What's wrong with a car that can do both electric/gasoline, and how is it not better than electric only?
It's not like Toyota lost R&D race, they're still experimenting and testing electric motors. Only thing they lack is battery production capacity. They can't be the only car company that is, that stuff is demand right now.
Also, is electric really the future? Aren't you guys overestimating the progress of switching a bit here? In my circle of people I know pretty much everyone has a car, only a few hybrids, only 2 people with pure electric (Tesla hipsters...), rest are gasoline (few diesels). I could easily be wrong, but I do not see this trend changing drastically for at least a few decades. By far not everyone has a garage, by far not everyone even has their own drive way. A lot of people are happy to find a parking spot at all for the night, any spot. Good luck with putting charging stations at all of these spots. Solve parking problem first (again... best of luck to you), then I'd be more optimistic about electric cars.
Poor America... Chinese steal your trade secrets, Russians run your elections, Arabs constantly looking for opportunity to either run you over or crash a plane into you, Canadians don't want to trade fair, Mexicans crossing your border without asking, Syria is telling you to pack your toys and GTFO of their country, Europe doesn't want to pay your NATO "protection" money, Venezuela not accepting your puppet government, NSA monitoring your porn watching habbit, TSA gives you a rectal exam every time you fly anywhere...
The whole world is against you. Just stay in, don't peek your beak out . Isolate. Drop the iron curtain and be done with it already. Called it United States Security Response (USSR for short).
If China wants to do something that's perfectly legal for them, US law doesn't "trump" it, even if that happens to be US president's name.
If it's any consolation, US retains the right to be salty about it, maybe break some agreements or something with China, but common.... we all know agreements with US aren't worth the ink or paper they're written with/on, as evidenced by their breaking of agreement with Iran anyway.
In other news, our Saudi friends and allies have made great strides in women's rights and equality.
No longer will a woman sit there wondering where her husband is after he decides to divorce her without saying anything. As of last week courts will be required to send notification text message to wife's phone, to tell her that she's been divorced. Now that's what I call progress!
Ivan doesn't promote that sort of thing, quite the opposite. As a rule people that don't like Ivan are into that. They even blame Ivan of being homophobic at times.
Getting away with what? Trading with with Iran, country that China has no sanctions against?
Why should China give a frog's fart about US sanctions? Especially after US unilaterally broke its treaty with Iran.
It's like a bully trying to pick on someone, then he glances back and sees all his "flunkies"/"followers"/"buddies" are staying out of it. He's on his own. Feeling a bit of panic, maybe some cold sweat coming on bully?
"they'll never come close to us in terms of productivity per capita". What a load arrogant BS. You really think you are so much more productive and creative that they'll never come close to you??? lol
I don't care what country you live in, doesn't matter, it's not a true democracy anyway. You also have to be deluded to think that China is totalitarian. Surprise!!! There's millions of people involved in their "totalitarian" government making all kinds of decisions on all levels. Just like yours, wherever you're from. Had you been born Chinese you'd have about the same chance of having equal amount of input on how your government runs and its policy as you do right now, whatever country you are from. On the average it's next to no input at all.
"when you have one company where people only work four days a week, and another where they work 5+ the results are inevitable when they compete"
Replace "company" with "country" to see bigger picture. Short term, quarterly profits kind of narrow view, you are probably right. Big picture with sustainability you are not.
Company doesn't care how healthy its worker drones are, country does. More free time does make you healthier and less stressed long term.
Company doesn't care about future generations. Country does, or at least should... More free hours for parents, means better parenting.
Capitalism is predatory, it is built to destroy competition and feed on its corpse. Other systems are more benign, they have their advantages, but aren't meant to be aggressive and destructive to those around them. Capitalism dies, when it runs out of things to grow on.
It's like putting a spider with a honey bee in a jar, and then arguing that spiders are obviously better for the world and environment, because it ate the bee.
Socialism spreads the misery of something bad happening more evenly among everyone. While capitalism insulates the richest from those bad things. Since the richest population are the ones with most decision making power, they refuse to acknowledge or do anything about the problem (they're insulated from it, remember?). So it never gets solved.
"It's a system built upon volunteerism and altruism." - to add, it also has a component of "learning" and in some circles "prestige" while volunteering. Can score a decent job if prove yourself in open source volunteering. So there is some personal gain involved, beyond feeling good about yourself.
I'm not defending communism, its previous iterations in history have had ups and downs, BUT it is fallacy that it had no reward or incentive for people to do better and achieve great things. This is often touted as greatest advantage of capitalism. There was always prestige, recognition, and often promotion earned by achieving/inventing something worthwhile.
Receiving monetary rewards for winning or achieving something was not uncommon either. It just wouldn't be ridiculous amounts of money that would let your worthless good-for-nothing great great great grankids to mooch off of, like it does under capitalism.
Sounds like you subscribe to philosophy of "Why bother wiping it, it'll only get dirty again!".
PS: I've lived under capitalism all my life, I've yet to see a toilet that gives you quarters for turds.... my parents lived under communism all their life, I'm fairly certain no state official every defecated on their doorstep (especially during a casual conversation).
Under capitalism those 2 entities will cooperate, while secretly plotting on how to destroy each other after they survive the initial threat of destruction. Don't you see it's a never ending cycle or screwing each other over? Why would anyone defend or want to live in a world like that?
Capitalism is based on competition. It implies separate entities fighting each other to achieve their own selfish goals. It's a system of "I got mine, and everything else can go to hell", totally directionless and chaotic system.
In order to overcome resource depletion we have to eventually expand (outside of our planet presumably). This implies cooperation on much larger scale than capitalism can provide, because remember that capitalism is a bunch of separate entities (possibly hostile to each other) pulling in their own selfish directions, as in NOT towards the same goal.
To give analogy: 10 people stuck on a small island that simply doesn't have enough food to feed them. They could all separate go their own way. Some will hoard scraps and fight others. Some might come up with innovative way to extend their food supply a while longer (based on their skills). One or two might try to build a raft (and never complete building it before starving or getting murdered/eaten by others that are not doing so). That's capitalism.
Or they could all pull together, share everything equally, plan work equally, build a raft together and gtfo the island. Notice the word: SHARE. Like for no profit, or promotion. Just share equally, go hungry together so that not one single person starves. These things are more akin to Communism.
One way leads to survival, the other to violence and death.
You don't want to give your phone number to Google?
Heh, would you phone happen to be an Android? Like more than 80% of the world.... Because Google wrote android... so you can bet not only do they know your phone number, but every key you ever pressed on that phone.
It seems ridiculous to say that moon landings were faked..... but at the same time about equally ridiculous to say that it didn't make A LOT OF SENSE or have HUGE INCENTIVE for US to fake them at the time... I'm kind of torn between the two here.
Was NASA and people really THAT brave back then (or as you put it the opposite of "a bunch of risk averse pussies") ? Did they really "overcome the long list of non-existing technologies"? These are big challenges. Challenges that for some reason we cannot overcome today....
So it made a hell of a lot of sense to fake it, because going to the moon for real would have been ridiculously difficult and dangerous. That's what makes me personally question if it really happened or not.
Because it's the largest economy today... you are using as some kind of argument to win all arguments.
Ask a Mongol during Genghis Khan, he'd tell you their system is BEST EVER. He'll even show you how much progress they have made, and how much more the quality of life for their people has improved.
Same thing with US. The only difference is time. You don't know if 100 or 1000 years later (or next month) American flavor of capitalism (cronyism or corporatism, or whatever else more accurately describes it) that you praise so much might be viewed as the most brutal, inefficient, unfair, and plain stupid system used.
IMHO there is a presently undiscovered formula that determines current best economical system for specific state. This is where EVERYONE got it wrong, it's NEVER CONSTANT, it's very fluid and changes with variables. Some of the variables being your current wealth, percentage of population compared with neighbors/competitors, current quality of life, number and strength of allies, current production output export vs import, natural resources, expansion possibilities, etc... Whatever system was best yesterday, might be different today. Also what's good for you, might be bad for someone else.
For example: plenty of expansion possibilities might yield best result of Colonialism. Tough times, need to tighten your belts, surrounded by enemies, few resources, and you might end up with best being Communism (or even dare I say Militaristic Fascism as horrible as it may sound). Things are easy, doing ok on most things, can loosen up a bit, maybe need to innovate a bit faster, might be best to go for some kind of Capitalism/Socialism hybrid.
Facebook is your home? Or perhaps you mean any medium where anyone's opinion can be posted is "your home" and if it doesn't agree with your point of view should be taken out as trash?
If you want to punish liars.... for example could start with Collin Powell, GW Jr, everyone in government, military, all private citizens that supported invasion of Iraq, which was based on WMD lie and caused a great deal of suffering to millions of people. We know for a fact it was a lie after all, there's no denying it. Why hasn't anyone in "your home" taken responsibility for it?
What's wrong with the way it's always been? Let all information out there through, don't filter anything. If source is caught lying, people don't go to it anymore. If source proves reliable, more people pay attention to it.
THAT many people want some kind of regulation/agency to tell them what's true and what's not true, what to believe and what not to believe instead of making up their own minds...? Sounds more like 79-88% of Americans are morons.
Slashdot Mirror
What's wrong with a car that can do both electric/gasoline, and how is it not better than electric only?
It's not like Toyota lost R&D race, they're still experimenting and testing electric motors. Only thing they lack is battery production capacity. They can't be the only car company that is, that stuff is demand right now.
Also, is electric really the future? Aren't you guys overestimating the progress of switching a bit here? In my circle of people I know pretty much everyone has a car, only a few hybrids, only 2 people with pure electric (Tesla hipsters...), rest are gasoline (few diesels). I could easily be wrong, but I do not see this trend changing drastically for at least a few decades. By far not everyone has a garage, by far not everyone even has their own drive way. A lot of people are happy to find a parking spot at all for the night, any spot. Good luck with putting charging stations at all of these spots. Solve parking problem first (again... best of luck to you), then I'd be more optimistic about electric cars.
Poor America... Chinese steal your trade secrets, Russians run your elections, Arabs constantly looking for opportunity to either run you over or crash a plane into you, Canadians don't want to trade fair, Mexicans crossing your border without asking, Syria is telling you to pack your toys and GTFO of their country, Europe doesn't want to pay your NATO "protection" money, Venezuela not accepting your puppet government, NSA monitoring your porn watching habbit, TSA gives you a rectal exam every time you fly anywhere...
The whole world is against you. Just stay in, don't peek your beak out . Isolate. Drop the iron curtain and be done with it already. Called it United States Security Response (USSR for short).
"US Has Killed More Than 20 Million People in 37 âoeVictim Nationsâ Since World War II" , that's just the headline of an article I happened to google.
Why does US try to do business and travel through China if they sanction Chinese trade partners? What gives them the right?
Go ahead, tell me about your superiority and how you can do things that others aren't allowed to do Adolf.
So either A) stop buying from China or B) stuff it.
Oh right... look under the keyboard you're typing on, where is it made?.... Option B it is then.
If China wants to do something that's perfectly legal for them, US law doesn't "trump" it, even if that happens to be US president's name.
If it's any consolation, US retains the right to be salty about it, maybe break some agreements or something with China, but common.... we all know agreements with US aren't worth the ink or paper they're written with/on, as evidenced by their breaking of agreement with Iran anyway.
In other news, our Saudi friends and allies have made great strides in women's rights and equality.
No longer will a woman sit there wondering where her husband is after he decides to divorce her without saying anything. As of last week courts will be required to send notification text message to wife's phone, to tell her that she's been divorced. Now that's what I call progress!
Ivan doesn't promote that sort of thing, quite the opposite. As a rule people that don't like Ivan are into that. They even blame Ivan of being homophobic at times.
Getting away with what? Trading with with Iran, country that China has no sanctions against?
Why should China give a frog's fart about US sanctions? Especially after US unilaterally broke its treaty with Iran.
It's like a bully trying to pick on someone, then he glances back and sees all his "flunkies"/"followers"/"buddies" are staying out of it. He's on his own. Feeling a bit of panic, maybe some cold sweat coming on bully?
"3. You are innocent. The Russians made a mistake. What are the chances the Russians will admit to that and lose face? You're screwed."
Chances are very good. Just imagine of all the exploding heads "Russians aren't evil....they let him go... what!?!!?" POP
"they'll never come close to us in terms of productivity per capita". What a load arrogant BS. You really think you are so much more productive and creative that they'll never come close to you??? lol
I don't care what country you live in, doesn't matter, it's not a true democracy anyway. You also have to be deluded to think that China is totalitarian. Surprise!!! There's millions of people involved in their "totalitarian" government making all kinds of decisions on all levels. Just like yours, wherever you're from. Had you been born Chinese you'd have about the same chance of having equal amount of input on how your government runs and its policy as you do right now, whatever country you are from. On the average it's next to no input at all.
"when you have one company where people only work four days a week, and another where they work 5+ the results are inevitable when they compete"
Replace "company" with "country" to see bigger picture. Short term, quarterly profits kind of narrow view, you are probably right. Big picture with sustainability you are not.
Company doesn't care how healthy its worker drones are, country does. More free time does make you healthier and less stressed long term.
Company doesn't care about future generations. Country does, or at least should... More free hours for parents, means better parenting.
Capitalism is predatory, it is built to destroy competition and feed on its corpse. Other systems are more benign, they have their advantages, but aren't meant to be aggressive and destructive to those around them. Capitalism dies, when it runs out of things to grow on.
It's like putting a spider with a honey bee in a jar, and then arguing that spiders are obviously better for the world and environment, because it ate the bee.
Socialism spreads the misery of something bad happening more evenly among everyone. While capitalism insulates the richest from those bad things. Since the richest population are the ones with most decision making power, they refuse to acknowledge or do anything about the problem (they're insulated from it, remember?). So it never gets solved.
"It's a system built upon volunteerism and altruism." - to add, it also has a component of "learning" and in some circles "prestige" while volunteering. Can score a decent job if prove yourself in open source volunteering. So there is some personal gain involved, beyond feeling good about yourself.
I'm not defending communism, its previous iterations in history have had ups and downs, BUT it is fallacy that it had no reward or incentive for people to do better and achieve great things. This is often touted as greatest advantage of capitalism. There was always prestige, recognition, and often promotion earned by achieving/inventing something worthwhile.
Receiving monetary rewards for winning or achieving something was not uncommon either. It just wouldn't be ridiculous amounts of money that would let your worthless good-for-nothing great great great grankids to mooch off of, like it does under capitalism.
Sounds like you subscribe to philosophy of "Why bother wiping it, it'll only get dirty again!".
PS: I've lived under capitalism all my life, I've yet to see a toilet that gives you quarters for turds.... my parents lived under communism all their life, I'm fairly certain no state official every defecated on their doorstep (especially during a casual conversation).
Under capitalism those 2 entities will cooperate, while secretly plotting on how to destroy each other after they survive the initial threat of destruction. Don't you see it's a never ending cycle or screwing each other over? Why would anyone defend or want to live in a world like that?
If you have a disease that's killing you, namely greed and selfishness, wouldn't it be better to cure it rather than "optimize around that"?
If you come home, and there's a turd at your doorstep, do you "optimize around that" or clean it up?
Capitalism is based on competition. It implies separate entities fighting each other to achieve their own selfish goals. It's a system of "I got mine, and everything else can go to hell", totally directionless and chaotic system.
In order to overcome resource depletion we have to eventually expand (outside of our planet presumably). This implies cooperation on much larger scale than capitalism can provide, because remember that capitalism is a bunch of separate entities (possibly hostile to each other) pulling in their own selfish directions, as in NOT towards the same goal.
To give analogy: 10 people stuck on a small island that simply doesn't have enough food to feed them. They could all separate go their own way. Some will hoard scraps and fight others. Some might come up with innovative way to extend their food supply a while longer (based on their skills). One or two might try to build a raft (and never complete building it before starving or getting murdered/eaten by others that are not doing so). That's capitalism.
Or they could all pull together, share everything equally, plan work equally, build a raft together and gtfo the island. Notice the word: SHARE. Like for no profit, or promotion. Just share equally, go hungry together so that not one single person starves. These things are more akin to Communism.
One way leads to survival, the other to violence and death.
You don't want to give your phone number to Google?
Heh, would you phone happen to be an Android? Like more than 80% of the world.... Because Google wrote android... so you can bet not only do they know your phone number, but every key you ever pressed on that phone.
It seems ridiculous to say that moon landings were faked..... but at the same time about equally ridiculous to say that it didn't make A LOT OF SENSE or have HUGE INCENTIVE for US to fake them at the time... I'm kind of torn between the two here.
Was NASA and people really THAT brave back then (or as you put it the opposite of "a bunch of risk averse pussies") ? Did they really "overcome the long list of non-existing technologies"? These are big challenges. Challenges that for some reason we cannot overcome today....
So it made a hell of a lot of sense to fake it, because going to the moon for real would have been ridiculously difficult and dangerous. That's what makes me personally question if it really happened or not.
Cry me a river....
Any game on Steam can be refunded anytime under 14 days, with less than 2 hours played. So effectively EVERY GAME has a "demo verson".
You didn't have that kind of convenience back then.... don't even lie... I played games back then too...
Because it's the largest economy today... you are using as some kind of argument to win all arguments.
Ask a Mongol during Genghis Khan, he'd tell you their system is BEST EVER. He'll even show you how much progress they have made, and how much more the quality of life for their people has improved.
Same thing with US. The only difference is time. You don't know if 100 or 1000 years later (or next month) American flavor of capitalism (cronyism or corporatism, or whatever else more accurately describes it) that you praise so much might be viewed as the most brutal, inefficient, unfair, and plain stupid system used.
IMHO there is a presently undiscovered formula that determines current best economical system for specific state. This is where EVERYONE got it wrong, it's NEVER CONSTANT, it's very fluid and changes with variables. Some of the variables being your current wealth, percentage of population compared with neighbors/competitors, current quality of life, number and strength of allies, current production output export vs import, natural resources, expansion possibilities, etc... Whatever system was best yesterday, might be different today. Also what's good for you, might be bad for someone else.
For example: plenty of expansion possibilities might yield best result of Colonialism. Tough times, need to tighten your belts, surrounded by enemies, few resources, and you might end up with best being Communism (or even dare I say Militaristic Fascism as horrible as it may sound). Things are easy, doing ok on most things, can loosen up a bit, maybe need to innovate a bit faster, might be best to go for some kind of Capitalism/Socialism hybrid.
Facebook is your home? Or perhaps you mean any medium where anyone's opinion can be posted is "your home" and if it doesn't agree with your point of view should be taken out as trash?
If you want to punish liars .... for example could start with Collin Powell, GW Jr, everyone in government, military, all private citizens that supported invasion of Iraq, which was based on WMD lie and caused a great deal of suffering to millions of people. We know for a fact it was a lie after all, there's no denying it. Why hasn't anyone in "your home" taken responsibility for it?
What's wrong with the way it's always been? Let all information out there through, don't filter anything. If source is caught lying, people don't go to it anymore. If source proves reliable, more people pay attention to it.
THAT many people want some kind of regulation/agency to tell them what's true and what's not true, what to believe and what not to believe instead of making up their own minds...? Sounds more like 79-88% of Americans are morons.