You need your sense of taste checked. It doesn't look ugly at all. And a Le Sabre? Are you kidding? Have you even looked at the pictures? Are you blind?
If you want to compare to Porche, compare to their saloon, the Panamera. Or, perhaps, a BMW M5 or a Mercedes S500, which is what this provides similar features to. Except the acceleration, which is comparable to a Porche 911 Carrera, which happens to cost $80k. Odd that. http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/911/911-carrera/featuresandspecs/
What you pay in electricity you will save several times over in fuel.
And just because they are limited in quantity means they can't be car of the year? You're coming off as a grumpy old fart who just doesn't like these newfangled electric autermobeels and will find any reason you can to be offended that somebody else thinks they're great.
If you're looking at the Ford C-Max, you should probably check out a VW Golf TDI. It gets over 50MPG. It has for the last 8 years. And you're complaining that the Tesla is expensive? Compare it to a BMW 5-series, which is what it provides similar performance to. It's not a bad deal at all then, and looks way cooler.
The second part of the message: "Die ist ein Kinnerhunder und zwei Mackel uber und der bitte schön ist den Wunderhaus sprechensie. 'Nein' sprecht der Herren 'Ist aufern borger mit zveitingen'."
What we actually need to do is compare old battery packs to new ones, that's the only thing which will give us reliable density improvements. Looking at all of the other improvements doesn't actually affect the physical density of the battery, which is what this technology (and the previous "breakthroughs") claim to achieve. Most laptops still come with in-a-metal-tube battery cells, which are much heavier and have big air gaps that don't need to be there. Compare this to your cellphone battery and you'll see what I mean. Getting rid of those "can" batteries is going to be the first step to making battery packs smaller, lighter and higher density.
No it isn't. If you have a 1" tall screen with a 15" diagonal it will only be ~15" wide, and have an area of ~15 inch^2 If you have a 1:1 aspect ratio with a 15" diagonal then each side will be ~10" which gives you an area of a bit over 100 inch^2
Dunno, considering the budget they are working with I'd say getting performance even in the same ballpark as Intel is pretty impressive, especially once you factor in that they are a full process node behind at the fabs. Their multi-threaded top-end speed is the same or faster than Intel, it's only in IPC that they are still behind. Their performance/$ is tied or better.
The judge would expect Apple to follow the spirit of the court order, not the letter. Judges tend to be unhappy when people intentionally misinterpret their words...
Your argument is bad and you should feel bad. If Apple design a flux capacitor and make it look exactly like the one in the movie, then prevent others from also making one that looks like the one in the movie regardless of how the internals functioned, that would be stupid. Apple isn't suing over patents of how the flux capacitor works, they are suing over how it looks. And since there are previous examples of something which looks very similar, why should they get protection when clearly they don't have a unique, non-obvious idea?
If the US doesn't allow international observers to verify that the elections it holds are free and fair it is in no place to criticize any other country for vote rigging. The founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if they could hear you say that not being able to verify elections as free and fair is not an atrocity.
Who cares what the law says. The law says to always follow the speed limit, and you don't follow that, do you? Sometimes the law is wrong, and when it is it needs to be changed. Justifying an atrocity against transparency (which is the only thing which prevents corruption) in something as important as voting via the use of the slogan "the law says so" is just plain stupid. Keep it up and I'm sure you'll enjoy your fascism along with all of your neo-nazi friends as your transparent democracy slips away between your fingers. Waiting for people who have a vested interest in the way things are to change the laws isn't going to help anything.
Republicans haven't balanced a budget since before Reagan, so I can understand them being fed up with the "not small government enough" attitude. Interesting that you attribute the pro-life attitude to groups other than Catholic/Evangelist, from what I've seen it generally comes from bible thumper creationists.
kind of behavior that liberals seem to think...... Liberals also have had a habit of mandating behaviors in the past couple of decades
It's not really fair to paint all liberals with the brush of the Democrats, just like it isn't fair to paint all conservatives with the brush of the Republicans. Often, it is somebody who thinks they have a good idea to help people, and then they get carried away. Everyone is just a person, remember that. Often people are out of touch or don't comprehend the full effects of their actions, even if they have the best intentions. Also, people see children in conditions they wouldn't want for their children and get worried, that is just cultural exposure.
HPV vaccine... not sure why that would be an issue, it's a worthy cause, and if we finally have a vaccine for it then I see no problem with mandating its application just like for polio back in the day. One less disease would be great, and especially considering HPV causes cervical cancer is surely about as pro-life as you can get. How can they be against HPV vaccine for themselves while also being anti-abortion even for people who want it? Surely anti-abortion is Big Government cracking down its laws? It seems like a contradiction to me.
Anyway, I don't live in the US any more, so its interesting to hear personal stories from the inside. Interestingly, in the rest of the world the Republicans are a bit of a (scary) joke party, nobody can even imagine voting for them or the policies they propose. It's very strange from an outside perspective when in the US they get +-50% every time. For the rest of the world, the Democrats are conservative, while the Republicans are a sort of Christian Taliban, intent on cracking down on women's rights and invading countries for oil.
If a cancer researcher does a study, what diseases do you think he might find cellphones cause? Tuberculosis? Clearly that is a bias, and if you want to claim that the cellphone companies are biased you can't ignore the cancer researcher's bias otherwise you have a double standard.
Slashdot Mirror
Bitch please. Somebody will create a unixware simulation in MineCraft!
You need your sense of taste checked. It doesn't look ugly at all. And a Le Sabre? Are you kidding? Have you even looked at the pictures? Are you blind?
If you want to compare to Porche, compare to their saloon, the Panamera. Or, perhaps, a BMW M5 or a Mercedes S500, which is what this provides similar features to. Except the acceleration, which is comparable to a Porche 911 Carrera, which happens to cost $80k. Odd that. http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/911/911-carrera/featuresandspecs/
What you pay in electricity you will save several times over in fuel.
And just because they are limited in quantity means they can't be car of the year? You're coming off as a grumpy old fart who just doesn't like these newfangled electric autermobeels and will find any reason you can to be offended that somebody else thinks they're great.
If you're looking at the Ford C-Max, you should probably check out a VW Golf TDI. It gets over 50MPG. It has for the last 8 years. And you're complaining that the Tesla is expensive? Compare it to a BMW 5-series, which is what it provides similar performance to. It's not a bad deal at all then, and looks way cooler.
Directional antennas allow you to track EM interference easily as well.
The second part of the message:
"Die ist ein Kinnerhunder und zwei Mackel uber und der bitte schön ist den Wunderhaus sprechensie. 'Nein' sprecht der Herren 'Ist aufern borger mit zveitingen'."
+1 Insightful.
We can recycle our batteries to be turned into electronics and our electronics to be turned into batteries. What a beautiful coincidence.
What we actually need to do is compare old battery packs to new ones, that's the only thing which will give us reliable density improvements. Looking at all of the other improvements doesn't actually affect the physical density of the battery, which is what this technology (and the previous "breakthroughs") claim to achieve. Most laptops still come with in-a-metal-tube battery cells, which are much heavier and have big air gaps that don't need to be there. Compare this to your cellphone battery and you'll see what I mean. Getting rid of those "can" batteries is going to be the first step to making battery packs smaller, lighter and higher density.
No, even worse. nutsell obviously means he is the one who stole them and is now trying to sell the walnuts!
WHO'S THERE? ARE YOU A SEX CRIMINAL? /. and it's stupid caps lock filters... is this enough lower case yet? what if we want to yell?
.
.
.
.
damn
How about some Charlie the Unicorn and Salad Fingers while we're at it?
No it isn't.
If you have a 1" tall screen with a 15" diagonal it will only be ~15" wide, and have an area of ~15 inch^2
If you have a 1:1 aspect ratio with a 15" diagonal then each side will be ~10" which gives you an area of a bit over 100 inch^2
Google Goggles also does a nice job with barcodes.
No, it's so you can skip the TSA stripsearch once you have a legitimate ticket.
Dunno, considering the budget they are working with I'd say getting performance even in the same ballpark as Intel is pretty impressive, especially once you factor in that they are a full process node behind at the fabs. Their multi-threaded top-end speed is the same or faster than Intel, it's only in IPC that they are still behind. Their performance/$ is tied or better.
And you need a lot more than the cruising power to take off in a reasonable distance in the first place.
The judge would expect Apple to follow the spirit of the court order, not the letter. Judges tend to be unhappy when people intentionally misinterpret their words...
Your argument is bad and you should feel bad. If Apple design a flux capacitor and make it look exactly like the one in the movie, then prevent others from also making one that looks like the one in the movie regardless of how the internals functioned, that would be stupid. Apple isn't suing over patents of how the flux capacitor works, they are suing over how it looks. And since there are previous examples of something which looks very similar, why should they get protection when clearly they don't have a unique, non-obvious idea?
If the US doesn't allow international observers to verify that the elections it holds are free and fair it is in no place to criticize any other country for vote rigging. The founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if they could hear you say that not being able to verify elections as free and fair is not an atrocity.
Who cares what the law says. The law says to always follow the speed limit, and you don't follow that, do you? Sometimes the law is wrong, and when it is it needs to be changed. Justifying an atrocity against transparency (which is the only thing which prevents corruption) in something as important as voting via the use of the slogan "the law says so" is just plain stupid. Keep it up and I'm sure you'll enjoy your fascism along with all of your neo-nazi friends as your transparent democracy slips away between your fingers. Waiting for people who have a vested interest in the way things are to change the laws isn't going to help anything.
Bank accounts with high interest rates which hold currencies with high inflation. Not so useful as you'd imagine.
And you should feel bad.
Samsung isn't just in the computer chip industry. They make screens, phones, tablets, ships (yes, the big cargo hauling ones) etc
Republicans haven't balanced a budget since before Reagan, so I can understand them being fed up with the "not small government enough" attitude. Interesting that you attribute the pro-life attitude to groups other than Catholic/Evangelist, from what I've seen it generally comes from bible thumper creationists.
kind of behavior that liberals seem to think ...... Liberals also have had a habit of mandating behaviors in the past couple of decades
It's not really fair to paint all liberals with the brush of the Democrats, just like it isn't fair to paint all conservatives with the brush of the Republicans. Often, it is somebody who thinks they have a good idea to help people, and then they get carried away. Everyone is just a person, remember that. Often people are out of touch or don't comprehend the full effects of their actions, even if they have the best intentions. Also, people see children in conditions they wouldn't want for their children and get worried, that is just cultural exposure.
HPV vaccine... not sure why that would be an issue, it's a worthy cause, and if we finally have a vaccine for it then I see no problem with mandating its application just like for polio back in the day. One less disease would be great, and especially considering HPV causes cervical cancer is surely about as pro-life as you can get. How can they be against HPV vaccine for themselves while also being anti-abortion even for people who want it? Surely anti-abortion is Big Government cracking down its laws? It seems like a contradiction to me.
Anyway, I don't live in the US any more, so its interesting to hear personal stories from the inside. Interestingly, in the rest of the world the Republicans are a bit of a (scary) joke party, nobody can even imagine voting for them or the policies they propose. It's very strange from an outside perspective when in the US they get +-50% every time. For the rest of the world, the Democrats are conservative, while the Republicans are a sort of Christian Taliban, intent on cracking down on women's rights and invading countries for oil.
If a cancer researcher does a study, what diseases do you think he might find cellphones cause? Tuberculosis? Clearly that is a bias, and if you want to claim that the cellphone companies are biased you can't ignore the cancer researcher's bias otherwise you have a double standard.