And in the meantime, I have to deal everyday with the asshat having a conversation in the left hand lane, weaving, doing 55mph one minute then 80mph a couple minutes later, then back down 60, then having other cut me off - making me brake hard - because they need to get around him so they can keep their 80mph pace in a 65.
We need self driving cars and humans not allowed to touch the steering wheel.
No, we just need even enforcement of existing laws. Everything you've described is already a crime in pretty much every state, covered by either reckless driving or C&I laws.
Taking away driving privileges over 60? No. Requiring regular re-testing/re-certification? Absolutely... provided that you require it for *everybody*. If we *all* needed to go re-test for driving every 5 years (for example), there'd be a huge reduction in the number of accidents over-all, and people would be more likely to keep abreast of changes to the laws and safety standards.
Taking it a step further, if we didn't hand out licenses to kill to every 16 year old who passes a rudimentary exam, there'd be yet another huge reduction in accident rates.
Not to say that 16-year-olds shouldn't be allowed to drive, but rather there should be far more mandatory training involved.
I was thinking of current "affordable" electric models, like the Nissan Leaf
Ah, I thought you were talking about those tiny gasoline-powered tin cans.
You're right about that - personally, I'm kind of hoping soon-to-be-released models like the Tesla S can meet the mileage estimates put forth by the manufacturers, although considering that the Roadster recently had it's mileage expectation lowered by the EPA it's a bit concerning. Still, If they can produce a car that I can drive across the state and around town once I get there (so, about 400-600 total miles), without requiring 8 hours of down time* in between, that's something I may actually have interest in.
* Under normal circumstances, 8 hours is no big deal. But what happens when you get the evacuation order 2 hours after you plug in?
I don't think it's unreasonable to make mid-term projections of basic technological progress; you just have to decide how far out to draw the line between "batteries will improve 8% per year for another decade or two" versus "everyone will have mind-control jetpacks and be part of a supercomputer hive mind." I consider it fairly safe to expect technologies we *already have today* (slightly limited and expensive, but in an area of research progress) can gradually get better and cheaper. Some loonies in the '60s may have said we'd all be in space: but those were just the idiots speculating that rockets which cost *billions of dollars* would be affordable to middle-class families in a couple decades. But assuming that today's ~$100k (and falling) technology will reach the ~$20k range in a decade or two doesn't require a comparable stretch of credibility.
This is assuming no major socio-political upheavals, pandemics, natural disasters, or any number of other unknown unknowns that may have a negative effect on our ability to make those improvements. While planning for the future is a good idea, making predictions based on the expectation of a particular future is a ridiculous notion, IMO.
Plus, you've got to remember - lots of otherwise brilliant notions and technologies have gone the way of the dodo, merely by virtue of the fact that no government or corporation could find a way to monetize them. Granted, at this juncture there's no reason to think battery technology will meet the same fate, but we're talking 1-2 decades into the future; $deity knows what lies between now and then.
For hybrids, let's take a quote from your last article... so hybrids are *already* significantly past their "gasoline or diesel counterparts," according to your own source
According to one paragraph of one of the many sources I offered. From what I've read, the overall consensus is that, when it comes to pollutant output, hybrids, EVs, and IC engines are just about equal (and that's not factoring in the environmental cost of changing several hundred pounds of Lithium batteries every, what, 5-8 years?).
No surprise though, considering that they're doing the hybrid thing completely wrong - the IC engine should do nothing but charge the batteries. That way, you can have a much smaller engine, meaning less weight, less fossil fuel used, better range, and, combined with other technologies such as regenerative braking and solar-charging body panels, none of that "8 hours of downtime to charge" crap.
note that this problem is *not* so much from the "battery production being insanely polluting" as the electric charging source being "insanely polluting."
Which the NIMBY crowd finds intolerable; funny how filling the Chinese skies with pollution is A-OK for the Greenie Hipsters, but when it's their own air being fouled...
so, for roughly half the US population with access to cleaner energy sources, EVs meet or exceed the lifetime efficiency of a 50mpg car (like a hybrid; lots better than similar-sized
I'm not expecting a "major technological breakthrough" either; whether adoption is "anytime soon" is a matter of definition of "soon."
I figure 'soon' equates to 'when someone like my mom would buy one.' which means it has to be good for daily driving and the occasional 400-mile road trip to visit family across the state.
today's "daily commute only, no long road trips" range cars
Which cars are those? All the models I know of are capable of both (granted, due greatly in part to existing gasoline-based infrastructure). Anyway, a gasoline ForTwo can theoretically go from KC to STL on a single tank (71 MPG, 8.7 gal tank), whereas the electric model (84 mi on a full charge) would have to be charged at least 3 times one way, at 8 hours per charge.
will, in a decade or two, be up to the full range of gas vehicles.
"A decade or two" is a long friggin' time. Who knows what we'll come up with between now and then? (P.S. this is why I think futurists, AKA self-proclaimed oracles, are idiots).
Over the same time period, suitable infrastructure will get gradually rolled out into place.
Right... and in the 1960's, they were convinced that 20 years in the future we'd all have jetpacks and live on space colonies. Pure speculation, then and now.
By the way, do you have any reference about battery production --- for the types going into current and near future electric cars --- being "insanely polluting," comparable to the insane level of pollution released over the lifetime of a gasoline car? I've seen various FUD articles trying to "prove" points like that, but nothing that actually stands up to much scrutiny.
Funny, in my research I saw the opposite - various articles that tried to downplay the fact that hybrids and EVs pollute as much if not more than their gasoline or diesel counterparts. C'est la vie, eh, mon frere?
I think you misunderstood, who do you think reports to the NHTSA the information they use to post on the web for us to see?
Manufacturers, government agencies, independent safety review boards, and of course, the consumers themselves.
If the company owned all the dealerships, I think the argument could be made that they might be more willing to cover up and recall related issues.
If auto manufacturers were the sole source of safety information, I'd agree, but they are not (see above for short list).
FWIW, the government is currently considering issuing a recall on 192,000 Chrysler vehicles due to a stalling issue that was reported by owners, not the manufacturer. Then there's the whole Toyota "unintended acceleration" debacle from a couple years ago...
He didn't claim they were responsible. The words "GOP mecca" means something like "GOP dream world". As in what the GOP would like to turn the USA into (even more than the US already is) - a place where the people with money can buy their way into getting anything they want.
Yea, OK, so why single out the GOP?
If you stop paying attention to the lip-service and instead note only their actions, there is very, very little difference between Democrats and Republicans.
Not that I have anything personal against electric cars - much to the contrary, despite the fact that battery production releases insane amounts of pollution (thereby effectively negating the "green" effect of electrics vs internal combustion), I think electric cars would be a great solution for overpopulated urban centers - less (localized) air and noise pollution, easier parking (EVs trend to the 'microcar' side of the scale), et. al.
However, considering the lack of supporting infrastructure, abysmal battery life, and crazy-huge charging times, I just don't see them being adopted en masse anytime soon, short of an unlikely, major technological breakthrough.
FWIW, when we bought the wife's brand new 2012 TDI Jetta last year, the dealership failed to complete the mandatory factory recall repair on a faulty fuel line until I brought it up, a good 2 weeks after we had taken delivery on the car (which was 4 months after the recall notice was shipped to dealers from VW).
They're not yet outselling cars out-of-class, but give them time.
You mean, time for the 'OMG chek aut mah fancie not-so-green 'lectric supahcah!' fad to end?
Don't get me wrong, it's a testament to hipster-dom that the $110,000 Tesla Roadster is outselling its $80K direct rivals, but to even imagine that such a frivolity would have any notable effect on sales of nice cars that cost half as much? That's beyond unrealistic.
Slashdot Mirror
And in the meantime, I have to deal everyday with the asshat having a conversation in the left hand lane, weaving, doing 55mph one minute then 80mph a couple minutes later, then back down 60, then having other cut me off - making me brake hard - because they need to get around him so they can keep their 80mph pace in a 65.
We need self driving cars and humans not allowed to touch the steering wheel.
No, we just need even enforcement of existing laws. Everything you've described is already a crime in pretty much every state, covered by either reckless driving or C&I laws.
I'm reminded of the recent stories on The Daily Show about the more restrictive gun laws in Australia. Yeah, deaths are down, but freedom!
But rapes, violent assaults, and shit like this skyrocketed.
What was your point? That you'd rather live in a world where you're far more likely to be beaten half to death and subsequently raped?
HELL
RTFA:
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
http://www.cdc.gov/Motorvehiclesafety/Impaired_Driving/data.html
http://www.cdc.gov/Motorvehiclesafety/Impaired_Driving/bac.html
If I weighed 160lbs Id be bedridden from malnutrition
Is this like when dope addicts say, "I can quit whenever I want?"
Step 1, man - admitting you have a problem.
It will certainly make designated drivers even more popular.
Time to monetize that shit!
http://www.substitutedrivers.com/home.htm
No, I don't work for them, just think it's a bitchin' idea!
Taking away driving privileges over 60? No. Requiring regular re-testing/re-certification? Absolutely... provided that you require it for *everybody*. If we *all* needed to go re-test for driving every 5 years (for example), there'd be a huge reduction in the number of accidents over-all, and people would be more likely to keep abreast of changes to the laws and safety standards.
Taking it a step further, if we didn't hand out licenses to kill to every 16 year old who passes a rudimentary exam, there'd be yet another huge reduction in accident rates.
Not to say that 16-year-olds shouldn't be allowed to drive, but rather there should be far more mandatory training involved.
Which cars are those?
I was thinking of current "affordable" electric models, like the Nissan Leaf
Ah, I thought you were talking about those tiny gasoline-powered tin cans.
You're right about that - personally, I'm kind of hoping soon-to-be-released models like the Tesla S can meet the mileage estimates put forth by the manufacturers, although considering that the Roadster recently had it's mileage expectation lowered by the EPA it's a bit concerning. Still, If they can produce a car that I can drive across the state and around town once I get there (so, about 400-600 total miles), without requiring 8 hours of down time* in between, that's something I may actually have interest in.
* Under normal circumstances, 8 hours is no big deal. But what happens when you get the evacuation order 2 hours after you plug in?
I don't think it's unreasonable to make mid-term projections of basic technological progress; you just have to decide how far out to draw the line between "batteries will improve 8% per year for another decade or two" versus "everyone will have mind-control jetpacks and be part of a supercomputer hive mind." I consider it fairly safe to expect technologies we *already have today* (slightly limited and expensive, but in an area of research progress) can gradually get better and cheaper. Some loonies in the '60s may have said we'd all be in space: but those were just the idiots speculating that rockets which cost *billions of dollars* would be affordable to middle-class families in a couple decades. But assuming that today's ~$100k (and falling) technology will reach the ~$20k range in a decade or two doesn't require a comparable stretch of credibility.
This is assuming no major socio-political upheavals, pandemics, natural disasters, or any number of other unknown unknowns that may have a negative effect on our ability to make those improvements. While planning for the future is a good idea, making predictions based on the expectation of a particular future is a ridiculous notion, IMO.
Plus, you've got to remember - lots of otherwise brilliant notions and technologies have gone the way of the dodo, merely by virtue of the fact that no government or corporation could find a way to monetize them. Granted, at this juncture there's no reason to think battery technology will meet the same fate, but we're talking 1-2 decades into the future; $deity knows what lies between now and then.
For hybrids, let's take a quote from your last article... so hybrids are *already* significantly past their "gasoline or diesel counterparts," according to your own source
According to one paragraph of one of the many sources I offered. From what I've read, the overall consensus is that, when it comes to pollutant output, hybrids, EVs, and IC engines are just about equal (and that's not factoring in the environmental cost of changing several hundred pounds of Lithium batteries every, what, 5-8 years?).
No surprise though, considering that they're doing the hybrid thing completely wrong - the IC engine should do nothing but charge the batteries. That way, you can have a much smaller engine, meaning less weight, less fossil fuel used, better range, and, combined with other technologies such as regenerative braking and solar-charging body panels, none of that "8 hours of downtime to charge" crap.
note that this problem is *not* so much from the "battery production being insanely polluting" as the electric charging source being "insanely polluting."
Which the NIMBY crowd finds intolerable; funny how filling the Chinese skies with pollution is A-OK for the Greenie Hipsters, but when it's their own air being fouled...
so, for roughly half the US population with access to cleaner energy sources, EVs meet or exceed the lifetime efficiency of a 50mpg car (like a hybrid; lots better than similar-sized
They *could* produce the firmware and updates forever, but how are they going to pay the salaries of the people and infrastructure to deliver it?
"If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.”
I'm not expecting a "major technological breakthrough" either; whether adoption is "anytime soon" is a matter of definition of "soon."
I figure 'soon' equates to 'when someone like my mom would buy one.' which means it has to be good for daily driving and the occasional 400-mile road trip to visit family across the state.
today's "daily commute only, no long road trips" range cars
Which cars are those? All the models I know of are capable of both (granted, due greatly in part to existing gasoline-based infrastructure). Anyway, a gasoline ForTwo can theoretically go from KC to STL on a single tank (71 MPG, 8.7 gal tank), whereas the electric model (84 mi on a full charge) would have to be charged at least 3 times one way, at 8 hours per charge.
will, in a decade or two, be up to the full range of gas vehicles.
"A decade or two" is a long friggin' time. Who knows what we'll come up with between now and then? (P.S. this is why I think futurists, AKA self-proclaimed oracles, are idiots).
Over the same time period, suitable infrastructure will get gradually rolled out into place.
Right... and in the 1960's, they were convinced that 20 years in the future we'd all have jetpacks and live on space colonies. Pure speculation, then and now.
By the way, do you have any reference about battery production --- for the types going into current and near future electric cars --- being "insanely polluting," comparable to the insane level of pollution released over the lifetime of a gasoline car? I've seen various FUD articles trying to "prove" points like that, but nothing that actually stands up to much scrutiny.
Funny, in my research I saw the opposite - various articles that tried to downplay the fact that hybrids and EVs pollute as much if not more than their gasoline or diesel counterparts. C'est la vie, eh, mon frere?
Anyway, here are some links:
http://www.auto123.com/en/news/hybrid-and-ev-production-pollutes-more-than-gas-cars-but?artid=132278
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2012/04/electric-cars-may-pollute-more-than-gas-models-study.html
http://healthland.time.com/2012/02/14/why-electric-cars-are-more-polluting-than-gas-guzzlers-at-least-in-china/
http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/does-hybrid-car-production-waste-offset-hybrid-benefits1.htm
Cheers.
I think you misunderstood, who do you think reports to the NHTSA the information they use to post on the web for us to see?
Manufacturers, government agencies, independent safety review boards, and of course, the consumers themselves.
If the company owned all the dealerships, I think the argument could be made that they might be more willing to cover up and recall related issues.
If auto manufacturers were the sole source of safety information, I'd agree, but they are not (see above for short list).
FWIW, the government is currently considering issuing a recall on 192,000 Chrysler vehicles due to a stalling issue that was reported by owners, not the manufacturer. Then there's the whole Toyota "unintended acceleration" debacle from a couple years ago...
He didn't claim they were responsible. The words "GOP mecca" means something like "GOP dream world". As in what the GOP would like to turn the USA into (even more than the US already is) - a place where the people with money can buy their way into getting anything they want.
Yea, OK, so why single out the GOP?
If you stop paying attention to the lip-service and instead note only their actions, there is very, very little difference between Democrats and Republicans.
Meh. I'll believe it when I see it.
Not that I have anything personal against electric cars - much to the contrary, despite the fact that battery production releases insane amounts of pollution (thereby effectively negating the "green" effect of electrics vs internal combustion), I think electric cars would be a great solution for overpopulated urban centers - less (localized) air and noise pollution, easier parking (EVs trend to the 'microcar' side of the scale), et. al.
However, considering the lack of supporting infrastructure, abysmal battery life, and crazy-huge charging times, I just don't see them being adopted en masse anytime soon, short of an unlikely, major technological breakthrough.
I think the point is that the manufacturer would be less willing to come forward with the information to initiate a recall over a 3rd party.
They don't have to; the NHTSA maintains a publicly-accessible database
FWIW, when we bought the wife's brand new 2012 TDI Jetta last year, the dealership failed to complete the mandatory factory recall repair on a faulty fuel line until I brought it up, a good 2 weeks after we had taken delivery on the car (which was 4 months after the recall notice was shipped to dealers from VW).
They're not yet outselling cars out-of-class, but give them time.
You mean, time for the 'OMG chek aut mah fancie not-so-green 'lectric supahcah!' fad to end?
Don't get me wrong, it's a testament to hipster-dom that the $110,000 Tesla Roadster is outselling its $80K direct rivals, but to even imagine that such a frivolity would have any notable effect on sales of nice cars that cost half as much? That's beyond unrealistic.
So everyone else thinks you're an ill educated moron?
Considering that his post is a quote from Humpty Dumpty...
Muzzies
http://www.early-advantage.com/
That word doesn't mean what you think it means.
Is it normal for a contract between a carrier and an OEM to be structured such that unsold inventory would be sent back to the OEM?
Isn't that pretty much how auto dealerships work?
I used to roll with a Touch Pro 2, and aside from the horrific memory management that came courtesy of WM6.something, it was an alright device.
LOVED the built in stylus and full keyboard.
I believe it's called the "sell" button in your stock portfolio. Either that or make something bad happen for them.
I trust Zuckerburg's ego will do that for me.
There are lots of other approaches, I'd support yours, if it dealt with this problem. Just support some kind of fix.
The real problem being, of course, that the people in charge of implementing such changes are the same ones who profit from not doing so.
That being known, how do we fix it?
A horse of a different color is still a horse, of course of course.
Make it recognize those loud thumping cars with subwoofers and connect an automated laser to it.
The problem of antisocial jerks who like to annoy hundreds of people will be solved quite rapidly!
And by "antisocial jerks" you mean "black people".
What, you think only black people have loud stereos?
Racist.
Good thing most mechanics come equipped with this fancy technology called "ears" to tell what sort of sound it is.
1) that doesn't work too well for deaf mechanics.
2) computer diagnostic machines do not have ears at all.