Well, not really. The Uber frequently arrives too soon or too late -- and you have to stand outside in the rain peering at license plates to work out if this Prius is your Prius. Also, all too frequently, drivers accept a fare that they cannot practically take, e.g., on the wrong side of the Finchley Road (where there's no place to turn). And there's neither a need to yell, nor to stand in the rain: stand in the doorway under the awning and just pop out and wave your hand when the yellow light of the cab is visible.
Yeah, well Uber isn't meaningfully better than black cabs or private hire. Black cabs have a regulated fare, high quality hackney carriage (eg tight turning circle), drivers who can take you to places without a postcode, and can be hailed from the street. Private hire give you a set fare in advance. Uber does none of this.
Oh, and one other point: the Tube alone carried 1.37 billion passengers last year; buses carried 2.4bn+; the DLR is another 140m+; same for London Overground. Never mind being a competitive threat, Uber's paltry 3.5m riders can't even provide substantial headroom for the system. They are completely insignificant, while also being a complete pain in the arse.
Or alternatively, if people felt safe, but actually weren't, because Uber didn't do its job properly, then people would get attacked. Oh look! That's what's happened...
It may be archaic, but it also offers some distinct *advantages* over Uber: it can be much faster to jump in a cab when you come out of a restaurant than to get an Uber, for example.
You know, people piss and moan all the fricking time here about Apple and iOS. But this kind of thing never, ever, happens on iOS -- because it can't. Meanwhile, Android leaves ordinary people hugely vulnerable all the time. It would be nice if the many critics of Apple on Slashdot would be willing to admit that security vulnerabilities like this are a significant disadvantage of their preferred platform.
Gosh, if only Apple had anticipated that by not storing your biometric but instead storing a cryptographic hash of some datapoints derived from a mathematical model that won't be the same each time FaceID is re-scanned, just like TouchID.
Looking at your original comment, I think you meant something different by "unless" from what I'd understood, ie I took it to mean you were assuming novelty, whereas I now think you may have meant "unless Apple can convince a much larger proportion of people to use Hey Siri than has previously been the case (and it's a creepy feature)".
If that's the case, then I think your original arguments fall on three fronts: - Not sure you have any data to judge how many users have Hey Siri disabled or enabled. I'd be impressed if you did - It's not actually very creepy at all. See this article, for example: https://techcrunch.com/2015/09... - A touch sensor on the back sounds like a more dangerous implementation for driving, not less. Fiddling around on the back of a phone is not a safe thing to do!
Um, saying "Hey Siri" to trigger Siri has been part of the functionality for years. And you're deciding it's creepy *now*? You've not been paying attention, and there's plenty of iOS users who disagree.
Let's break this down, shall we? You've got three assertions in there, two explicit and one implicit: 1. Electric cars have much higher mass than other cars 2. That leads to higher tyre and road wear 3. Tyre and road wear really matters
1. Ain't necessarily so. A Tesla Model X is 2300kg, a Land Rover Discovery is 3200kg. A Renault Zoe is heavier than a Renault Clio (1500kg vs 990kg), but obviously both are waaaay lighter than any SUV. 2. Obviously, for any one car, the heavier it is, the more tyre and road wear -- but only if you keep all other factors constant. And you don't -- people drive electric cars differently. Specifically, they drive gently to get decent range. That reduces tyre wear. There may be other important effects too, such as a shift to smaller cars. We don't know yet. 3. It's an important source of particulates, but I can't find any evidence of exactly how important compared to other sources. Can you?
Do you have a source for that? Because I was looking and can't find an easy source for the relative importance of tailpipe, brakes and tires. And much as I'd like to take your word for it, you're just an AC on Slashdot...
As the OP is German, I'm sure he'd agree with you on the importance of reducing energy usage first. This is the country that developed Passivhaus, after all.
EVs address two of three significant sources of particulates from automobiles: 1. Tailpipe -- cut to zero either by displacement to power stations or complete removal through use of renewables 2. Brakes -- cut substantially due to use of regenerative braking 3. Tires -- still an issue
Two out of three is better than none out of three. And yes, we need cleaner tires. But I still look forward to the day when that is the only remaining problem to address
>fills up in two minutes but can't be filled up at home, can't be filled up overnight, can't be filled up on a delay switch when fuel is particularly cheap, can't be ready with a full tank every morning, etc etc
>can be filled up out of a man-portable container of gasoline in an emergency but can't be filled up from a plug point in an emergency
>goes at least 400 miles between fill-ups about 90miles more than a Tesla, 160 more than a Bolt, and about twice the range of a Renault Zoe, so a genuine advantage but not as big as you think
>has roughly the same range regardless of whether it's hot or bone-chilling cold true
would cost new about a quarter of what a Tesla costs sans federal and/or state bailouts and subsidies. >cheaper electric cars are available. It's new tech. The price will drop much further
Oh and look, you forgot to list the advantages of EVs compared to your car: - no tailpipe emissions - instant torque - pre-warmed and de-iced before you get in on those bone-chilling cold mornings you mentioned - no engine noise or vibrations - full range every morning - low fuelling costs - possibility of generating your own fuel at home - potential to run power tools off your battery if you're out doing manly things in the woods (you strike me as the kind of guy who prides himself on his manliness) -- see http://bollingermotors.com/ - new car configurations possible thanks to the absence of the engine and transmission, e.g. a hole from front to back of your truck to carry 24 2X4s -- see http://bollingermotors.com/ again - ability to be part of a closed-loop home power / transport storage-and-use system etc etc
Of *course* corporations get to pick and choose winners in that way. They are private institutions, not public utilities. They are free to make choices, just as we are. If you don't like it, set up your own corporation offering services on a no-questions-asked basis and see if you can beat them. This is the essence of America.
Billionare-funded outrage mob -- excellent expression. Perfectly sums up the alt-right.
Um. There are no doubt already a ton of Nazi sites on the dark web where you *already* can't mock the posts, debate the facts, or keep tabs on the threat. Also, Nazi f2f gatherings, and encrypted private chats. What's happened here is that Nazis have lost one high-profile public recruitment tool. High profile matters for recruitment, so this is a significant blow against them.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, not really. The Uber frequently arrives too soon or too late -- and you have to stand outside in the rain peering at license plates to work out if this Prius is your Prius. Also, all too frequently, drivers accept a fare that they cannot practically take, e.g., on the wrong side of the Finchley Road (where there's no place to turn). And there's neither a need to yell, nor to stand in the rain: stand in the doorway under the awning and just pop out and wave your hand when the yellow light of the cab is visible.
Yeah, well Uber isn't meaningfully better than black cabs or private hire. Black cabs have a regulated fare, high quality hackney carriage (eg tight turning circle), drivers who can take you to places without a postcode, and can be hailed from the street. Private hire give you a set fare in advance. Uber does none of this.
Oh, and one other point: the Tube alone carried 1.37 billion passengers last year; buses carried 2.4bn+; the DLR is another 140m+; same for London Overground. Never mind being a competitive threat, Uber's paltry 3.5m riders can't even provide substantial headroom for the system. They are completely insignificant, while also being a complete pain in the arse.
Or alternatively, if people felt safe, but actually weren't, because Uber didn't do its job properly, then people would get attacked. Oh look! That's what's happened...
Bollocks. You are given some rough estimate of the price that may or may not be accurate, especially with surge pricing.
It may be archaic, but it also offers some distinct *advantages* over Uber: it can be much faster to jump in a cab when you come out of a restaurant than to get an Uber, for example.
You know, people piss and moan all the fricking time here about Apple and iOS. But this kind of thing never, ever, happens on iOS -- because it can't. Meanwhile, Android leaves ordinary people hugely vulnerable all the time. It would be nice if the many critics of Apple on Slashdot would be willing to admit that security vulnerabilities like this are a significant disadvantage of their preferred platform.
It isn't a face map. You've fundamentally misunderstood how this works.
Gosh, if only Apple had anticipated that by not storing your biometric but instead storing a cryptographic hash of some datapoints derived from a mathematical model that won't be the same each time FaceID is re-scanned, just like TouchID.
Looking at your original comment, I think you meant something different by "unless" from what I'd understood, ie I took it to mean you were assuming novelty, whereas I now think you may have meant "unless Apple can convince a much larger proportion of people to use Hey Siri than has previously been the case (and it's a creepy feature)".
If that's the case, then I think your original arguments fall on three fronts:
- Not sure you have any data to judge how many users have Hey Siri disabled or enabled. I'd be impressed if you did
- It's not actually very creepy at all. See this article, for example: https://techcrunch.com/2015/09...
- A touch sensor on the back sounds like a more dangerous implementation for driving, not less. Fiddling around on the back of a phone is not a safe thing to do!
But why mention it in this context? There's no link -- the opposite, it's old functionality
Um, saying "Hey Siri" to trigger Siri has been part of the functionality for years. And you're deciding it's creepy *now*? You've not been paying attention, and there's plenty of iOS users who disagree.
Let's break this down, shall we? You've got three assertions in there, two explicit and one implicit:
1. Electric cars have much higher mass than other cars
2. That leads to higher tyre and road wear
3. Tyre and road wear really matters
1. Ain't necessarily so. A Tesla Model X is 2300kg, a Land Rover Discovery is 3200kg. A Renault Zoe is heavier than a Renault Clio (1500kg vs 990kg), but obviously both are waaaay lighter than any SUV.
2. Obviously, for any one car, the heavier it is, the more tyre and road wear -- but only if you keep all other factors constant. And you don't -- people drive electric cars differently. Specifically, they drive gently to get decent range. That reduces tyre wear. There may be other important effects too, such as a shift to smaller cars. We don't know yet.
3. It's an important source of particulates, but I can't find any evidence of exactly how important compared to other sources. Can you?
Do you have a source for that? Because I was looking and can't find an easy source for the relative importance of tailpipe, brakes and tires. And much as I'd like to take your word for it, you're just an AC on Slashdot...
As the OP is German, I'm sure he'd agree with you on the importance of reducing energy usage first. This is the country that developed Passivhaus, after all.
EVs address two of three significant sources of particulates from automobiles:
1. Tailpipe -- cut to zero either by displacement to power stations or complete removal through use of renewables
2. Brakes -- cut substantially due to use of regenerative braking
3. Tires -- still an issue
Two out of three is better than none out of three. And yes, we need cleaner tires. But I still look forward to the day when that is the only remaining problem to address
>fills up in two minutes
but can't be filled up at home, can't be filled up overnight, can't be filled up on a delay switch when fuel is particularly cheap, can't be ready with a full tank every morning, etc etc
>can be filled up out of a man-portable container of gasoline in an emergency
but can't be filled up from a plug point in an emergency
>goes at least 400 miles between fill-ups
about 90miles more than a Tesla, 160 more than a Bolt, and about twice the range of a Renault Zoe, so a genuine advantage but not as big as you think
>has roughly the same range regardless of whether it's hot or bone-chilling cold
true
would cost new about a quarter of what a Tesla costs sans federal and/or state bailouts and subsidies.
>cheaper electric cars are available. It's new tech. The price will drop much further
Oh and look, you forgot to list the advantages of EVs compared to your car:
- no tailpipe emissions
- instant torque
- pre-warmed and de-iced before you get in on those bone-chilling cold mornings you mentioned
- no engine noise or vibrations
- full range every morning
- low fuelling costs
- possibility of generating your own fuel at home
- potential to run power tools off your battery if you're out doing manly things in the woods (you strike me as the kind of guy who prides himself on his manliness) -- see http://bollingermotors.com/
- new car configurations possible thanks to the absence of the engine and transmission, e.g. a hole from front to back of your truck to carry 24 2X4s -- see http://bollingermotors.com/ again
- ability to be part of a closed-loop home power / transport storage-and-use system
etc etc
Apart from the Emoluments clause, of course. And various others. But laws are for little people, natch.
Really excellent comment
We don't need to make it structurally easy for people to act badly, though.
That is properly insightful and ought to be modded up.
You know, there are other choices available re police use of force between the US and Somalia.
Of *course* corporations get to pick and choose winners in that way. They are private institutions, not public utilities. They are free to make choices, just as we are. If you don't like it, set up your own corporation offering services on a no-questions-asked basis and see if you can beat them. This is the essence of America.
Billionare-funded outrage mob -- excellent expression. Perfectly sums up the alt-right.
His ignorance is his bliss.
Um. There are no doubt already a ton of Nazi sites on the dark web where you *already* can't mock the posts, debate the facts, or keep tabs on the threat. Also, Nazi f2f gatherings, and encrypted private chats. What's happened here is that Nazis have lost one high-profile public recruitment tool. High profile matters for recruitment, so this is a significant blow against them.