Furthermore, most companies don't really care what the people want any more. Even if people do prefer to order a hamburger from a human, these companies simply don't care. McDonald's does it, Burger King does it, and on and on until the rest don't matter.
Most people won't take yogurt out of a refrigerator and leave it on a shelf. That's going to be a small problem. Obviously there is a certain about of latitude that a brick and mortar store will extend to its patrons to put a box of breakfast cereal back in the wrong place that will be missed if all stores become automated.
I don't think that's obvious at all. Most food items would still be good. There should no way that a person would get charged for an item they didn't leave the store with.
It's all about weight distribution and suspension. If anything with weight is at one end of the vehicle, you get more sideways force on the front or back tires in turns which hurts forward momentum.
Granted, it sounded strange when I wrote it and I couldn't put my finger on why. I got stuck on engine because the phrase is 'mid-engine design'. However, upon checking the definition for 'engine' I am happy to report that the word works for EVs as well: "a machine for converting any of various forms of energy into mechanical force and motion; also : a mechanism or object that serves as an energy source. eg.black holes may be the engines for quasars"
Straight line acceleration is only a very small consideration for performance. Could a Tesla S beat a Ferrari around a track? I don't think anyone knows because EVs tend to overheat and turn off performance on any track actually designed to test a vehicle such as Nübergring.
I'm not an expert but i've noticed that an important aspect of a supercar is that it is mid-engine design because for that amount of handling you need all the weight centered in the vehicle. In an EV supercar I imagine both battery and engine would need to be centered.
The worse problem is if your family has been there for years. Mom and dad have their house paid off but you have to live somewhere. So is the whole family supposed to pick up and move? If not, then you move somewhere without a support structure, and while your house is cheaper, you are going to have all kinds of issues with child care, etc.
The thing I just don't understand about bluetooth is, why would you want to put a cap on the physical limit of your headphones? No matter how much you spend on them, they will never sound better than bluetooth is able to make them sound. I just don't get it. I am by no means an audiophile, but part of the fun of buying headphones, whether cheap or expensive, is to see what they can do when you first plug them in. With Bluetooth, every headphone is performing the same. It's just boring.
So what happens when you buy an adapter that is 'pence' and it fries your iphone? Apple will tell you you should have bought their 'many, many pence' adapter that is certified to use with Apple products.
You are only as free to avoid a phone with specs you don't like as there are alternatives with specs you do like. If the thing you want isn't profitable for some company, then capitalism turns its back.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, nothing fundamental changed in the economy like globalism or anything. We'll be fiiiine.
Sure it will change. No one will have money to pay people to look after their children and everyone will starve.
We prefer people doing some thing.
Furthermore, most companies don't really care what the people want any more. Even if people do prefer to order a hamburger from a human, these companies simply don't care. McDonald's does it, Burger King does it, and on and on until the rest don't matter.
Most people won't take yogurt out of a refrigerator and leave it on a shelf. That's going to be a small problem. Obviously there is a certain about of latitude that a brick and mortar store will extend to its patrons to put a box of breakfast cereal back in the wrong place that will be missed if all stores become automated.
How many NIO EP9s will be built for the public?
We are talking about production cars. Once you go custom build, it is a completely different conversation.
In an article about supercars, ability to handle on a track is very definitely relevant.
I don't think that's obvious at all. Most food items would still be good. There should no way that a person would get charged for an item they didn't leave the store with.
Shame on those people for not wanting to work for free! Automation could have been avoided if they would just submit to slavery!
It's all about weight distribution and suspension. If anything with weight is at one end of the vehicle, you get more sideways force on the front or back tires in turns which hurts forward momentum.
Granted, it sounded strange when I wrote it and I couldn't put my finger on why. I got stuck on engine because the phrase is 'mid-engine design'. However, upon checking the definition for 'engine' I am happy to report that the word works for EVs as well: "a machine for converting any of various forms of energy into mechanical force and motion; also : a mechanism or object that serves as an energy source. eg.black holes may be the engines for quasars"
Straight line acceleration is only a very small consideration for performance. Could a Tesla S beat a Ferrari around a track? I don't think anyone knows because EVs tend to overheat and turn off performance on any track actually designed to test a vehicle such as Nübergring.
I'm not an expert but i've noticed that an important aspect of a supercar is that it is mid-engine design because for that amount of handling you need all the weight centered in the vehicle. In an EV supercar I imagine both battery and engine would need to be centered.
The worse problem is if your family has been there for years. Mom and dad have their house paid off but you have to live somewhere. So is the whole family supposed to pick up and move? If not, then you move somewhere without a support structure, and while your house is cheaper, you are going to have all kinds of issues with child care, etc.
Capitalism says too bad! Sucks to be you! Live in a place without rodents next time!
If you can only expect sub par sound, then of course it's a negative point.
The thing I just don't understand about bluetooth is, why would you want to put a cap on the physical limit of your headphones? No matter how much you spend on them, they will never sound better than bluetooth is able to make them sound. I just don't get it. I am by no means an audiophile, but part of the fun of buying headphones, whether cheap or expensive, is to see what they can do when you first plug them in. With Bluetooth, every headphone is performing the same. It's just boring.
So what happens when you buy an adapter that is 'pence' and it fries your iphone? Apple will tell you you should have bought their 'many, many pence' adapter that is certified to use with Apple products.
That's funny, your wife tells me your dong is fairly standard.
Cables get damaged and the mechanical connection can get strained and damaged as well.
\You say that as if Bluetooth headphones aren't the most fragile things on the face of the planet.
You are only as free to avoid a phone with specs you don't like as there are alternatives with specs you do like. If the thing you want isn't profitable for some company, then capitalism turns its back.
Bose seems to be doing just fine. They're headphones have been the same price for over ten years now.
Backlog or not, any company can lose money per unit. That's not a difficult bar to achieve.
So if you can't buy it, it doesn't exist? You must be American.
Yes because I want to spend $80K on a vehicle that will give me chronic range anxiety.