I'd be curious to know how your code is going to affect cache coherency. Aren't cache invisible? Do you mean affect cache performance due to coherency issues?
Is it because you love your ICE car so much and you need to rationalize its continued use? Is it because you hate people who like electric cars because their politics are different than yours? Why are you so desperate to believe something that is so obviously silly?
Incontrovertible facts:
1. Electric cars are 3x as efficient as gas cars. 100mpge+ is common for electric cars. 2. The grid is dirtier is some places than in others, but it gets greener everywhere over time (through the introduction of renewable energy sources and improved efficiencies & scrubbers located at energy plants). So, the installed base of electric cars immediately become *greener* each year while ICE cars only become greener when the car is replaced--and it is *much* cheaper to make grid power cleaner than ICE cars.
With these two facts in hand any sane person would be very skeptical of claims about ICE cars being greener than electric cars--VERY skeptical.
Your link is pointing out that the grid is currently pretty dirty in some places in the world--and then you say that in 80% of the world it doesn't reduce carbon footprint to buy an electric car.
For one, it doesn't matter where all the people live, it matters where all the miles are driven--and there are about 3x as many miles driven per year in the US than in all of Asia, despite Asia having 10x as many people: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=us+auto+miles+driven+per+year+vs.+asia+auto+miles+driven+per+year
Secondly, as I said earlier: the grid gets cleaner every year and it is *much* cheaper to improve the carbon footprint of a handful of power plants than in a couple billion individual ICE cars.
just like we don't have multiple parallel sewage systems or electrical power distribution networks. There are multiple different restaurants--see the difference?
It's absurd for everyone to have parallel high-speed links into their homes to enable competition, just as it would be absurd to have multiple parallel sewage or electrical networks. Instead there should be a single last-mile network that is heavily regulated (including net neutrality) and then let the companies compete on everything else
This is where a group of idiots declares that Apple doesn't invent anything, their employees only "integrate" technology invented elsewhere. As someone who (a) invents hardware technology for a living, and (b) doesn't work for Apple, I can tell you with absolute certainty that you are completely full of shit. Apple does a huge amount of hardware R & D.
It's a one-time pad-based system and the merchant never gets the real account number or even the user's name. They get a one-time code for a specific purchase amount at a specific time. You could intercept the RF transmission and publish it on a billboard in Times Square and it would still be unhackable.
My experience is that smug Apple-bashers are pretty ignorant about technology in general, thanks for reinforcing that opinion.
I've never seen a version control tool which is less intuitive for a new user than GIT. It has horrible support for binary blobs and documents. Windows support is an afterthought.
GIT is the right tool for you only inasmuch as your needs mirror those of Linux kernel developers. That covers some of the universe but not all of it and not any part of the universe represented by the original post question.
I'm done with this conversation. My conclusion is that you are mentally incapable of understanding why anyone pays more than $25K for a car to the point that you refuse to acknowledge that millions of people do.
Obviously Tesla is not competing directly with $15K cars.
The Model S competes against other $80K cars. They didn't invent that market segment--they are competing within it. Yes, that is a premium luxury segment.
By all accounts, the Model 3 will be somewhere in the $35-45K range. There are already cars selling for that price--that segment already exists, and it is much larger than the $80K+ segment. Again, Tesla will compete more or less head-on against similarly priced vehicles that already exist. You can call that a luxury segment if you want, but the average price of a new car is $32K so there are a lot of people buying cars for that price.
When competing against cars that are approximately the same price (within 20% or so), one could make an argument about the long-term savings of energy costs and maintenance for an ICE vs. EV.
Literally no one on the entire fucking planet is arguing that you can save money with a Model 3 vs. the cheapest gas car you can find. That is an entirely fictional argument that you've constructed inside your delusional little mind. It's completely absurd on its face, since by that logic there should be noone purchasing *any* car over $15K and yet the average price of a new car is $32K.
VW sells cars for $35K+ (their CC line, for example). Now I'm going to talk really slowly so you can try to keep up. Imagine if the people who already buy those cars instead start to purchase Model 3's for about the same price. Is your mind blown?
That's exactly what happened with the Model S. It's not that people who were in the market for a $35K car and instead bought an $80K car--it's that people were in market for an $80K car chose the Tesla over other $80K cars.
It is irrelevant that there are other cars that are much cheaper--Tesla isn't selling into that segment yet. They will get there, just not in the next couple years.
There are a lot of different market segments in the auto industry. The Model S is extremely competitive in the high-end luxury sedan segment where cars regularly sell for $80K+. The Model 3 will be targeted at the $35-40K midrange sedan segment, a segment in which hundreds of thousands of cars are sold right now (BMW, Audi, Volkswagen, etc.)--the Model 3 will be sold at a similar price-point as those other cars.
Eventually electric car technology will ripple down into economy segments. That's how new technology works. In the mean time maybe you can try to wrap your head around the fact that your needs are not everyone's needs--i.e., not everyone is in the market for a 1999 honda civic.
Slashdot Mirror
presents no threat to Porsche. Absolutely insane.
I'd be curious to know how your code is going to affect cache coherency. Aren't cache invisible? Do you mean affect cache performance due to coherency issues?
They've never before been successful at jumping into a new category and making hundreds of billions of dollars. You are right to bet against them.
I guess they must all be wrong.
Welcome to the future.
Is it because you love your ICE car so much and you need to rationalize its continued use? Is it because you hate people who like electric cars because their politics are different than yours? Why are you so desperate to believe something that is so obviously silly?
Incontrovertible facts:
1. Electric cars are 3x as efficient as gas cars. 100mpge+ is common for electric cars.
2. The grid is dirtier is some places than in others, but it gets greener everywhere over time (through the introduction of renewable energy sources and improved efficiencies & scrubbers located at energy plants). So, the installed base of electric cars immediately become *greener* each year while ICE cars only become greener when the car is replaced--and it is *much* cheaper to make grid power cleaner than ICE cars.
With these two facts in hand any sane person would be very skeptical of claims about ICE cars being greener than electric cars--VERY skeptical.
Your link is pointing out that the grid is currently pretty dirty in some places in the world--and then you say that in 80% of the world it doesn't reduce carbon footprint to buy an electric car.
For one, it doesn't matter where all the people live, it matters where all the miles are driven--and there are about 3x as many miles driven per year in the US than in all of Asia, despite Asia having 10x as many people: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=us+auto+miles+driven+per+year+vs.+asia+auto+miles+driven+per+year
Secondly, as I said earlier: the grid gets cleaner every year and it is *much* cheaper to improve the carbon footprint of a handful of power plants than in a couple billion individual ICE cars.
just like we don't have multiple parallel sewage systems or electrical power distribution networks. There are multiple different restaurants--see the difference?
Problem solved.
What makes you think otherwise? If the network is effectively a monopoly then the government has every right to regulate it.
It's absurd for everyone to have parallel high-speed links into their homes to enable competition, just as it would be absurd to have multiple parallel sewage or electrical networks. Instead there should be a single last-mile network that is heavily regulated (including net neutrality) and then let the companies compete on everything else
http://www.apple.com
This is where a group of idiots declares that Apple doesn't invent anything, their employees only "integrate" technology invented elsewhere. As someone who (a) invents hardware technology for a living, and (b) doesn't work for Apple, I can tell you with absolute certainty that you are completely full of shit. Apple does a huge amount of hardware R & D.
It's a one-time pad-based system and the merchant never gets the real account number or even the user's name. They get a one-time code for a specific purchase amount at a specific time. You could intercept the RF transmission and publish it on a billboard in Times Square and it would still be unhackable.
My experience is that smug Apple-bashers are pretty ignorant about technology in general, thanks for reinforcing that opinion.
if you're using one-time pad encryption, which Apple Pay does.
Except for a thousand fucking companies.
Did you even read the question?
I've never seen a version control tool which is less intuitive for a new user than GIT. It has horrible support for binary blobs and documents. Windows support is an afterthought.
GIT is the right tool for you only inasmuch as your needs mirror those of Linux kernel developers. That covers some of the universe but not all of it and not any part of the universe represented by the original post question.
I'm done with this conversation. My conclusion is that you are mentally incapable of understanding why anyone pays more than $25K for a car to the point that you refuse to acknowledge that millions of people do.
for all the tax dollars that you are giving them in subsidies and fighting wars in the middle east?
Obviously Tesla is not competing directly with $15K cars.
The Model S competes against other $80K cars. They didn't invent that market segment--they are competing within it. Yes, that is a premium luxury segment.
By all accounts, the Model 3 will be somewhere in the $35-45K range. There are already cars selling for that price--that segment already exists, and it is much larger than the $80K+ segment. Again, Tesla will compete more or less head-on against similarly priced vehicles that already exist. You can call that a luxury segment if you want, but the average price of a new car is $32K so there are a lot of people buying cars for that price.
When competing against cars that are approximately the same price (within 20% or so), one could make an argument about the long-term savings of energy costs and maintenance for an ICE vs. EV.
Literally no one on the entire fucking planet is arguing that you can save money with a Model 3 vs. the cheapest gas car you can find. That is an entirely fictional argument that you've constructed inside your delusional little mind. It's completely absurd on its face, since by that logic there should be noone purchasing *any* car over $15K and yet the average price of a new car is $32K.
VW sells cars for $35K+ (their CC line, for example). Now I'm going to talk really slowly so you can try to keep up. Imagine if the people who already buy those cars instead start to purchase Model 3's for about the same price. Is your mind blown?
That's exactly what happened with the Model S. It's not that people who were in the market for a $35K car and instead bought an $80K car--it's that people were in market for an $80K car chose the Tesla over other $80K cars.
It is irrelevant that there are other cars that are much cheaper--Tesla isn't selling into that segment yet. They will get there, just not in the next couple years.
Why are you having such a hard time following the argument?
There are a lot of different market segments in the auto industry. The Model S is extremely competitive in the high-end luxury sedan segment where cars regularly sell for $80K+. The Model 3 will be targeted at the $35-40K midrange sedan segment, a segment in which hundreds of thousands of cars are sold right now (BMW, Audi, Volkswagen, etc.)--the Model 3 will be sold at a similar price-point as those other cars.
Eventually electric car technology will ripple down into economy segments. That's how new technology works. In the mean time maybe you can try to wrap your head around the fact that your needs are not everyone's needs--i.e., not everyone is in the market for a 1999 honda civic.
So there's a good example of a vehicle costing more than the vehicle it replaces.
Tesla is building out a high-speed charging network and funding R&D for a mass-market $35k electric car.
yawn.