being built on blind faith.
Climate science and particle physics both depend on large amounts of data, theoretical models, and lots of computer power. They are at the leading edge of their disciplines and their standards are more or less identical. Are you saying that, pari passu, particle physics doesn't meet the standards set by classical mechanics?
I conclude that you are not really a physicist or a chemist, or you would not be so ignorant of the kind of research that goes on nowadays.
The problem with Australia, strangely, is very different. It is not at all about criminals; it is because Australia is a society based on working class British culture which used to be highly unionised. Australians see high incomes and profligate use of energy as their "rights" - and, as we know, Trade Unionists would demand the suspension of the Laws of Thermodynamics if it infringed their members' "rights". They have got away with it because China has an insatiable demand for Australian minerals, but they are failing to develop a goods and service economy based on those minerals, which means the boom will eventually collapse. (Before anyone mods this flamebait, I have numerous Australian relatives, and the views described above come from my Australian uncle, who founded a successful business and yet used to ride a bicycle around Perth. He felt that the Australian economy was in the long term unsustainable - and his descendants have squandered his fortune.
"All power tends to corrupt. Absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely." Acton, of course, didn't know about psychopaths and malignant narcissists. Neither class is "mentally weak and easily corruptible"; both seek power to use it for their own, corrupt ends. Acton, however, was referring to people who started out with good intentions. Interestingly, the Palin emails seem to suggest that she is one of those - initially she meant well but now seems to be on a full-blown narcissist power trip.
...and a whole lot of others. Turing would the last person to approve - he was notably modest about his own contributions. Flowers' contribution was that of a technology enabler - he identified ways that thermionic valves (tubes) could be made reliable (the main one being not switching the heaters on and off.) This was a very important contribution - but without Tutte, Turing and Newman there would have been nothing to contribute to.
However, its existence asks a big question - did the Roman Empire hold technical progress up for nearly 1500 years? It seems likely that it was the Roman takeover of the Hellenic world that put paid to the skills and thought needed to produce things like this. The maker(s) of the Antikythera mechanism were as skilled as Galileo, and about as capable astronomically. The Romans were militarily effective, but otherwise uncivilised, like the Normans.
Samsung and Asus now look like the biggest threats to Apple, in phones and tablets respectively.
No mod points, but if I had you would have got one.
Some years ago I was blocked in traffic by an idiot and when he eventually moved, I mouthed "thank you" at him. He proceeded to follow me home, knocked on my door, and screamed at me that I had called him a "wanker". Well, I might have thought it...a universal gesture for "thank you" is surely needed.
Obviously a parameterised[sic] query prevents the most obvious forms of injection attack, but it alone does not protect against everything. Although it can be tedious, all data returned in forms should really be checked for syntactical legitimacy. Apart from anything else, this makes it easy to distinguish between accident and malice, and so know when to pop up a box saying "please check that the contents of each box make sense before clicking Submit" and when to put up a 404 and block the IP for a while. On a large commercial website, the development cost per submission is quite low, and failing to validate data is a stupid corner to cut.
I've given away, sold or scrapped more old computers than I care to think about. In the end, it's what's in your head, what you have done and what you have made that matters. Letting other people's creations define you is something I find inadequate.
You are presenting with a number of symptoms of schizophrenia. Either you know this and are trolling or you need to consult s physician urgently.
As the soldier, diplomat and historian John Bagot Glubb pointed out, the Arab problem is that they are unable, for cultural reasons, to avoid their states fragmenting through tribal clashes and the mechanisms of gaining power. A global caliphate is as probable as a world union of all C programmers with a set of common beliefs and goals.
For Al Queda, the US reverting to Christian fundamentalism is a good thing, because the power structure of Christian fundamentalism is similar to fundamentalist Islam, and so it is easier to take over from within. It is exactly the same mechanism by which German communists were among the most likely to become fanatical Nazis - people who are already fanatics are ripe for conversion to a different brand of fanaticism.
Among the most reliable vehicles on the road are the Toyota Prius, and the various BMW and VW Diesels, all of which have good or very good fuel consumption. In the past, high MPG went with small engines and bottom-end gearboxes which were cheaper and less well made than the more expensive ones further up the range. Now it's likely to be the mid range powertrains that are older designs and less reliable, while the most modern and high spec powertrains also use less fuel.
Linux is not worse than Windows in terms of user experience. Perhaps Gnome or KDE are worse than Windows XP desktop (I personally prefer Gnome of the three). But Linux the operating system is not worse than Windows the operating system; most users never really come into contact with either of them, at least, not in a well run corporate environment. However, the point about Chrome is that it is Linux with a Google Chrome like front end. That's not stupid; webOS is a similar concept and a lot of people who try it like it very much. The user experience is defined by the quality of the applications that run in Chrome.
This shows that the (American-designed) Fukushima plant has design faults replicated in other plants of similar design. The British regulator is now re-examining proposals for new build in the light of the Japanese disaster. It is not at all clear that other designs of reactor have the same problems.
The problem of the US Navy is that it is not set up to combat piracy economically. Its ships and munitions are too expensive to operate, and its systems are intended to detect tactical level threats, not identify which of a hundred similar fishing boats is in fact a pirate boat. It would probably be cheaper and more effective just to give the pirates reasonably well paid jobs, lack of which explains why they are involved in piracy in the first place.
In this country, General Wade was once despatched with an army to deal with the rebellious, raiding Highlanders. When he got there he decided that the problem was poverty. He set them to building roads in the Highlands, bringing trade to the area. It worked. Later, the Caledonian Canal was built for much the same reason: it wasn't economic as a canal but it brought employment and opportunity. These are the examples that the US should be looking at.
I can't help but think that what he really needs is some good business advice, though as he may possibly now end up having to go into hiding from creditors, it could be a bit late.
In fruit flies and bacteria you can do evolutionary experiments in months to a few years. Strict creationism (i.e. species are unique and created by (a) god) has been repeatedly disproven.