Probably true, but what about people like Richard Paey?. They had to have 3 trials, pressure his doctor to testify against him(they threatened his medical license), and put pressure on the jury to get a conviction.
Then, once in prison due to the 'cruel and unusual' clause they had to find somebody to treat his pain - and that doctor promptly prescribed a morphine pump that puts the drug right into his spine. At a cost well in excess of a number of years of pill-popping.
They deliberately set the 'intent to sell' amounts low because criminal distributers simply arranged to never be caught with more than a few packets at a time.
I do wonder just how the courts can accurately judge whether a person has intentions of concealing dope or not.
Not a lawyer, but I believe you'd need to somehow prove it 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Going by my limited experience factors I'd consider, both for/against: 1. Being a known drug dealer/mule 2. Being able to express a logical non-drug reason to have a safe - CCW(discrete & reasonably secure firearm storage when you go to an area you can't carry), receipt delivery, expensive jewelry, etc... 3. Drug dog* alerting on hole, even if empty 4. Whether I believe the hide is designed to evade casual theft or police search. If it requires seven steps to open, it's not designed to stop the 'average' car thief from finding it, it's designed to try to evade the feds.
*Personally I'd want to see whether said drug dog was accurate. Given that there's detectible amounts of drugs on any given piece of cash; I don't go for 'We detected XYZ drugs within the compartment where the stated use is transferring store receipts; I require it be absolutely filthy with trace amounts.
Not to diss your points, but I feel the need to point out that in places without private prisons you still generally have a lobby pressing for much the same thing in the form of the lobby of the prison guard union.
As for Ohio's contract, I'd love to see the officials who signed the contract fined and fired for exceeding their authority, and the contract ruled null and invalid due to containing invalid clauses.
I've heard about stuff like what the AC mentioned. From what I understand that particular interpritation is routinely defeated whenever it reaches a judge or jury. Problem is that the person often plea-bargains out, resulting in a 'conviction' without precident.
Even if they know the dude will be able to get off in a trial, it amounts to police harassment to the tune of thousands of dollars to defend yourself. Even if the charges are dropped before significant lawyer bills, it can still add up to harassment along the lines of this poor guy.
I've also heard where cops take 'concealed' to mean that there's an angle it can't be seen from, as opposed to not being able to be seen from any angle. As such, 'rubber banded to your hip' would still count as concealed if the cop can't see the firearm THROUGH your body. This resulted in jokes about carrying it on the top of your head.
Dude, you asked for the sales figures, the best I had without telling you to go google it yourself.
Uh... Even after rereading my post I never asked for the sales figures. Taking the 'I think' seriously, you'd have been looking at sales for the leaf, not total car sales.
Googling it, it looks like the leaf actually has it beat - 22k in 2011, increasing to 32k in 2013. Tesla doesn't expect to hit 30k until 2014, it seems to be about a 'year' behind in total sales. Oops, I was wrong, the 'hottest' selling EV, defined as 'most sales', would be the $30k/75mile leaf, not the $80k/265mile Model S. Which is why I didn't state it as outright fact, sticking "I think" in there.
Then I don't see your image at all, you have no potential for a sale.
Plus, well, it might be a touch more of a pain, but I have non-standard image capture software and access to my cache. At some point it becomes a challange.;)
Well, speaking as a photographer, the thing about selling photographs on the internet is that you generally have to show people what they're about to buy. So right click and save image is always a possibility. (There are coding ways around this, most of which are trivial to break. That's why the solutions are legal instead of technical.)
Yeah, use a browser other than IE and/or some sort of flashblock.
I make a point of saving any images on websites that attempt to block 'save as' by disabling the right mouse click. I normally find this out when I'm trying to either open up a link in a new tab or go back one handed (so no ctrl-click). If the site is 'personal' enough that they're probably paying attention, I sometimes email it to them going in a polite way 'Your protection is both a failure and an annoyance'.
Subsequent investigation revealed that the actual rate was closer to 80% for engaging the enemy, and the remaining 20% were more often engaged in tasks more important than them, personally, shooting at the enemy - including things like calling in airstrikes/artillery, delivering ammo, and treating the wounded.
The only way you could get it down to anywhere near 10% is if you include support troops that never saw a battlefield.
Indeed. I think I've heard about this guy on the radio. When it comes to the 'murdering psychopath' twist, it was identified that you not only needed the genes, they also generally had to be 'activated' by a horribly abusive childhood.
IE you have a reasonably well adjusted member of society if you raised your potential psychopath well, or a person without the genes horribly(sad as that is). It's only when the two mix that you get serial killers.
Just because you're a psychopath doesn't mean you need to be a murderer - as I like to joke: 'I'd have no problems killing you, but hiding the bodies is such a pain'.
Personally, I believe in the 'social contract'. Humans are NOT set up to 'go at it alone'.
Well, let's consider: 60kwh Tesla : $62.4k, 85kwh Tesla : $72.4k Cost for 25kwh: $10k (roughly, the 85kwh model has a few other premium options like free access to supercharge stations) This gives me ~$24k for 60kwh, $34k for 85kwh. Or almost half the cost of the car.
Browsing around searching for the cost of the battery pack shows that Tesla is offering to sell replacement batteries upfront for $10-12k, but that's with deliveries 8 years in the future and currently LiIon batteries are dropping ~10% a year. 'Rule of 72' means that in roughly 7 years the batteries should cost half as much to make. Combined with the interest, that would be inline with the current cost estimate.
I've heard that the shorter ranged car is selling substantially worse though - especially since you don't get access to things like supercharging stations without it.
So what? I said the hottest selling EV, not the hottest selling car. I'm fully aware it's still an insignificant amount of the market. If Tesla can get the cost of the car down to about half of where it is now they'd easily be able to sell a couple OOM more of them- which would be a significant portion of world sales, not just US.
Then there is price... The Model S is $20K MORE than this truck, for half the vehicle. I don't mind spending a bit more for some things, but that is just nuts. Call me when the Model S is $40K, it will become interesting at that point. The Chevy Volt is also nice technology, but for $40K, GM is out of their minds.
It's mostly the battery that's killing the Model S's price. With the Volt since it still has an engine it has all the complexity of a IC vehicle AND that of an EV, plus a still fairly substantial cost for the battery.
Around a decade ago I said that there's nothing wrong with EV's that a battery that costs half as much for double the capacity wouldn't fix. This was back in the lead-acid/NiMH days, LiIon came along and doubled capacity, but also doubled cost. It's made a lot of gains on cost since then, and actually has a theoretical max cost lower than that of NiMH, but it's still about twice as expensive as I'd like it to be.
I go on about 4 trips a year that are well outside the range of an EV. It only has to be more than 100 miles to hit that limit.
Model S range is 300, or are you going camping? As for the seats, I'm more worried about heat(Alaska).
Frankly, this is the problem. I'm the target customer for Tesla, I can afford one. But I'm not interested because it isn't a full size SUV. Even when it comes out, it is likely to be so expensive, I won't care.
I disagree; you're not their target 'yet'. They're still selling as many cars as they can make, with responsible expansion. They're planning a small SUV next year, the model X. Don't think that's quite up to your standards yet, but the idea of dual motors powering the front and rear wheels gets my attention.
I don't need 250 miles of range in an EV, 75 miles is plenty. The 250 miles doesn't help me because when I need that, I really need 500-1,000 miles of range, refilling my gas tank takes 5 minutes, recharging a 250 mile range SUV takes 5 hours.
You need supercharging stations then. They can slap ~200 miles on in under an hour.
Can we fly to Florida? Yes, but I hate the airlines, airports, and all the crap that goes along with flying these days (and I say that as a pilot!), I would much rather drive. Driving doesn't save any money, the cost to drive my truck to Florida and back is actually about the same as 5 coach round trip tickets. I can charter a plane, but that is 4 times the price, but interestingly enough, about the same cost as 5 first class round trip tickets.
Well, as a pilot you should realize that if you charter a plane you don't have to deal with all the airline terminal stuff. It's hilareous watching commercial passangers in Alaska for the first time see a bush pilot with a handgun strapped to his hip walking to his plane.
I don't disagree that EV's aren't quite 'there' yet. They're in an interesting spot where they're only economic to people who fit very specific profiles, but that's okay; cut the price of the batteries in half again and I think you'd see 10X as many people driving them.
I've seen a number of hybrids up here in Alaska, gas is expensive.
My idea is to use the fuel source best suited for purpose - in the extreme north install a small hydrocarbon heater - probably propane, but you have your choice of fuels otherwise. That way you have the energy density and 90%+ efficiency for producing heat(not a high penalty over the 100% efficiency of electric resistance, and it's cold enough to really limit the effectiveness of heat pump style heating), and the efficiency of electric for moving, where it's 90% efficient(over ~30% for gasoline).
My decade old saying was 'There's nothing wrong with EV's that a battery that costs half as much for double the capacity wouldn't fix'.
At the time they were using lead-acid, the switch to LiIon gave us the double, but at double the cost. We haven't reached the 'half the price' yet though.
I've got the same problem, but I live in a Condo. I have a detached garage with an assigned space that's about 40 feet from my electric meter and main panel. I'd have to run conduit under a driveway and 2 sidewalks to get power to my parking space. Needless to say, it wouldn't be cheap.
Not cheap, no, but with the hydrolic drills and such they'd be able to punch a line over there pretty easily without touching the driveway or sidewalks, for less than you might think.
do you have ANY concept of how much it costs to add a WiFi router to an internet connection the business already has
Do you? Are you figuring on hiring somebody to set it up properly so it protects your internal network? How about checking to see if you need to increase your connection bandwidth? QoS so your credit card transactions always has priority, etc...? How about hiring a lawyer to draft the agreement splash page to protect your ass from liability if/when somebody does something illegal over your public wifi?
not to mention the high likelihood of outside connections being vandalized...
I think vandalism is less of a concern in most areas than you might think. Stupid drivers running into them though, yes.
As for attracting customers, I figure that the first round will mostly be free chargers being the 'trickle' type, and fast chargers costing money. Still, completely filling a Model S is like $8.50 worth of electricity, vs $85 for my truck's tank, for similar ranges.
Given energy densities and such, it'd need to be at least 220V.
A model S uses 330 wh per mile. Because the compoents tend to get more efficient as they get bigger, leafs are in the same category.
This translates to, with some overhead, and allowances for waste, about 5 miles an hour charging at 120V@15A, or 40 miles over an 8 hour period. Not 'quite' enough for what I'd consider sufficient overhead for the 'averge' round trip commute. Kick it up to 240V@15A(max you could theoretically do without running heavier wire, which would really cost), and you're looking at 80 miles in the same time.
The magic number is 200 miles for the worst-case range. This ensures that when the vehicle is a few years old, its range will likely still be enough to handle the majority of owners' commutes. This translates to about a 300 mile average range. In other words, the batteries on existing EVs are undersized by more than a factor of 4 from what I would consider to be a usable vehicle. They're simply nowhere close to being ready for prime time.
I haven't seen sales figures, but I think the hottest selling EV today is the Model S, which has around 300 miles of range.
Point taken, but the truth is, you end up spending so much on a rental that you might as well have just bought the gas car, renting a nice car 4 times a year wipes out the gas savings very quickly.
You go on long trips four times a year? My family is more like one. For that matter, right now my job has me so far from them that I fly. Anyways, I once attempted to calculate out at what price point it makes sense to own two vehicles for the purposes of saving money - the results were that you'd need to be an extremely prolific driver to beat the 'just own the more capable vehicle in the first place' or 'rent the more capable vehicle when you need it'. Results vary, but it's something like driving 3x the average to make two vehicles worth it, and renting only makes sense if you use it for 10 days or less a year.
Not to mention that you probably can't rent the same thing you drive,
Why would you want to, especially if you're renting because you need capabilities(range, cargo space, etc...) that your normal vehicle doesn't have?
it won't be as well equipped as your own car, and so on.
It's not tough to beat the feature set of my truck.
The people who can afford to buy EV cars aren't going to rent beaters, and to rent the nice cars costs so much, you might as well buy a nice gas car and be done with it.
Remember, quite a few of these types are also the ones that will hire a plane to fly 300 miles rather than drive it, then rent a vehicle on location if appropriate. They'd be renting a car even if they had a gasoline one back home.
I think what TMCP was trying to get at is that real-world performance depends on the tasks you're looking to do. Adding more hardware might 'always' work for benchmarks, but if your task isn't that parallelizable it won't improve your performance.
It's sort of like how a while ago I'd buy a faster dual-core over quad cores - the games I played weren't written for multiple cores, but windows was smart enough to offload it's stuff to the other core, which still wasn't anything near fully utilized. I'd have actually been better off with a ~1Ghz 'control' CPU and a ~5Ghz 'game' CPU.
Honestly, I figure that if we really hit a road-block hardware wise we'll start switching back to optimization. It's a known issue that our current generation software are bloated and inefficient. Rather than just develop and bolt-on new features, go back and optimize - With enough work I think you could make an Office suit that does everything current versions do with 1/4 the memory and CPU.
To summarize the above: Non-metallic guns currently suck, even/especially 3D printed ones. They suck so badly that I actually want criminals to use them, because it'll mean that they've sunk far more resources into the gun for less benefit than nearly every other course of action with the goal of committing violence with intent to harm.
I've never seen my rabbits do it. I have seen my guinea pigs do so regularly (but only very fresh, straight from the anus). I've been told that this is indeed to give the food a second chance, as digesting plant matter is hard and there is a lot of nutritional value in their droppings.
You're in a better spot to know that I would be, but I do know that dogs will turn into corpophages(shit-eaters) if they aren't getting the right diet; often the solution to a dog that's eating shit is to feed them better dogfood. Could be the same with rabbits - feed them easily digested food and they won't do it as they don't need the second pass.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably true, but what about people like Richard Paey?. They had to have 3 trials, pressure his doctor to testify against him(they threatened his medical license), and put pressure on the jury to get a conviction.
Then, once in prison due to the 'cruel and unusual' clause they had to find somebody to treat his pain - and that doctor promptly prescribed a morphine pump that puts the drug right into his spine. At a cost well in excess of a number of years of pill-popping.
They deliberately set the 'intent to sell' amounts low because criminal distributers simply arranged to never be caught with more than a few packets at a time.
I do wonder just how the courts can accurately judge whether a person has intentions of concealing dope or not.
Not a lawyer, but I believe you'd need to somehow prove it 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Going by my limited experience factors I'd consider, both for/against:
1. Being a known drug dealer/mule
2. Being able to express a logical non-drug reason to have a safe - CCW(discrete & reasonably secure firearm storage when you go to an area you can't carry), receipt delivery, expensive jewelry, etc...
3. Drug dog* alerting on hole, even if empty
4. Whether I believe the hide is designed to evade casual theft or police search. If it requires seven steps to open, it's not designed to stop the 'average' car thief from finding it, it's designed to try to evade the feds.
*Personally I'd want to see whether said drug dog was accurate. Given that there's detectible amounts of drugs on any given piece of cash; I don't go for 'We detected XYZ drugs within the compartment where the stated use is transferring store receipts; I require it be absolutely filthy with trace amounts.
Not to diss your points, but I feel the need to point out that in places without private prisons you still generally have a lobby pressing for much the same thing in the form of the lobby of the prison guard union.
As for Ohio's contract, I'd love to see the officials who signed the contract fined and fired for exceeding their authority, and the contract ruled null and invalid due to containing invalid clauses.
I've heard about stuff like what the AC mentioned. From what I understand that particular interpritation is routinely defeated whenever it reaches a judge or jury. Problem is that the person often plea-bargains out, resulting in a 'conviction' without precident.
Even if they know the dude will be able to get off in a trial, it amounts to police harassment to the tune of thousands of dollars to defend yourself. Even if the charges are dropped before significant lawyer bills, it can still add up to harassment along the lines of this poor guy.
I've also heard where cops take 'concealed' to mean that there's an angle it can't be seen from, as opposed to not being able to be seen from any angle. As such, 'rubber banded to your hip' would still count as concealed if the cop can't see the firearm THROUGH your body. This resulted in jokes about carrying it on the top of your head.
Dude, you asked for the sales figures, the best I had without telling you to go google it yourself.
Uh... Even after rereading my post I never asked for the sales figures. Taking the 'I think' seriously, you'd have been looking at sales for the leaf, not total car sales.
Googling it, it looks like the leaf actually has it beat - 22k in 2011, increasing to 32k in 2013. Tesla doesn't expect to hit 30k until 2014, it seems to be about a 'year' behind in total sales. Oops, I was wrong, the 'hottest' selling EV, defined as 'most sales', would be the $30k/75mile leaf, not the $80k/265mile Model S. Which is why I didn't state it as outright fact, sticking "I think" in there.
Then I don't see your image at all, you have no potential for a sale.
Plus, well, it might be a touch more of a pain, but I have non-standard image capture software and access to my cache. At some point it becomes a challange. ;)
Well, speaking as a photographer, the thing about selling photographs on the internet is that you generally have to show people what they're about to buy. So right click and save image is always a possibility. (There are coding ways around this, most of which are trivial to break. That's why the solutions are legal instead of technical.)
Yeah, use a browser other than IE and/or some sort of flashblock.
I make a point of saving any images on websites that attempt to block 'save as' by disabling the right mouse click. I normally find this out when I'm trying to either open up a link in a new tab or go back one handed (so no ctrl-click). If the site is 'personal' enough that they're probably paying attention, I sometimes email it to them going in a polite way 'Your protection is both a failure and an annoyance'.
The claim was 30%, not 10%.
Subsequent investigation revealed that the actual rate was closer to 80% for engaging the enemy, and the remaining 20% were more often engaged in tasks more important than them, personally, shooting at the enemy - including things like calling in airstrikes/artillery, delivering ammo, and treating the wounded.
The only way you could get it down to anywhere near 10% is if you include support troops that never saw a battlefield.
Indeed. I think I've heard about this guy on the radio. When it comes to the 'murdering psychopath' twist, it was identified that you not only needed the genes, they also generally had to be 'activated' by a horribly abusive childhood.
IE you have a reasonably well adjusted member of society if you raised your potential psychopath well, or a person without the genes horribly(sad as that is). It's only when the two mix that you get serial killers.
Just because you're a psychopath doesn't mean you need to be a murderer - as I like to joke: 'I'd have no problems killing you, but hiding the bodies is such a pain'.
Personally, I believe in the 'social contract'. Humans are NOT set up to 'go at it alone'.
Well, let's consider:
60kwh Tesla : $62.4k, 85kwh Tesla : $72.4k
Cost for 25kwh: $10k (roughly, the 85kwh model has a few other premium options like free access to supercharge stations)
This gives me ~$24k for 60kwh, $34k for 85kwh. Or almost half the cost of the car.
Browsing around searching for the cost of the battery pack shows that Tesla is offering to sell replacement batteries upfront for $10-12k, but that's with deliveries 8 years in the future and currently LiIon batteries are dropping ~10% a year. 'Rule of 72' means that in roughly 7 years the batteries should cost half as much to make. Combined with the interest, that would be inline with the current cost estimate.
I've heard that the shorter ranged car is selling substantially worse though - especially since you don't get access to things like supercharging stations without it.
So what? I said the hottest selling EV, not the hottest selling car. I'm fully aware it's still an insignificant amount of the market. If Tesla can get the cost of the car down to about half of where it is now they'd easily be able to sell a couple OOM more of them- which would be a significant portion of world sales, not just US.
Then there is price... The Model S is $20K MORE than this truck, for half the vehicle. I don't mind spending a bit more for some things, but that is just nuts. Call me when the Model S is $40K, it will become interesting at that point. The Chevy Volt is also nice technology, but for $40K, GM is out of their minds.
It's mostly the battery that's killing the Model S's price. With the Volt since it still has an engine it has all the complexity of a IC vehicle AND that of an EV, plus a still fairly substantial cost for the battery.
Around a decade ago I said that there's nothing wrong with EV's that a battery that costs half as much for double the capacity wouldn't fix. This was back in the lead-acid/NiMH days, LiIon came along and doubled capacity, but also doubled cost. It's made a lot of gains on cost since then, and actually has a theoretical max cost lower than that of NiMH, but it's still about twice as expensive as I'd like it to be.
I go on about 4 trips a year that are well outside the range of an EV. It only has to be more than 100 miles to hit that limit.
Model S range is 300, or are you going camping? As for the seats, I'm more worried about heat(Alaska).
Frankly, this is the problem. I'm the target customer for Tesla, I can afford one. But I'm not interested because it isn't a full size SUV. Even when it comes out, it is likely to be so expensive, I won't care.
I disagree; you're not their target 'yet'. They're still selling as many cars as they can make, with responsible expansion. They're planning a small SUV next year, the model X. Don't think that's quite up to your standards yet, but the idea of dual motors powering the front and rear wheels gets my attention.
I don't need 250 miles of range in an EV, 75 miles is plenty. The 250 miles doesn't help me because when I need that, I really need 500-1,000 miles of range, refilling my gas tank takes 5 minutes, recharging a 250 mile range SUV takes 5 hours.
You need supercharging stations then. They can slap ~200 miles on in under an hour.
Can we fly to Florida? Yes, but I hate the airlines, airports, and all the crap that goes along with flying these days (and I say that as a pilot!), I would much rather drive. Driving doesn't save any money, the cost to drive my truck to Florida and back is actually about the same as 5 coach round trip tickets. I can charter a plane, but that is 4 times the price, but interestingly enough, about the same cost as 5 first class round trip tickets.
Well, as a pilot you should realize that if you charter a plane you don't have to deal with all the airline terminal stuff. It's hilareous watching commercial passangers in Alaska for the first time see a bush pilot with a handgun strapped to his hip walking to his plane.
I don't disagree that EV's aren't quite 'there' yet. They're in an interesting spot where they're only economic to people who fit very specific profiles, but that's okay; cut the price of the batteries in half again and I think you'd see 10X as many people driving them.
Not per various sources - puts the truck 5 years out - making 2018/9 closer than 2015.
As for towing - you have my attention at "100% torque at 0 RPM".
I've seen a number of hybrids up here in Alaska, gas is expensive.
My idea is to use the fuel source best suited for purpose - in the extreme north install a small hydrocarbon heater - probably propane, but you have your choice of fuels otherwise. That way you have the energy density and 90%+ efficiency for producing heat(not a high penalty over the 100% efficiency of electric resistance, and it's cold enough to really limit the effectiveness of heat pump style heating), and the efficiency of electric for moving, where it's 90% efficient(over ~30% for gasoline).
My decade old saying was 'There's nothing wrong with EV's that a battery that costs half as much for double the capacity wouldn't fix'.
At the time they were using lead-acid, the switch to LiIon gave us the double, but at double the cost. We haven't reached the 'half the price' yet though.
I've got the same problem, but I live in a Condo. I have a detached garage with an assigned space that's about 40 feet from my electric meter and main panel. I'd have to run conduit under a driveway and 2 sidewalks to get power to my parking space. Needless to say, it wouldn't be cheap.
Not cheap, no, but with the hydrolic drills and such they'd be able to punch a line over there pretty easily without touching the driveway or sidewalks, for less than you might think.
do you have ANY concept of how much it costs to add a WiFi router to an internet connection the business already has
Do you? Are you figuring on hiring somebody to set it up properly so it protects your internal network? How about checking to see if you need to increase your connection bandwidth? QoS so your credit card transactions always has priority, etc...? How about hiring a lawyer to draft the agreement splash page to protect your ass from liability if/when somebody does something illegal over your public wifi?
not to mention the high likelihood of outside connections being vandalized...
I think vandalism is less of a concern in most areas than you might think. Stupid drivers running into them though, yes.
As for attracting customers, I figure that the first round will mostly be free chargers being the 'trickle' type, and fast chargers costing money. Still, completely filling a Model S is like $8.50 worth of electricity, vs $85 for my truck's tank, for similar ranges.
Given energy densities and such, it'd need to be at least 220V.
A model S uses 330 wh per mile. Because the compoents tend to get more efficient as they get bigger, leafs are in the same category.
This translates to, with some overhead, and allowances for waste, about 5 miles an hour charging at 120V@15A, or 40 miles over an 8 hour period. Not 'quite' enough for what I'd consider sufficient overhead for the 'averge' round trip commute.
Kick it up to 240V@15A(max you could theoretically do without running heavier wire, which would really cost), and you're looking at 80 miles in the same time.
The magic number is 200 miles for the worst-case range. This ensures that when the vehicle is a few years old, its range will likely still be enough to handle the majority of owners' commutes. This translates to about a 300 mile average range. In other words, the batteries on existing EVs are undersized by more than a factor of 4 from what I would consider to be a usable vehicle. They're simply nowhere close to being ready for prime time.
I haven't seen sales figures, but I think the hottest selling EV today is the Model S, which has around 300 miles of range.
Point taken, but the truth is, you end up spending so much on a rental that you might as well have just bought the gas car, renting a nice car 4 times a year wipes out the gas savings very quickly.
You go on long trips four times a year? My family is more like one. For that matter, right now my job has me so far from them that I fly. Anyways, I once attempted to calculate out at what price point it makes sense to own two vehicles for the purposes of saving money - the results were that you'd need to be an extremely prolific driver to beat the 'just own the more capable vehicle in the first place' or 'rent the more capable vehicle when you need it'. Results vary, but it's something like driving 3x the average to make two vehicles worth it, and renting only makes sense if you use it for 10 days or less a year.
Not to mention that you probably can't rent the same thing you drive,
Why would you want to, especially if you're renting because you need capabilities(range, cargo space, etc...) that your normal vehicle doesn't have?
it won't be as well equipped as your own car, and so on.
It's not tough to beat the feature set of my truck.
The people who can afford to buy EV cars aren't going to rent beaters, and to rent the nice cars costs so much, you might as well buy a nice gas car and be done with it.
Remember, quite a few of these types are also the ones that will hire a plane to fly 300 miles rather than drive it, then rent a vehicle on location if appropriate. They'd be renting a car even if they had a gasoline one back home.
I think what TMCP was trying to get at is that real-world performance depends on the tasks you're looking to do. Adding more hardware might 'always' work for benchmarks, but if your task isn't that parallelizable it won't improve your performance.
It's sort of like how a while ago I'd buy a faster dual-core over quad cores - the games I played weren't written for multiple cores, but windows was smart enough to offload it's stuff to the other core, which still wasn't anything near fully utilized. I'd have actually been better off with a ~1Ghz 'control' CPU and a ~5Ghz 'game' CPU.
Honestly, I figure that if we really hit a road-block hardware wise we'll start switching back to optimization. It's a known issue that our current generation software are bloated and inefficient. Rather than just develop and bolt-on new features, go back and optimize - With enough work I think you could make an Office suit that does everything current versions do with 1/4 the memory and CPU.
To summarize the above: Non-metallic guns currently suck, even/especially 3D printed ones. They suck so badly that I actually want criminals to use them, because it'll mean that they've sunk far more resources into the gun for less benefit than nearly every other course of action with the goal of committing violence with intent to harm.
I've never seen my rabbits do it. I have seen my guinea pigs do so regularly (but only very fresh, straight from the anus). I've been told that this is indeed to give the food a second chance, as digesting plant matter is hard and there is a lot of nutritional value in their droppings.
You're in a better spot to know that I would be, but I do know that dogs will turn into corpophages(shit-eaters) if they aren't getting the right diet; often the solution to a dog that's eating shit is to feed them better dogfood. Could be the same with rabbits - feed them easily digested food and they won't do it as they don't need the second pass.