The US is many times larger than any European country, including Russia. They're not comparable.
So instead, I'm comparing Europe as a whole to the US, and individual European countries to US states. These comparisons are between similarly sized and populated areas. And looking at both of those, the US is richer than Europe, and US states are richer than European countries.
They serve the utility they're designed for: non-road-trip transportation.
Oh really? There's a huge shopping mall that's 1 hour away by car from my house. If the car only has a range of 100 miles, I'll be stuck there. Even if it's a new one with slightly better range, I'm still in trouble if I try to pick up grocery or lunch before heading there.
Almost all of the energy used in space travel is used near Earth. So if we have something that could boost a spaceship from low Earth orbit to escape velocity, and it doesn't use any fuel, that's still incredibly useful.
Exactly, Tesla is trying to optimize for two things (energy recovery and stopping). Most other car companies are only optimizing one (stopping).
Or you know, they can hire engineers with common sense and optimize for stopping distance when you stomp on the brake, and energy recovery when it's gently pressed.
Not to mention other car manufacturers aren't necessarily optimizing for stopping distance, limiting brake wear and minimizing the jolt to passengers are also considerations.
I wonder how reproducible CR's method is. Brake testing is relatively simple, but for fuel efficiency, there are a lot of environmental factors that can affect the results, such as quality of the road surface, minor elevation changes, tire inflation, altitude, air pressure, temperature, wind, size of cars in front of you, quality of the fuel, and driver habits.
There's a nice table of median income on Wikipedia. The US is not #1, but it's quite close to the top. Of course, the US is a big place. If you are comparing similarly-populated areas, then there are parts of the US that are far, far richer than any place in Europe.
The richest European country is Luxembourg, with 600,000 people and $52,000 in median household income. Fairfax County, Virginia, with 1.1 million people, is at $115,000. Meanwhile, the poorest countries in the EU, Spain and Italy, are around $20,000, and the poorest state in the US, Mississippi, is at $40,000. Even when you look at disposable income instead of median, the data still agrees.
So I think it's safe to say the US is richer than Europe as a whole.
A truly committed EV maker will force rest of the industry to deliver EV. That is why I am paying more knowingly. I have quite a few friends, call them fellow bleeding hearts if you want to, who have done the same.
Funny thing is, if we bleeding heart liberals spend our money on what we like, it is laugh worthy.
It's not so much "laugh worthy" as concerning. Any American driving a gasoline car can look across the pond and see exactly how far liberals will go to force it on everyone. They have very high gas taxes, highway tolls, license and registration fees, and VAT. Basically, they make it impossible for the poorer folks to drive anywhere, all in the name of being green.
When EVs become a significant part of the market, you can bet the liberals will try to ban gasoline cars. That's great for people like you (and me) who can afford them and no longer have to deal with the pollution, but it's terrible for people who can't.
Personally speaking, I don't think the current crop of electric vehicles has better utility than my much cheaper gas car, so I'm holding off for now.
That has everything to do with the amount of effort they put in, and nothing to do with how good their spelling is. I've had several well educated friends ask me to proofread their resumes and cover letters. And guess what? They all have typos! The only reason their employers don't see that is because they put in the effort to make it error-free, which in cases like these, involved finding someone else who's good at writing.
Oh sure, issue a challenge where only your opponent is handicapped. How amazing you are! Somebody give this guy a medal.
If instead of spending 5 years studying arithmetic, you spent 1 week studying economics, you'd know that everything comes at a cost. All that time spent on simple arithmetic is really only useful for a handful of jobs. Meanwhile, a year of critical thinking, personal finance or cooking would benefit almost everyone for a lifetime.
And just for fun, here's my counter challenge to you: read the entire text of this challenge. If you don't, you lose. If you do, I win.
Sure, that is a great way to get the kids into a university course.
I "typed" the previous sentence using the free text to speech feature on my laptop, on one try, and without any manual interference. I also typed these two sentences in the same way, with the exception of fixing one word and adding quotes to another.
Besides, anyone can tell what you wrote were the wrong words at a glance. That's a much easier task than spelling something like "capricious" correctly.
You shouldn't equate math with arithmetic. Yes, you do need to know math to convert real-world problems into something you can type into a calculator, but doing the mental arithmetic is not very useful. Just speaking for myself, despite being able to multiply 4 digit numbers by heart, I don't do it very often. I can't trust myself to calculate everything as accurately as a calculator.
The difference is, adding lanes in the air is free. Once minimum separation can't be reduced anymore, they can switch to bigger planes, and then to formation flying. There simply aren't enough people in the world to fill the whole North Atlantic. They'll run out of airports, pilots, and TSA screeners long before they run out of airspace.
Unless the other plane is sitting perfectly still, there's no need to fly the whole 40 miles around it. And even if it was, a 40 mile separation can be achieved with a 5 degree deviation in heading over a 460-mile course, which is 3.5 miles of extra distance, extending the trip by 24 seconds.
And keep in mind, the 40-mile separation only needs to be adhered to where there's no radar service, e.g. over empty oceans. Otherwise the separation can be reduced to 3 miles laterally, or 1,000 feet vertically.
So no, it's not going to make much of a difference in flight time.
As other posters have mentioned, relatively strong people can move planes bare-handed. So I'd say the Tesla is already way over-built for this purpose.
People planning to break the law don't ponder jail time. Never have, never will.
Now you're just denying reality. I'm one of those who planned to break the law at one point, then considered jail time and didn't follow through. What does that make me?
Our main battle tanks are two generations behind Russia's and their air defense systems are also greatly enhanced. Iran successfully took over one of our most sophisticated drones and captured in, a couple years ago, using electronic warfare... Although we have the F-22 and the F-35 jets, we are falling in most other areas and are even behind in some.
Too bad none of that actually matters if it really was a defensive war. We have more than enough nuclear weapons to flatten any invading army, their military bases, sea ports, airports and factories, as well as that of their allies and trading partners, several times over.
"Making an example to deter" has worked so greatly for killing people for murder, hasn't it?
But it does, the number of murders is quite low. I've thought about murdering many people. If it were legal, I'd probably have carried through with a few, like that school administrator who thought bullying was "a part of growing up" and refuses to do anything about it.
In this case, the reason "making an example" doesn't work is because he and his peers haven't been alive long enough to hear about those examples. This is why minors are tried differently than adults.
Slashdot Mirror
The US is many times larger than any European country, including Russia. They're not comparable.
So instead, I'm comparing Europe as a whole to the US, and individual European countries to US states. These comparisons are between similarly sized and populated areas. And looking at both of those, the US is richer than Europe, and US states are richer than European countries.
So in your world, renting a gasoline car once a month to make up for the crippled EV you bought is totally reasonable.
They serve the utility they're designed for: non-road-trip transportation.
Oh really? There's a huge shopping mall that's 1 hour away by car from my house. If the car only has a range of 100 miles, I'll be stuck there. Even if it's a new one with slightly better range, I'm still in trouble if I try to pick up grocery or lunch before heading there.
Almost all of the energy used in space travel is used near Earth. So if we have something that could boost a spaceship from low Earth orbit to escape velocity, and it doesn't use any fuel, that's still incredibly useful.
The next model should be gaze controlled. You want to turn left, just look that way. That would be very cool indeed.
In other news: a sharp spike in vehicular accidents involving beautiful women.
Oh? Can you link me to a used Tesla ad for $10k? Because none of the other EVs are anywhere close to being comparable to gas cars in terms of utility.
Exactly, Tesla is trying to optimize for two things (energy recovery and stopping). Most other car companies are only optimizing one (stopping).
Or you know, they can hire engineers with common sense and optimize for stopping distance when you stomp on the brake, and energy recovery when it's gently pressed.
Not to mention other car manufacturers aren't necessarily optimizing for stopping distance, limiting brake wear and minimizing the jolt to passengers are also considerations.
Doesn't have to be a hacker. Microsoft has blue-screened plenty of people without ever intending to.
I wonder how reproducible CR's method is. Brake testing is relatively simple, but for fuel efficiency, there are a lot of environmental factors that can affect the results, such as quality of the road surface, minor elevation changes, tire inflation, altitude, air pressure, temperature, wind, size of cars in front of you, quality of the fuel, and driver habits.
There's a nice table of median income on Wikipedia. The US is not #1, but it's quite close to the top. Of course, the US is a big place. If you are comparing similarly-populated areas, then there are parts of the US that are far, far richer than any place in Europe.
The richest European country is Luxembourg, with 600,000 people and $52,000 in median household income. Fairfax County, Virginia, with 1.1 million people, is at $115,000. Meanwhile, the poorest countries in the EU, Spain and Italy, are around $20,000, and the poorest state in the US, Mississippi, is at $40,000. Even when you look at disposable income instead of median, the data still agrees.
So I think it's safe to say the US is richer than Europe as a whole.
A truly committed EV maker will force rest of the industry to deliver EV. That is why I am paying more knowingly. I have quite a few friends, call them fellow bleeding hearts if you want to, who have done the same. Funny thing is, if we bleeding heart liberals spend our money on what we like, it is laugh worthy.
It's not so much "laugh worthy" as concerning. Any American driving a gasoline car can look across the pond and see exactly how far liberals will go to force it on everyone. They have very high gas taxes, highway tolls, license and registration fees, and VAT. Basically, they make it impossible for the poorer folks to drive anywhere, all in the name of being green.
When EVs become a significant part of the market, you can bet the liberals will try to ban gasoline cars. That's great for people like you (and me) who can afford them and no longer have to deal with the pollution, but it's terrible for people who can't.
Personally speaking, I don't think the current crop of electric vehicles has better utility than my much cheaper gas car, so I'm holding off for now.
That has everything to do with the amount of effort they put in, and nothing to do with how good their spelling is. I've had several well educated friends ask me to proofread their resumes and cover letters. And guess what? They all have typos! The only reason their employers don't see that is because they put in the effort to make it error-free, which in cases like these, involved finding someone else who's good at writing.
Oh sure, issue a challenge where only your opponent is handicapped. How amazing you are! Somebody give this guy a medal.
If instead of spending 5 years studying arithmetic, you spent 1 week studying economics, you'd know that everything comes at a cost. All that time spent on simple arithmetic is really only useful for a handful of jobs. Meanwhile, a year of critical thinking, personal finance or cooking would benefit almost everyone for a lifetime.
And just for fun, here's my counter challenge to you: read the entire text of this challenge. If you don't, you lose. If you do, I win.
Sure, that is a great way to get the kids into a university course.
I "typed" the previous sentence using the free text to speech feature on my laptop, on one try, and without any manual interference. I also typed these two sentences in the same way, with the exception of fixing one word and adding quotes to another.
Besides, anyone can tell what you wrote were the wrong words at a glance. That's a much easier task than spelling something like "capricious" correctly.
You shouldn't equate math with arithmetic. Yes, you do need to know math to convert real-world problems into something you can type into a calculator, but doing the mental arithmetic is not very useful. Just speaking for myself, despite being able to multiply 4 digit numbers by heart, I don't do it very often. I can't trust myself to calculate everything as accurately as a calculator.
how to make a quality sandwich with ground beef
Your problem is trying to make a sandwich with ground beef.
The difference is, adding lanes in the air is free. Once minimum separation can't be reduced anymore, they can switch to bigger planes, and then to formation flying. There simply aren't enough people in the world to fill the whole North Atlantic. They'll run out of airports, pilots, and TSA screeners long before they run out of airspace.
Unless the other plane is sitting perfectly still, there's no need to fly the whole 40 miles around it. And even if it was, a 40 mile separation can be achieved with a 5 degree deviation in heading over a 460-mile course, which is 3.5 miles of extra distance, extending the trip by 24 seconds.
And keep in mind, the 40-mile separation only needs to be adhered to where there's no radar service, e.g. over empty oceans. Otherwise the separation can be reduced to 3 miles laterally, or 1,000 feet vertically.
So no, it's not going to make much of a difference in flight time.
Bikeshare is already huge in China. It's not really new tech at this point.
Bicycles illegal? I am suddenly interested in moving to Venice.
You pretty much have to love tourists though.
As other posters have mentioned, relatively strong people can move planes bare-handed. So I'd say the Tesla is already way over-built for this purpose.
People planning to break the law don't ponder jail time. Never have, never will.
Now you're just denying reality. I'm one of those who planned to break the law at one point, then considered jail time and didn't follow through. What does that make me?
Have the front camera slide out from the top edge when in use.
Our main battle tanks are two generations behind Russia's and their air defense systems are also greatly enhanced. Iran successfully took over one of our most sophisticated drones and captured in, a couple years ago, using electronic warfare... Although we have the F-22 and the F-35 jets, we are falling in most other areas and are even behind in some.
Too bad none of that actually matters if it really was a defensive war. We have more than enough nuclear weapons to flatten any invading army, their military bases, sea ports, airports and factories, as well as that of their allies and trading partners, several times over.
"Making an example to deter" has worked so greatly for killing people for murder, hasn't it?
But it does, the number of murders is quite low. I've thought about murdering many people. If it were legal, I'd probably have carried through with a few, like that school administrator who thought bullying was "a part of growing up" and refuses to do anything about it.
In this case, the reason "making an example" doesn't work is because he and his peers haven't been alive long enough to hear about those examples. This is why minors are tried differently than adults.