They couldn't do that. If you remember, the Model 3 generated massive interest and Tesla had a stack of pre-orders.If they had made the $35k version available, they would have been sold straight away to people on the waiting list, probably at a substantial loss.
However, when the car was announced, Musk said deliveries would begin in late 2017, so we should really be measuring the price rise between (say) October 2017 and now. That's about 3.25%.
Musk was still CEO of Tesla last time I checked. He is still at the helm.
Still, I do think this is a cynical move. In fact, the announcement of the $35k model 3 was a cynical move. I don't think there was ever any possibility of building it at a profit. I think they just announced it as part of a bait and switch move.
2016: "if you sign up to the waiting list for our super duper $35k car, you won't have to make do with a crappy Leaf or Bolt.
2019: "Oh sorry, you can't have the $35k car after all. What about a $40k one instead?"
That's not an impossible scenario. There's currently no European arrest warrant outstanding for him or extradition request from the USA, so it depends on whether the Crown Prosecution Service can be bothered to prosecute him for skipping bail.
Having said that, don't forget that for a proportion of the seven years he spent in the Ecuador embassy, he would have been sent to Sweden to face the rape accusations. So from his point of view, it may not have been time wasted if he thought he would be found guilty.
Wait. So not only did the incompetent cop fail to ascertain if the man was a hostage or the shooter and was a threat, he missed. His bullet could have gone anywhere. He needs to be fired at the very least.
So there's been a crash in which the erroneous intervention of an automated system was a factor, a number of incidents in which pilot intervention saved the airframe (including one with the aircraft that crashed) and a second crash which looked like it might be related (and the evidence in that direction has only got stronger since the first grounding notifications).
So basically, they installed a feature to make a new plane fly like an old one so they wouldn't have to retrain pilots. Now you're saying that pilots need training to use a feature that's supposed to obviate the need for training.
I can't help thinking it would be better to get rid of the feature and stop pretending it isn't a new plane with different flight characteristics.
I think your post would have been more credible if you had shown any understanding that a trademark and copyright are not the same thing. In particular, you need to take active steps to defend against violations of a registered trademark or you may lose it.
I would guess the reason they were advised against registering "open source" as a trademark is that they would have had to be continually defending it when used incorrectly, plus they wanted the term to become a widely used term.
No. The problem is that it has got four engines. Two modern twin engined planes can carry more passengers with better fuel economy to more airports with more flexibility. The Boeing 747-8 has also bombed, at least in the passenger carrying market and for the same reason: nobody wants four engined aircraft anymore.
As a bonus when you get back to the car, you'll find it nicely ventilated due to the hole the thief made in the window when they stole your wallet and phone.
"The mobile application accompanying the watch has unencrypted communications with its backend server and the server enables unauthenticated access to data," said authorities in the RAPEX alert. "As a consequence, the data such as location history, phone numbers, serial number can easily be retrieved and changed."
So I'd say we are talking about backend data that can be hacked in seconds. Except "unauthenticated access" suggests no real hacking is required. That is a huge privacy concern. Furthermore, an attacker can change things, so presumably, they could easily impersonate a parent. I'll leave predicting the consequences as an exercise.
The USA still doesn't have any intention of building a wall on the Mexican border, only the twat in the Whitehouse.
Anyway extradition doesn't work the way the GP seems to think. Neither the UK nor Sweden has any intention of extraditing Assange to the USA but that is because the USA hasn't requested extradition. However, if the USA asked the UK to extradite him, they almost certainly would, which makes me wonder why he came here in the first place, unless it was to avoid a rape trial.
Also in the UK. Assange tried to get the European Arrest Warrant voided in the UK courts but the UK courts ruled that what Assange was alleged to have done would constitute rape under UK law and therefore the EAW should stand. At that point Assange legged it into the Ecuador embassy.
Had he been concerned about extradition to the USA, he would not have come to the UK at all or would have gone to the Ecuador embassy as soon as he got here instead of waiting until it became inevitable that he would have to go back to Sweden to answer charges of rape.
It really doesn't matter if the women wanted him prosecuted for rape or not. The Swedish law enforcement authorities wanted him prosecuted for rape and instead of facing the charges, Assange ran away. The obvious explanation for this is that he believes he is a rapist under Swedish law.
Cars (electric or not) are not the future. The environmental damage caused by making a Tesla is just as bas as the damage caused by making fossil fuelled cars. If you are concerned for the environment, you'd be reducing the need for cars of any sort.
The parking brake usually only applies the brakes on the rear wheels. The truck's rear wheels are not turning.
Regardless of the torque of the Tesla, I'm really not at all surprised by this. There isn't much weight above the rear wheels of the truck which means the towing vehicle doesn't need need to apply much force to shift it. Don't forget the model X is all wheel drive and is pretty heavy itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Milk comes from a cow's behind
That's udderly untrue.
They couldn't do that. If you remember, the Model 3 generated massive interest and Tesla had a stack of pre-orders.If they had made the $35k version available, they would have been sold straight away to people on the waiting list, probably at a substantial loss.
In the US from March 2016 to March 2019, consumer prices have risen by approximately 6.7%. $35k then would therefore be about $37,400 now.
However, when the car was announced, Musk said deliveries would begin in late 2017, so we should really be measuring the price rise between (say) October 2017 and now. That's about 3.25%.
Musk was still CEO of Tesla last time I checked. He is still at the helm.
Still, I do think this is a cynical move. In fact, the announcement of the $35k model 3 was a cynical move. I don't think there was ever any possibility of building it at a profit. I think they just announced it as part of a bait and switch move.
2016: "if you sign up to the waiting list for our super duper $35k car, you won't have to make do with a crappy Leaf or Bolt.
2019: "Oh sorry, you can't have the $35k car after all. What about a $40k one instead?"
That's not an impossible scenario. There's currently no European arrest warrant outstanding for him or extradition request from the USA, so it depends on whether the Crown Prosecution Service can be bothered to prosecute him for skipping bail.
Having said that, don't forget that for a proportion of the seven years he spent in the Ecuador embassy, he would have been sent to Sweden to face the rape accusations. So from his point of view, it may not have been time wasted if he thought he would be found guilty.
Found it. It's from the LA Times.
https://www.latimes.com/busine...
I'd like to RTFA, but there's no link to it. There's no link to the source of the quotation.
Wait. So not only did the incompetent cop fail to ascertain if the man was a hostage or the shooter and was a threat, he missed. His bullet could have gone anywhere. He needs to be fired at the very least.
So there's been a crash in which the erroneous intervention of an automated system was a factor, a number of incidents in which pilot intervention saved the airframe (including one with the aircraft that crashed) and a second crash which looked like it might be related (and the evidence in that direction has only got stronger since the first grounding notifications).
I think I would ground the aircraft.
So basically, they installed a feature to make a new plane fly like an old one so they wouldn't have to retrain pilots. Now you're saying that pilots need training to use a feature that's supposed to obviate the need for training.
I can't help thinking it would be better to get rid of the feature and stop pretending it isn't a new plane with different flight characteristics.
China was the first ones
LOL U cant even get ur singulas and plural rite!!!!!!!!! ROFL!!!!
I can't tell you how hard that was to type with autocorrect on.
Because people start to black out at that point.
I think your post would have been more credible if you had shown any understanding that a trademark and copyright are not the same thing. In particular, you need to take active steps to defend against violations of a registered trademark or you may lose it.
I would guess the reason they were advised against registering "open source" as a trademark is that they would have had to be continually defending it when used incorrectly, plus they wanted the term to become a widely used term.
No. The problem is that it has got four engines. Two modern twin engined planes can carry more passengers with better fuel economy to more airports with more flexibility. The Boeing 747-8 has also bombed, at least in the passenger carrying market and for the same reason: nobody wants four engined aircraft anymore.
As a bonus when you get back to the car, you'll find it nicely ventilated due to the hole the thief made in the window when they stole your wallet and phone.
From the summary:
So I'd say we are talking about backend data that can be hacked in seconds. Except "unauthenticated access" suggests no real hacking is required. That is a huge privacy concern. Furthermore, an attacker can change things, so presumably, they could easily impersonate a parent. I'll leave predicting the consequences as an exercise.
Britain still mints and circulates pennies.
The USA still doesn't have any intention of building a wall on the Mexican border, only the twat in the Whitehouse.
Anyway extradition doesn't work the way the GP seems to think. Neither the UK nor Sweden has any intention of extraditing Assange to the USA but that is because the USA hasn't requested extradition. However, if the USA asked the UK to extradite him, they almost certainly would, which makes me wonder why he came here in the first place, unless it was to avoid a rape trial.
Also in the UK. Assange tried to get the European Arrest Warrant voided in the UK courts but the UK courts ruled that what Assange was alleged to have done would constitute rape under UK law and therefore the EAW should stand. At that point Assange legged it into the Ecuador embassy.
Had he been concerned about extradition to the USA, he would not have come to the UK at all or would have gone to the Ecuador embassy as soon as he got here instead of waiting until it became inevitable that he would have to go back to Sweden to answer charges of rape.
The man is a rapist. Stop defending him.
It really doesn't matter if the women wanted him prosecuted for rape or not. The Swedish law enforcement authorities wanted him prosecuted for rape and instead of facing the charges, Assange ran away. The obvious explanation for this is that he believes he is a rapist under Swedish law.
Cars (electric or not) are not the future. The environmental damage caused by making a Tesla is just as bas as the damage caused by making fossil fuelled cars. If you are concerned for the environment, you'd be reducing the need for cars of any sort.
The parking brake usually only applies the brakes on the rear wheels. The truck's rear wheels are not turning.
Regardless of the torque of the Tesla, I'm really not at all surprised by this. There isn't much weight above the rear wheels of the truck which means the towing vehicle doesn't need need to apply much force to shift it. Don't forget the model X is all wheel drive and is pretty heavy itself.
Those two options are not mutually exclusive. The generals asked him to order it, and then he did order it.
You'd go to jail in the UK for doing that.
Because it is none of the things you characterise it as.