What the hell are you talking about? They're all standard CDs, DVDs and Blu-Rays (except for UMD which was a major flop). Just because they're called something else doesn't make them different.
FL100, 10 000ft is stupidly low. So low it requires no pressurization.
The joke goes something like:
Small prop plane wants to boast, requests tower confirm its altitude, which is given as something like FL070. Hearing this, a smartass fighter pilot (some versions add a more subdued jet pilot between these two) asks for his flight level, which is given as something like FL400. Finally, a third (fourth) pilot asks for clearance to FL600. Controller laughs and says "You're cleared for Flight Level Six-Zero-Zero, if you can reach it. Pilot replies with "Roger, now descending from Flight Level Eight-Zero-Zero."
Strawman? Be serious. The best you can do is accuse me of a logical fallacy for using imprecise wording to express my disbelief at the amount of PR bullshit you swallow, seemingly mindlessly?
There is a very big difference between making numbers up and looking up some figures and building a coherent picture from them.
Is it reasonable to expect that most charges will top up at least a little less than half a battery? Yes, this is a conservative estimate. Is it resonable for a roughly 10m^2 car to be covered by 15m^2 of solar panels? Sure, given the pictures one sees of the superchargers. Is it reasonable to take an old power/area figure? Yes, but you can also consider this a variable and manipulate it to obtain data for several possibilities, most of which prove my point.
You really argue a lot for someone who wanted proof that a bunch of solar panels aren't enough to charge cars under realistic conditions...
I'm not pulling stuff out of my ass. It's called Fermi Estimation, look it up. I don't need exact values to arrive at a meaningful number.
Yes, closer to the equator you get more exposure. You're missing the point. Even if you cut my original figures in half, due to better solar panels, more sunlight, and so on, you still arrive at a number that proves my point.
Seriously, I don't understand why you're so convinced Tesla had the ultimate answer to everything - they don't. They have the answer to the lack of good electric cars, but they don't have the answer to the source of the electricity.
Even if you can cut down the exposure required to 5-6 hours, the point is still valid.
The fact that they're sunny only means that there will be fewer occasions on which they won't be producing as much power. They won't magically produce more power in ideal conditions because "it's sunny".
Do you take all claims made by companies at face value? I hope not.
Pretty much half the cars around here are Diesels. All new ones have particulate filters and I've never heard of anybody with a clogged particulate filter. The ECU is supposed to make the engine idle at higher RPMs when necessary to help clear the filter.
Engine oil contamination by fuel? Sounds like a badly-built engine to me, typically it's the other way around.
According to wikipedia, typical photovoltaic power density is 170W/m^2. Let's say your average Tesla S charge requires 30kWh (less than half a charge). That means more than 170 hours of sunlight per square meter for a typical charge. Let's say for every charging spot there are 15m^2 of solar panels. That means more than 11 (almost 12) hours of sunlight for less than half a charge.
I believe you'll find my estimates were conservative and thus prove my point.
What kind of diesel engines are you even considering buying? The two highest profile mass failures in diesels in recent years are VW's 1.9TDI turbos all going to hell shortly after the warranty expires and BMW's N47 timing chain issues.
In fact, Diesels require less maintenance than comparable Otto cycle engines simply because they don't have sparkplugs. Everything else is similar between either type of engine.
As much as I am a fan of Tesla, there is no way in hell that the superchargers get most of their power from their solar panels (unless they only charge a car per day).
Not really, if you're sentenced to life for several different reasons, it doesn't make sense to be set free if one of the reasons turns out to be invalid.
There are a few motherboards in the segment already, which typically use LSI 2308 SAS controllers to provide 8 SAS/SATA (6Gb/s) channels. Some even support ECC RAM.
Sure, marine applications is an issue, but that does not detract from the argument: Getting rid of fossil fuels is a good thing. Nobody is advocating a ban on fossil fuels. We should do our best to eliminate their use wherever possible, though.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure all cars with buttons have that option in some way. I'm sure it's not the first thing I'd do.
What would I do? One word: Neutral.
If your jurisdiction is retarded enough that carrying around a weapon is seen as a necessity, I suggest you move to a safer place.
What the hell are you talking about? They're all standard CDs, DVDs and Blu-Rays (except for UMD which was a major flop). Just because they're called something else doesn't make them different.
Don't forget the insane hoops one must jump through just to play it back on a PC.
Come to think of it, I think I've heard the altitude version regarding both the SR-71 and Concorde...
I've seen both versions. They're good jokes, but I'm not sure they really happened.
Windows Phone has a similar solution, but it's Microsoft's own implementation.
Yeah, you got it wrong.
7000ft is FL070
FL100, 10 000ft is stupidly low. So low it requires no pressurization.
The joke goes something like:
Small prop plane wants to boast, requests tower confirm its altitude, which is given as something like FL070.
Hearing this, a smartass fighter pilot (some versions add a more subdued jet pilot between these two) asks for his flight level, which is given as something like FL400.
Finally, a third (fourth) pilot asks for clearance to FL600. Controller laughs and says "You're cleared for Flight Level Six-Zero-Zero, if you can reach it. Pilot replies with "Roger, now descending from Flight Level Eight-Zero-Zero."
Strawman? Be serious. The best you can do is accuse me of a logical fallacy for using imprecise wording to express my disbelief at the amount of PR bullshit you swallow, seemingly mindlessly?
There is a very big difference between making numbers up and looking up some figures and building a coherent picture from them.
Is it reasonable to expect that most charges will top up at least a little less than half a battery? Yes, this is a conservative estimate.
Is it resonable for a roughly 10m^2 car to be covered by 15m^2 of solar panels? Sure, given the pictures one sees of the superchargers.
Is it reasonable to take an old power/area figure? Yes, but you can also consider this a variable and manipulate it to obtain data for several possibilities, most of which prove my point.
You really argue a lot for someone who wanted proof that a bunch of solar panels aren't enough to charge cars under realistic conditions...
I'm not pulling stuff out of my ass. It's called Fermi Estimation, look it up. I don't need exact values to arrive at a meaningful number.
Yes, closer to the equator you get more exposure. You're missing the point. Even if you cut my original figures in half, due to better solar panels, more sunlight, and so on, you still arrive at a number that proves my point.
Seriously, I don't understand why you're so convinced Tesla had the ultimate answer to everything - they don't. They have the answer to the lack of good electric cars, but they don't have the answer to the source of the electricity.
Even if you can cut down the exposure required to 5-6 hours, the point is still valid.
The fact that they're sunny only means that there will be fewer occasions on which they won't be producing as much power. They won't magically produce more power in ideal conditions because "it's sunny".
Do you take all claims made by companies at face value? I hope not.
Pretty much half the cars around here are Diesels. All new ones have particulate filters and I've never heard of anybody with a clogged particulate filter. The ECU is supposed to make the engine idle at higher RPMs when necessary to help clear the filter.
Engine oil contamination by fuel? Sounds like a badly-built engine to me, typically it's the other way around.
According to wikipedia, typical photovoltaic power density is 170W/m^2.
Let's say your average Tesla S charge requires 30kWh (less than half a charge).
That means more than 170 hours of sunlight per square meter for a typical charge.
Let's say for every charging spot there are 15m^2 of solar panels.
That means more than 11 (almost 12) hours of sunlight for less than half a charge.
I believe you'll find my estimates were conservative and thus prove my point.
[Citation Needed]
What kind of diesel engines are you even considering buying? The two highest profile mass failures in diesels in recent years are VW's 1.9TDI turbos all going to hell shortly after the warranty expires and BMW's N47 timing chain issues.
Particulate filters failing? That's news to me.
Marketing vs. Reality
Do the math on the solar panels and you'll quickly realize why that paragraph is firmly rooted in marketing, and not reality.
I don't think so. Sure the exterior design is similar, but they don't actually show tape.
They do call their data storage media tapes, occasionally, though.
They could be ROM/flash cartridges, like oversized SD cards.
As I said, nothing that a decent Otto-cycle engine doesn't have.
In fact, Diesels require less maintenance than comparable Otto cycle engines simply because they don't have sparkplugs. Everything else is similar between either type of engine.
As much as I am a fan of Tesla, there is no way in hell that the superchargers get most of their power from their solar panels (unless they only charge a car per day).
Multiply 137 by 6 and place a decimal seperator between the third and second least significant digits.
600+180+42=822, which means 8.22.
Probably faster than getting a calculator if you're not sitting next to one (admittedly, it doesn't happen oftne these days).
Not really, if you're sentenced to life for several different reasons, it doesn't make sense to be set free if one of the reasons turns out to be invalid.
There are a few motherboards in the segment already, which typically use LSI 2308 SAS controllers to provide 8 SAS/SATA (6Gb/s) channels. Some even support ECC RAM.
I'm glad something as stupid as a spork isn't an exclusively human invention...
Sure, marine applications is an issue, but that does not detract from the argument: Getting rid of fossil fuels is a good thing. Nobody is advocating a ban on fossil fuels. We should do our best to eliminate their use wherever possible, though.