The range as stated by Tesla is about 55 miles at its governed top speed of 125 MPH. That's a pretty short distance, and given what this car is, I'd say 125 isn't an abnormal speed for someone to be driving this car. Even if you're staying below the speed limit to maximize range, you're only going to be getting under 300 miles. You're absolutely correct that you can't do NY-LA on a single tank of gas. But you can do it in 2 days with stops for fuel in any other car. You'd take over a week in the Tesla, because you'd have to stop for several hours every 200 miles or so.
The GM EV1 took care of the proof of concept years before the Tesla. It had the same range problems, but was clearly intended for short distance commuting, which the Tesla isn't. I stand by my statement that it's a really cool toy and technology demonstrator, but not much of a car unless you're only intending it as a commuter vehicle, and other options handle that better for far less money.
Would I want one? I'm not sure. I certainly could buy better cars for the money. Now, if I had unlimited funds, already had the other cars I'd want first, and wanted it as a 6th or 7th car, and already had a nice SUV with a trailer to get it to where I wanted to drive it, sure. As I don't have those yet, not so much.
If I were to consider an electric option, I'd have to pick the Chevy Volt. It's actually going to be useable as a car, since you've got gasoline backup power when the battery dies. It's too bad nuclear won't scale down to car size, though. Could you imagine only having to refuel every 10 years?
Everything Clarkson said was accurate. The car has serious issues. Those issues are shared by any other all-electric car, and will be until there's a major breakthrough in battery technology.
The Tesla would be a lot of fun - for a very short distance. That would be followed by a long recharge, whereas with any other car you just refuel and keep going. And it would be ridiculous for Top Gear not to show that very real issue. Did they dramatize the showing? Yes. Would the outcome have been any different if they had just driven the car until the battery died? No.
Ultimately, any battery operated car is either a short-distance commuter (and who wants a Tesla for sitting in rush hour traffic) or a toy. And other toys at the Tesla's price point will give you a lot more fun for the money. The Tesla is a very cool technology demonstrator. It's not a very good car.
Tabs belong in the tab bar, not the title bar. Chrome looks awful.
The only things that belong in the title bar are the close button, the dock button, and the zoom to max content size button on the left, the window title in the middle, and the toolbar button on the right.
Your concept of "how our brain's abstraction capability works" is clearly incomplete, as that's a current area of research where we really don't have anywhere close to a complete picture. If you're claiming that it's something that one can educate oneself about by looking at a textbook, you're sadly mistaken.
And if you're actually claiming that rote memorization of a multiplication table is in any way applicable to advanced mathematics, you're absolutely incorrect, and it is actually harmful to many students.
Current mathematics education techniques are very successful with a very small percentage of students, and an abject failure with the vast majority. And a big part of that is the fact that basic arithmetic has very little to do with advanced math.
And I would argue that arithmetic has very little to do with advanced mathematics, and doesn't need to be taught as a base, short of a very cursory explanation, given that once one understands the concept of how it works, there's no need at all to keep doing it by hand, and in fact even before one understands the concept, the tool (a calculator) should be taught. Follow the "here's how you do this" with "here's how this works" rather than the other way around.
The way we've historically tried to "build the base" doesn't work for the VAST majority of humans. Mathematics education is a dismal failure, except for the very few students who learn that way. It's time to fix it.
And if another multiplication table is never memorized, the world will be none the worse for it.
Then the point of the exam has already been nullified, and they need to stop giving that exam forever.
It's like saying that every carpenter needs to be able to make their own brace and bit, and use that to drill holes. They don't learn that any more, they don't need to, they have some very lovely power drills that can do the job hundreds of times faster.
If the function of doing something by hand has already been replaced by a machine, teach how to use the machine. Don't bother with the cruft that people will never use again, and know they'll never use again.
And sure, there will be a few people who want to do it the old way. We call these people hobbyists, and they'll learn how to do it on their own. That goes for the mathematical functions, and the old brace and bit. We don't need to be testing it, and we certainly don't need to be emphasizing it in any sort of mandatory class.
These are drug warrants we're talking about. The cops like to use their fancy SWAT toys, and they love no-knock warrants.
You're not going to get a polite detective knocking, you're going to get 20 cops breaking down your door at 3 am, trashing your house and your beowulf cluster looking for your grow operation.
There's one big problem for most users with SIP that Skype solved.
SIP is not terribly useful without a SIP provider. Skype IS a Skype provider. And by that, I mean that when you download Skype, you've got a service to connect to other users, without having to do anything else. You've also got cheap dialout capability (it's about $3/month for US calls) and you've got cheap dialin capability (about $60/year in the US).
So you've got reasonable price, ease of use, and a largeish userbase that you can call without having to pay anything. I'd LOVE to see an open solution that's as easy to use and as cheap, but I suspect we won't see that.
Maybe once M$ really starts killing Skype, somebody else will show up. I'd say at this point, the only one big enough to do it would be Google.
No, you stop lying. The option of going into enormous debt is only there if you're in immediate danger of dying. Otherwise, there is no health care unless you have cash or insurance. The state programs are only available if you have children or are a child. And forget about dental or vision care.
I'd say the odds are probably closer to 70 - 30 that you'd find a better hospital here by picking one at random. But it doesn't matter how good that hospital is if you can't pay for it, and millions of Americans can't. The care you get if you're poor and can't afford to pay is minimal, they'll save your life, but put you back on the street, and with your medical debt, you can forget ever owning anything again.
And it's not hard to find people who have no options for shelter. The shelters are full, they're turning people away every day.
Free speech IS the public interest. There's nothing to "balance" there.
Without free speech, there can be no democratic society, and without a democracy, there can be no legitimate government. If the government censors ANYTHING, it is by definition a repressive oligarchy.
While the poorest here generally have access to food, health care is available only for immediate emergencies, and will saddle you with enormous debt if you use it. The quality of that tremendously expensive emergency care is variable, and may be worse than anything that you'd get in South America.
Shelter can be completely unavailable, unless you consider the underside of a bridge to be adequate shelter. The shantytowns that the poorest in South America may call home aren't an option here - building codes will result in such a thing being bulldozed in short order.
I don't know. Goatse.cx was something of a defining moment for some of us. It was the point where we stopped caring about images we saw on the internet.
I don't think I've seen a "shock site" since that has actually shocked me, or really bothered me in any way. Tubgirl? Yawn. Lemonparty? Gay guys get old too. 2 Girls 1 Cup? Eh, the music was ok, but I didn't even get slightly queasy. I can look at pictures of dismembered bodies while eating dinner now - I might not want to, but I can.
So I suppose in a way I never recovered. And I'm ok with that - otherwise some of the really fucked up shit on the internet would get to me more than just being an annoyance.
And that means I really don't have any interest in a link blocker. It's Slashdot, we've come to expect the occasional hello.jpg.
Back on topic, good on Oracle. Now if they can just stop being evil everywhere else.
Done right, you could give them a serious disincentive to have an in-house legal department.
"Oh, you're using your in-house counsel? No problem. We'll just take the annual budget of that department, and you can give that much to the other side." - Judge GoodGuy
Never gonna happen with Congress bought and paid for by the corporations, though.
How about... The sides in a court case are allowed to pitch in as much money as they want, but half of it will go to your opponent, to allow him to buy exactly as good legal advice as you do.
I think you may have just hit upon a solution to the whole issue of tort reform.
It's absolutely brilliant. All parties to a dispute would be going in with exactly equal footing for legal representation, no matter how much either side was willing or able to spend on legal fees. It could result in an opening of access to the courts for the poor, and at the same time put a serious smackdown on SLAPP suits.
All tort "reform" to this point has concentrated on reducing the size of awards, which isn't always a good thing. This would just put the man on the street on an equal legal footing with the largest corporation.
Now, all we need to do is come up with about $100 million to buy some senators, and it'll be passed.
I went to public high school in Tennessee. My junior high school biology teacher didn't do any dancing around - they covered evolution, to the point that a two-semester college intro anthropology course was a review of a small portion of the material I'd covered in junior high biology.
On the first day of the material, the teacher gave a statement to the effect of "This is a science class, not a religion class. We're not interested in religion here, we're not discussing religion here, and if you don't learn and understand the material, you're going to fail. If you want to talk about religion, do it somewhere else."
High school biology didn't cover human evolution, because it was too broad a subject for what was mostly a plant biology course.
Google says that's 325 miles. You'll never make it in one day with a Tesla.
And that's their point. It's not a realistic car. There's nothing at all disingenuous about that.
Sure, you could use it to commute to work. But there's no fun in that with a sports car. I believe Nissan makes an electric more appropriate to that market.
The Tesla is an expensive toy, and as such, cannot perform to the general expectations of other expensive toys in its class, due to the current inherent limitations of its power source.
The problem was dramatized. Top Gear is an entertainment show. I don't see why this is an issue, especially since the problem with the car is real and verifiable.
I saw the show. I would still want to have a Tesla if I could afford it, but it would have to be my second high-end sports car, because I'd want to have one I could actually drive long distances if I wanted. As it is, I can't afford the first one, so I'm not getting a Tesla anytime soon.
That has to be the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard.
His time is gone. He's developed the software and moved on. Nothing anyone else can do at that point can change that without the mythical time machine.
It's not possible to steal something from the past - the past has it, and will always have it.
Slashdot Mirror
The range as stated by Tesla is about 55 miles at its governed top speed of 125 MPH. That's a pretty short distance, and given what this car is, I'd say 125 isn't an abnormal speed for someone to be driving this car. Even if you're staying below the speed limit to maximize range, you're only going to be getting under 300 miles. You're absolutely correct that you can't do NY-LA on a single tank of gas. But you can do it in 2 days with stops for fuel in any other car. You'd take over a week in the Tesla, because you'd have to stop for several hours every 200 miles or so.
The GM EV1 took care of the proof of concept years before the Tesla. It had the same range problems, but was clearly intended for short distance commuting, which the Tesla isn't. I stand by my statement that it's a really cool toy and technology demonstrator, but not much of a car unless you're only intending it as a commuter vehicle, and other options handle that better for far less money.
Would I want one? I'm not sure. I certainly could buy better cars for the money. Now, if I had unlimited funds, already had the other cars I'd want first, and wanted it as a 6th or 7th car, and already had a nice SUV with a trailer to get it to where I wanted to drive it, sure. As I don't have those yet, not so much.
If I were to consider an electric option, I'd have to pick the Chevy Volt. It's actually going to be useable as a car, since you've got gasoline backup power when the battery dies. It's too bad nuclear won't scale down to car size, though. Could you imagine only having to refuel every 10 years?
They weren't slandered.
Everything Clarkson said was accurate. The car has serious issues. Those issues are shared by any other all-electric car, and will be until there's a major breakthrough in battery technology.
The Tesla would be a lot of fun - for a very short distance. That would be followed by a long recharge, whereas with any other car you just refuel and keep going. And it would be ridiculous for Top Gear not to show that very real issue. Did they dramatize the showing? Yes. Would the outcome have been any different if they had just driven the car until the battery died? No.
Ultimately, any battery operated car is either a short-distance commuter (and who wants a Tesla for sitting in rush hour traffic) or a toy. And other toys at the Tesla's price point will give you a lot more fun for the money. The Tesla is a very cool technology demonstrator. It's not a very good car.
No kidding.
Tabs belong in the tab bar, not the title bar. Chrome looks awful.
The only things that belong in the title bar are the close button, the dock button, and the zoom to max content size button on the left, the window title in the middle, and the toolbar button on the right.
Strange...
I seem to get mod points 15 at a time, about once a month.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use
I think that covers it pretty well. Dilution, tarnishment, etc. don't apply.
It won't work. You can use someone else's trademark legally to describe the product of that company, there's plenty of case law to back that up.
Your concept of "how our brain's abstraction capability works" is clearly incomplete, as that's a current area of research where we really don't have anywhere close to a complete picture. If you're claiming that it's something that one can educate oneself about by looking at a textbook, you're sadly mistaken.
And if you're actually claiming that rote memorization of a multiplication table is in any way applicable to advanced mathematics, you're absolutely incorrect, and it is actually harmful to many students.
Current mathematics education techniques are very successful with a very small percentage of students, and an abject failure with the vast majority. And a big part of that is the fact that basic arithmetic has very little to do with advanced math.
I am not strawmanning the argument.
And I would argue that arithmetic has very little to do with advanced mathematics, and doesn't need to be taught as a base, short of a very cursory explanation, given that once one understands the concept of how it works, there's no need at all to keep doing it by hand, and in fact even before one understands the concept, the tool (a calculator) should be taught. Follow the "here's how you do this" with "here's how this works" rather than the other way around.
The way we've historically tried to "build the base" doesn't work for the VAST majority of humans. Mathematics education is a dismal failure, except for the very few students who learn that way. It's time to fix it.
And if another multiplication table is never memorized, the world will be none the worse for it.
See: Aspirin
You do realize you can now buy a low-end Android phone for under $100 with no contract, right?
Then the point of the exam has already been nullified, and they need to stop giving that exam forever.
It's like saying that every carpenter needs to be able to make their own brace and bit, and use that to drill holes. They don't learn that any more, they don't need to, they have some very lovely power drills that can do the job hundreds of times faster.
If the function of doing something by hand has already been replaced by a machine, teach how to use the machine. Don't bother with the cruft that people will never use again, and know they'll never use again.
And sure, there will be a few people who want to do it the old way. We call these people hobbyists, and they'll learn how to do it on their own. That goes for the mathematical functions, and the old brace and bit. We don't need to be testing it, and we certainly don't need to be emphasizing it in any sort of mandatory class.
People actually don't change the locks when they move in?
I went from the closing to the house with my locks that were already in my car. I'd owned the house less than an hour when the locks were changed.
That would be like taking over for another sysadmin and not changing the passwords immediately.
I don't know why you would expect that.
These are drug warrants we're talking about. The cops like to use their fancy SWAT toys, and they love no-knock warrants.
You're not going to get a polite detective knocking, you're going to get 20 cops breaking down your door at 3 am, trashing your house and your beowulf cluster looking for your grow operation.
There's one big problem for most users with SIP that Skype solved.
SIP is not terribly useful without a SIP provider. Skype IS a Skype provider. And by that, I mean that when you download Skype, you've got a service to connect to other users, without having to do anything else. You've also got cheap dialout capability (it's about $3/month for US calls) and you've got cheap dialin capability (about $60/year in the US).
So you've got reasonable price, ease of use, and a largeish userbase that you can call without having to pay anything. I'd LOVE to see an open solution that's as easy to use and as cheap, but I suspect we won't see that.
Maybe once M$ really starts killing Skype, somebody else will show up. I'd say at this point, the only one big enough to do it would be Google.
No, you stop lying. The option of going into enormous debt is only there if you're in immediate danger of dying. Otherwise, there is no health care unless you have cash or insurance. The state programs are only available if you have children or are a child. And forget about dental or vision care.
I'd say the odds are probably closer to 70 - 30 that you'd find a better hospital here by picking one at random. But it doesn't matter how good that hospital is if you can't pay for it, and millions of Americans can't. The care you get if you're poor and can't afford to pay is minimal, they'll save your life, but put you back on the street, and with your medical debt, you can forget ever owning anything again.
And it's not hard to find people who have no options for shelter. The shelters are full, they're turning people away every day.
Free speech IS the public interest. There's nothing to "balance" there.
Without free speech, there can be no democratic society, and without a democracy, there can be no legitimate government. If the government censors ANYTHING, it is by definition a repressive oligarchy.
Oddly, you're almost completely wrong.
While the poorest here generally have access to food, health care is available only for immediate emergencies, and will saddle you with enormous debt if you use it. The quality of that tremendously expensive emergency care is variable, and may be worse than anything that you'd get in South America.
Shelter can be completely unavailable, unless you consider the underside of a bridge to be adequate shelter. The shantytowns that the poorest in South America may call home aren't an option here - building codes will result in such a thing being bulldozed in short order.
I don't know. Goatse.cx was something of a defining moment for some of us. It was the point where we stopped caring about images we saw on the internet.
I don't think I've seen a "shock site" since that has actually shocked me, or really bothered me in any way. Tubgirl? Yawn. Lemonparty? Gay guys get old too. 2 Girls 1 Cup? Eh, the music was ok, but I didn't even get slightly queasy. I can look at pictures of dismembered bodies while eating dinner now - I might not want to, but I can.
So I suppose in a way I never recovered. And I'm ok with that - otherwise some of the really fucked up shit on the internet would get to me more than just being an annoyance.
And that means I really don't have any interest in a link blocker. It's Slashdot, we've come to expect the occasional hello.jpg.
Back on topic, good on Oracle. Now if they can just stop being evil everywhere else.
Done right, you could give them a serious disincentive to have an in-house legal department.
"Oh, you're using your in-house counsel? No problem. We'll just take the annual budget of that department, and you can give that much to the other side." - Judge GoodGuy
Never gonna happen with Congress bought and paid for by the corporations, though.
Not if the contract is legally void. The judge might include losing the right to sue over past articles as part of a punitive judgement, though.
I think you may have just hit upon a solution to the whole issue of tort reform.
It's absolutely brilliant. All parties to a dispute would be going in with exactly equal footing for legal representation, no matter how much either side was willing or able to spend on legal fees. It could result in an opening of access to the courts for the poor, and at the same time put a serious smackdown on SLAPP suits.
All tort "reform" to this point has concentrated on reducing the size of awards, which isn't always a good thing. This would just put the man on the street on an equal legal footing with the largest corporation.
Now, all we need to do is come up with about $100 million to buy some senators, and it'll be passed.
Interesting.
I went to public high school in Tennessee. My junior high school biology teacher didn't do any dancing around - they covered evolution, to the point that a two-semester college intro anthropology course was a review of a small portion of the material I'd covered in junior high biology.
On the first day of the material, the teacher gave a statement to the effect of "This is a science class, not a religion class. We're not interested in religion here, we're not discussing religion here, and if you don't learn and understand the material, you're going to fail. If you want to talk about religion, do it somewhere else."
High school biology didn't cover human evolution, because it was too broad a subject for what was mostly a plant biology course.
Oh yeah, Word 5. The last good product to ever come out of M$.
I'd almost forgotten how bad 6 was. And it's never gotten any better, just more bloated - and now we're up to 14.
And the Windoze version is even worse - what an abomination of a user interface that bloatware is!
Google says that's 325 miles. You'll never make it in one day with a Tesla.
And that's their point. It's not a realistic car. There's nothing at all disingenuous about that.
Sure, you could use it to commute to work. But there's no fun in that with a sports car. I believe Nissan makes an electric more appropriate to that market.
The Tesla is an expensive toy, and as such, cannot perform to the general expectations of other expensive toys in its class, due to the current inherent limitations of its power source.
The problem was dramatized. Top Gear is an entertainment show. I don't see why this is an issue, especially since the problem with the car is real and verifiable.
I saw the show. I would still want to have a Tesla if I could afford it, but it would have to be my second high-end sports car, because I'd want to have one I could actually drive long distances if I wanted. As it is, I can't afford the first one, so I'm not getting a Tesla anytime soon.
That has to be the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard.
His time is gone. He's developed the software and moved on. Nothing anyone else can do at that point can change that without the mythical time machine.
It's not possible to steal something from the past - the past has it, and will always have it.