It's basically a glorified bluetooth speaker costing 5x as much as some others. Oh and it does a bunch of other things that can be done much better by other means.
When it comes to the general automotive qualities of the S, X and probably the 3, I don't think there's much to complain about. They've proven that electric vehicles don't break down, don't look weird and can be desirable vehicles.
That said, the adage "never buy version 1 of anything" applies to cars as much as it does to anything else. Buying a new model of vehicle is just a bad idea. It will launch with defects in its design, production / quality issues and software bugs which will be rectified in later production vehicles. Unless those defects are sufficiently dangerous to warrant a recall, or can be fixed during updates / servicing they'll be there forever. Aside from that Tesla in particular tends to bump up the specs of its vehicles in an iterative fashion. It makes no sense to me why anyone would preorder a model 3 from them even if ultimately it might be a great car.
There are LOTS of things the Tesla have in common with combustion vehicles. Headlights, glass, motors (for windows, seats, wingmirrors etc.), mirrors, seats, speakers, seatbelts, rubber seals, primer / paint, tyres, alloy rims, wiring, sensors, trim, dashboard / door moulds, carpeting, locks, etc. Most of their assembly line would also be very similar in terms of process and the machinery / robotics / diagnostics software that moves it along. I expect Tesla shares many of its suppliers with other vehicle manufacturers.
Obviously there are major differences such as battery and motors. Teslas are supposedly very mechanically reliable from an automotive aspect. The faults in the X are mostly to do with the doors, trim and other teething troubles.
Lots of combustion vehicles have these faults too or even more serious issues. My Hyundai diesel's clutch pretty much exploded one day - it was repaired under warranty but apparently it was a common fault in that model.
Those gull wing doors were just a silly gimmick. Yeah they look cool but in an SUV, they make zero sense. Aside from all the mechanical / electrical complexity, they're prone to leak, open / close slower than a regular door (too bad if its snowing / raining), prevent the doors from having storage space, prevent a bike / canoe / luggage rack being mounted on the car.
Regular doors work just as well, or even sliding ones. They're cheaper, simpler and more reliable. It should be a no brainer. Of course that assumes the gull wing doors were added to solve a practical problem. The reality is they were probably added to solve a marketing problem - a justification to jack the price up and free press.
Is why the the right wing would want to attack Musk. He's an entrepreneur, he's creating a LOT of jobs and intellectual property and he has a distinctly libertarian streak. Why are they attacking the guy?
Hack the sites these jihadi fuckwits gather on or set up lots of honeypot sites for that purpose. Stir liberally with agent provocateurs. Then use the ip addresses, user ids and text gathered to profile what hours they're active, who they interact with, what they're up to, what their interests are, where they most likely live and ultimately who they are. Then serve the ISP with a court order and conduct more conventional surveillance.
Or gather all the ip interactions for the 99.99999% of non terrorist related activity and get swamped with noise.
Continuum is a good concept - a phone that becomes a desktop. But hobbling that concept by making it only run Windows universal apps makes it still born. A good idea becomes an absolutely terrible idea. It MUST run native software or it will not take off.
Microsoft would have been better off to choose an Intel mobile chipset and worked on this other stuff. Then when it was ready they could switch to ARM if they liked. However, chances are that even if ARM does get x86 emulation it will be terrible. It'll eat batteries and it will chug. Microsoft should also be tooling up their Developer Studio to spit out universal binaries using LLVM or similar. If an exe is compiled natively on first invocation then it doesn't matter what processor it runs on and performance should be good on all of them.
*Sigh* give it up. Git for Windows is built with MinGW and accompanied by MSYS binaries. The only reason cygwin is mentioned is for the reasons I cited, for compatibility / detection. If this is too much to take in, I suggest you email their mailing list and run your theory by them.
I'm glad that you're in a position to dictate precisely what development environment your company uses and what your customers use. I'm not. Aside from that the Bash runs over Windows subsystem for Linux. It is not a set of Unix tools that have been ported, compiled and running natively as Windows executables, rather it is a virtualized environment for running Linux binaries.
Secondly, Git for Windows DOES use Msys/MinGW. This is as easy to confirm by just installing it and looking at the directory called "mingw64" with all the Unix commands in it. Or typing "uname -a" from bash itself. The only references to cygwin are some minor interoperability tools for converting cygwin paths, cygwin terminal support and suchlike for people in mixed environments.
Msys Bash is better than Cygwin for anyone wanting to run bash on Windows. Best out-of-the-box solution so far is probably Git for Windows installer which includes bash and a bunch of other stuff required to keep git happy. It works regardless of someone using Windows 10 or something earlier.
My point if it wasn't clear was there was no reason for incompatibility in the first place. If "dir" can be aliased to something called "Get-ChildItem", then it could have been aliased to something called "Get-Dos-Dir" which implemented the same arguments and behaviour as the CMD dir. The same applies for the other commands built into CMD - popd, pushd, cd, goto, if etc. plus any syntax for environment variable expansion, pipes, redirection etc. Even invoking the command "cmd" itself could have been implemented such that it correctly parsed and executed.bat and.cmd files all from Powershell.
If Microsoft had done this, then it wouldn't even be a point of discussion because cmd would be long gone. The problem was that Microsoft *didn't* do this. Cmd and Powershell ran in parallel, incompatible worlds and anyone concerned with all-too-real bullshit of different versions of.NET or Powershell on some random PC would have written their scripts for cmd as the lowest common denominator. And that's exactly what actually happened.
Meanwhile in Unix-land, bash was largely a superset of ksh was largely a superset of sh so migrating was easy and natural. Everyone uses bash and there's a reason for that. Can you guess?
You can't issue dos/cmd commands. The likes of "dir" are aliases onto things in powershell which superficially resemble the old commands but function differently.
For example I can type "dir", but "dir/?" doesn't do a thing. So maybe the syntax is a bit different. Typing "dir -help" or "dir --help" issues an enormous error message that apparently I've done something wrong. Not helpful. Typing "help dir", tells me about something called "get-childitem" but essentially doesn't help at all except tell me to type "get-help Get-ChildItem -detailed". Eventually I get a wall of text which STILL doesn't correspond to the old syntax.
Would it have really killed Microsoft to make "dir" function like "dir"? Maybe later on when I'm comfortable and familiar with the powershell I might want call get-childitem for something. But it is FAR more important to me during transition that the thing is familiar and all the various.bat /.cmd scripts that I have actually survive the transition.
I should add that the command "ls" also aliases to "get-childitem". So Microsoft are equal-opportunity confounders.
The normal command prompt is simple, stupid and does what it's told. Powershell is like some esoteric, incompatible, overly complex thing that claims to do anything via cmdlets, scripts, functions etc. but ends up just complicating everything including the simple stuff. It doesn't even have the good grace to be a superset of command prompt or bash which would at least make it familiar.
I don't see how forcing people to use it is supposed to win people over or fail to piss off people who want the old command prompt.
Is he referring to traditional quarried slate and hand dried tiles, or to "traditional" factory produced asphalt / cement / concrete / clay tiles? The ambiguity is kind of important to define here since most constructions probably use the latter kind (which cost ~ $1 each) and not the former (5-10x as much).
And somehow I doubt these solar tiles are going to sell for $1 a pop or anywhere close. Modern roof tiles only have to be secured with a single nail so it's hard to see how they're easy to fit unless they come on prefabricated panels or something and only the edges and joins need finishing. Perhaps that is the case, but if they're individually put in place then I don't see them being cheaper that way either because someone has to wire them all up in rows.
AOL bought Compuserve and the service became a skinned version of AOL. Small piece of trivia - the Compuserve fat client used Mozilla / Gecko as its embedded browser near the end of its life. AOL was planning to use Gecko in their main client but Microsoft paid them off with a big heap of money. That's what set things unraveling with Netscape causing Mozilla to be spun off as a non-profit org.
The Concorde service wasn't like that. They sent a limo for you and had a separate checkin, lounge. You could go from kerb to boarding in 20 or 30 minutes. The process wouldn't be especially slower than a private jet. And flying a private jet across the Atlantic would take you 7 hours or so.
I've been on a private jet and for international travel you still have to go through the usual bullshit of airport security, baggage scans and even liquid restrictions plus customs on the other side. Private jets cost way more than even a 1st class ticket. They're only viable if you're super rich or have a lot of people coming and going between the same destinations to afford to charter them.
Yeah but they're not Nazis. They might share the common interest in exterminating world Jewry and the subjugation of lesser, mud peoples but they also like meditation, tai chi, tall lattes, ear buds, and ironic T-shirts. See, totally not Nazi.
Of course you'll run into problems. Just like page rankings run into problems. I don't believe those problems are insurmountable. Articles can be scored on veracity, provenance, cited sources / links etc. and that determines their ranking. If necessary there can be an override switch.
And Facebook can't force people to read news but it can downrank the crap and in doing so give greater prominence to stories that are more likely to be true and important. And no I believe Snopes is biased except towards bullshit.
Are they perfect? No, but they're trying which is more than can be said of Facebook. Facebook is declaring war on clickbait. If they can develop algorithms for that then news can be handled in a similar way.
Slashdot Mirror
It's basically a glorified bluetooth speaker costing 5x as much as some others. Oh and it does a bunch of other things that can be done much better by other means.
That said, the adage "never buy version 1 of anything" applies to cars as much as it does to anything else. Buying a new model of vehicle is just a bad idea. It will launch with defects in its design, production / quality issues and software bugs which will be rectified in later production vehicles. Unless those defects are sufficiently dangerous to warrant a recall, or can be fixed during updates / servicing they'll be there forever. Aside from that Tesla in particular tends to bump up the specs of its vehicles in an iterative fashion. It makes no sense to me why anyone would preorder a model 3 from them even if ultimately it might be a great car.
Obviously there are major differences such as battery and motors. Teslas are supposedly very mechanically reliable from an automotive aspect. The faults in the X are mostly to do with the doors, trim and other teething troubles.
Lots of combustion vehicles have these faults too or even more serious issues. My Hyundai diesel's clutch pretty much exploded one day - it was repaired under warranty but apparently it was a common fault in that model.
Regular doors work just as well, or even sliding ones. They're cheaper, simpler and more reliable. It should be a no brainer. Of course that assumes the gull wing doors were added to solve a practical problem. The reality is they were probably added to solve a marketing problem - a justification to jack the price up and free press.
Actually I do know what "ad hominem" means. Thanks for playing.
Wow that's some ad hominem you hammered out there.
Explain how it's "grabbing taxpayer money" please.
Is why the the right wing would want to attack Musk. He's an entrepreneur, he's creating a LOT of jobs and intellectual property and he has a distinctly libertarian streak. Why are they attacking the guy?
Or gather all the ip interactions for the 99.99999% of non terrorist related activity and get swamped with noise.
Microsoft would have been better off to choose an Intel mobile chipset and worked on this other stuff. Then when it was ready they could switch to ARM if they liked. However, chances are that even if ARM does get x86 emulation it will be terrible. It'll eat batteries and it will chug. Microsoft should also be tooling up their Developer Studio to spit out universal binaries using LLVM or similar. If an exe is compiled natively on first invocation then it doesn't matter what processor it runs on and performance should be good on all of them.
*Sigh* give it up. Git for Windows is built with MinGW and accompanied by MSYS binaries. The only reason cygwin is mentioned is for the reasons I cited, for compatibility / detection. If this is too much to take in, I suggest you email their mailing list and run your theory by them.
Secondly, Git for Windows DOES use Msys/MinGW. This is as easy to confirm by just installing it and looking at the directory called "mingw64" with all the Unix commands in it. Or typing "uname -a" from bash itself. The only references to cygwin are some minor interoperability tools for converting cygwin paths, cygwin terminal support and suchlike for people in mixed environments.
Git for Windows uses an MinGW / Msys dist, not Cygwin.
Msys Bash is better than Cygwin for anyone wanting to run bash on Windows. Best out-of-the-box solution so far is probably Git for Windows installer which includes bash and a bunch of other stuff required to keep git happy. It works regardless of someone using Windows 10 or something earlier.
If Microsoft had done this, then it wouldn't even be a point of discussion because cmd would be long gone. The problem was that Microsoft *didn't* do this. Cmd and Powershell ran in parallel, incompatible worlds and anyone concerned with all-too-real bullshit of different versions of .NET or Powershell on some random PC would have written their scripts for cmd as the lowest common denominator. And that's exactly what actually happened.
Meanwhile in Unix-land, bash was largely a superset of ksh was largely a superset of sh so migrating was easy and natural. Everyone uses bash and there's a reason for that. Can you guess?
For example I can type "dir", but "dir /?" doesn't do a thing. So maybe the syntax is a bit different. Typing "dir -help" or "dir --help" issues an enormous error message that apparently I've done something wrong. Not helpful. Typing "help dir", tells me about something called "get-childitem" but essentially doesn't help at all except tell me to type "get-help Get-ChildItem -detailed". Eventually I get a wall of text which STILL doesn't correspond to the old syntax.
Would it have really killed Microsoft to make "dir" function like "dir"? Maybe later on when I'm comfortable and familiar with the powershell I might want call get-childitem for something. But it is FAR more important to me during transition that the thing is familiar and all the various .bat / .cmd scripts that I have actually survive the transition.
I should add that the command "ls" also aliases to "get-childitem". So Microsoft are equal-opportunity confounders.
I don't see how forcing people to use it is supposed to win people over or fail to piss off people who want the old command prompt.
And somehow I doubt these solar tiles are going to sell for $1 a pop or anywhere close. Modern roof tiles only have to be secured with a single nail so it's hard to see how they're easy to fit unless they come on prefabricated panels or something and only the edges and joins need finishing. Perhaps that is the case, but if they're individually put in place then I don't see them being cheaper that way either because someone has to wire them all up in rows.
AOL bought Compuserve and the service became a skinned version of AOL. Small piece of trivia - the Compuserve fat client used Mozilla / Gecko as its embedded browser near the end of its life. AOL was planning to use Gecko in their main client but Microsoft paid them off with a big heap of money. That's what set things unraveling with Netscape causing Mozilla to be spun off as a non-profit org.
I've been on a private jet and for international travel you still have to go through the usual bullshit of airport security, baggage scans and even liquid restrictions plus customs on the other side. Private jets cost way more than even a 1st class ticket. They're only viable if you're super rich or have a lot of people coming and going between the same destinations to afford to charter them.
Having too many wife beating nazis in positions of authority undermines 'civic authority'.
Yeah but they're not Nazis. They might share the common interest in exterminating world Jewry and the subjugation of lesser, mud peoples but they also like meditation, tai chi, tall lattes, ear buds, and ironic T-shirts. See, totally not Nazi.
The name Boom was chosen after comparing favourably to Kablammo, Plunge, Missing, FreeFall, Disintegrator and Fireball during test marketing.
And Facebook can't force people to read news but it can downrank the crap and in doing so give greater prominence to stories that are more likely to be true and important. And no I believe Snopes is biased except towards bullshit.
Are they perfect? No, but they're trying which is more than can be said of Facebook. Facebook is declaring war on clickbait. If they can develop algorithms for that then news can be handled in a similar way.
I'd say the majority of it was targeted at the right in the US election but Snopes has lots of stories targeted at the left so it's not all one way.