how many people out there will wreck their finances this way?
Amazing, just a few years ago most people didn't think they had to have a cell phone, let alone use it all the time. Yet these days I know some families that have gone over the top with them.
Sorry, but having a $50 to $100+ new monthy expense is not my idea of progress. What is truly amazing is that the Cell providers marketing worked so well. Pay by the minute? I guess unlimited coming so expensive makes sense because people will convince themselves they are getting a deal.
We have unlimited local calling on some plans in the Atlanta area and a few give you unlimited national calling too. These plans are regularly less than $50 a month but the only hang up is limited local coverage even though they piggy back on another network.
Now unlimited high speed data "might" be worth it. Might be because for the most part people don't need it. Businesses and self employed might need it. Say going to a client and making a presentation and you need stuff from outside at the last minute. Regular people? What, watch YouTube on my phone? I guess some will.
$100+ a month for voice - not for me, I can put that $100 to far better use. Kill yourself with monthlies and keep moaning about how you don't get paid enough - I won't
It may be hard to get a copy but its a very good read. Nothing out of this world, well unless you count the "Black Cloud". Very good science fiction with a good dose of politics; though tied to the times the politics would fit well today.
Watch DVDs while you use either. If your real inventive put the keyboard on the damn machine and attach a mouse pad. Then you play your world of warcraft and get a work out as well.
I think installing some versions of linux will provide enough time for a work out too. Installing XP may make you into an Olympic athlete so I advise not doing it too much as people will wonder what your up to.
PS: I use an elliptical and watch DVDs (good old geek stuff like Red Dwarf / Stargate / South Park / etc)
By loading up on official sounding degrees, titles, etc, he could just bully the system.
What you end up with is people siding with him for no other reason that he "has credentials" regardless of what he does. He could post the most inane shit somewhere else but the majority of people wouldn't go so far as to look.
wikipedia has no place for anonyminity. There should be no "may do it", if someone is an adminstrator then they must prove their credentials.
Hell, the bias of some admins on wikipedia is beyond belief. You have to love some of the articles tagged as incomplete, not up to standards, or whatnot. You can tell some are pushing agendas and I would not doubt there are many more "pretenders" about that they want to admit to.
I do remember reading articles related to the NY settlement that stations were paid or coerced into playing her album. Too many bands are foisted upon us and most listeners don't even realize it. Still long term I doubt it will have that much impact, the record companies will come up something similar that fits in the rules.
Hell, CDs are still essentially price fixed, and how long has that been going on?
See, hunting for killer asteroids requires money, that money can serve Congress better by buying votes through some "aid" program. NASA will continue to get the short end of the stick because we as American citizens keep putting back the same aristocracy that is allowing the US to fall behind the world in science.
NASA doesn't need to justify it, we the people need to justify ourselves by putting people more concerned about advancing this nation instead of advancing their own status.
That $300 billion tab in Iraq is meaningless in this conversation as NASA's budget would still be what it is. The money would have just vanished down some vote buying program that forever indebts us.
and I usually read multiple reviews of the same game to insure I get a better understanding of what its about, how it works, and how it doesn't work as it should.
So for me reviews are still warranted. If I cannot find a review I will rely on friends and if they don't have it I then wait for a demo. Reading usenet can help as well. Still its great to see pictures and read the reviewers take on gameplay. Sometimes even games I wanted that got decent reviews I ended up not purchasing because the game play was not what I was expecting..
Because that is a far better question. People here and elsewhere take it about as seriously as their voting, which means not very much.
Look, I don't care who is the President as the result is the same. NASA gets the short end of the stick because Congress cannot buy votes with it. Making a moonbase, increasing our scientific knowledge, or working with others around the world, DOES NOT BUY VOTES.
thats the real problem. A new local library buys votes, a funding program for cow farts at your local university buys votes, promising medical care for all buys votes.
Science isn't dieing because of a President, its dieing because people keep putting back into power the same aristocrats they always put in power. We know why they do , these aristo-polis use their position to buy their continued existance. So keep voting based on that R or D... and you will get no R&D
As for corporate computing, nothing wrong with it, so if it comes preloaded figure business will eventually use it. Hell it took my company until a little over a year ago to deploy large number of XP machines. All under the guise of thorough testing but the real truth is, the PC group is slower than molasses in winter, lazier than the people in a welfare line, and more interested in new gadgets than running an OS through the testing requirements we have.
For the masses its just fine, my parents recently bought a new laptop which has Vista. Other than finding a few items moved or renamed they just use it. The key is, its just a damn operating system. It doesn't mean DIDDLY to them. they don't care. they saw a laptop with features they wanted at a price they wanted to pay. OS be damned, it didn't matter. All they wanted was to get mail while on the road, connect to wireless, and use WORD.
As for AERO, fwiw, if you have a video card with 32mb of memory you might just see a performance boost with it turned on, especially with low system ram installations.
Why do so many developers lead off with this or a similar statement?
Are they all admitting they have no chance to be as popular either because of subject matter or skill? I think some would delude themselves into believeing its subject matter but mostly its skill.
Even Vangard is this way, hell they go out of their way to not only claim they aren't like WOW but worse, to dismiss WOW as a kids game. I guess thats one way of convincing yourself.
If any game should have a shot its LOTR but we all know its going to fall on its face because of who is producing it; Turbine.
Warhammer Online looks fun, watching some of the developer videos "and I heal, and I heal" are just outright a blast. Imagine a game where you finally don't have some twit who just sits back and spams "heal". Kind of like Quakeworld the MMORPG:)
still, that line of "we aren't wow, or we aren't going to replace wow" comes off as "we suck, but it sounds better and looks better to point to the elephant in the room"
Which was a surprise to me as I always see customers in there.
I cannot say I am surprised that the corporation is having problems, moving into TVs had to be painful and their pricing strategy cannot withstand the big box stores. Now with Best Buy offering Apple products there is less reason for many to visit a Comp USA
I don't care about the price, if I wanted one price would not have been my determining factor. It probably kills its for some others. One thing I didn't consider earlier is the number of people I know who won't get one because its too big. Its the old idea of, its a phone, if I wanted a pc I would get one.
The killer problem with the iPhone in my book, and it seems to get knocks from others I know as well, is the fact it doesn't have a battery you can changeout on the fly. I travel, and I don't always have access to a power outlet. Worse, the iPhone is designed to do things other than just being a phone, hence I will need to use it more often. So, whats with this fixed battery?
boneheaded.
Then again Apple is about looks more than anything in their consumer side. There are a few bright ideas in their PC group that seriously need to come over to the iPod/iPhone side.
and with the strings attached its not always wanted either.
Most US advances are not made with government money. It just doesn't work that way. Look towards the corporations leading the edges of technology to see what is really getting done that applicable to everyday life.
The problem with government grants is that you end up with both good and bad, new ways to heal people and usually multiple ways to kill them. At least pharms are a one way street in the corporate world... still...
don't bemoan a problem that isn't as drastic, let alone far reaching as many claim it is. What harms science is regulation an inteference by government, not lack of funds from it
One of the problem with the games that folded before release is that everyone involved can play "what release would have been like" with impunity. Too many developers promise the world and then get crushed trying to deliver it. Some suffer feature creep as the go along forever not finishing the game as intended simply because they cannot stay focues.
Its probably best they do not release, if the developer cannot be realistic before release how can we expect them to be so after? I have been in games where bugs went unchecked for a long time because the developer kept adding features. Instead of fixing what was there they got caught in the trap of new stuff is fun, who wants to work on old code.
There have a been a few games which I think were just tossed out there to see what response would be. Its easy to throw together a bunch of mock ups, its even easier to put up a webpage of things your game will have, getting it all delivered is a whole 'nuther story.
Because the skill that most people profess to have, and constantly rail that WOW players do not have, only exists in their own minds.
Its up to the player to decide if the effort required is worth it to them. The nice thing about WOW is that you don't have to do that. You can play the game just for fun or you can spend your life in it.
One of the reasons there are "countless" level 60+ players who are clueless is simply because the game has so many damn players its beyond hope they would all be good. Want a hint? Guilds, the bigger the better. The more hardcore the guild the less likely your will be surrounded by idiots.
Finally, for all those who love to call WOW "easy mode - requires no skill" Its obvious you didn't play very long. RAIDs require not only skill and cooperation but the ability to react to situations when someone screws up. Whats so much fun is I can find these complainers in other games, usually getting good groups wiped.
NASA's budget has increase each year under Bush. While it appears mostly inflation type increases.
Other than when the moon program ended the budget only decreased twice, under Carter and Clinton. Bush's dad actually jumped it up a bit more than Reagan, it got decent increases under Clinton till his second term, also when NASA was having problems.
The opportunities are always missed regardless of who is in office. We can only look back and play "what ifs". Congress is more interested in vote buying schemes than real science. If you want to lay the real blame for NASA's lack of funding look no farther than Congress. A Congress which would rather build bridges to nowhere, pay for research into useless areas, and enact new ways of taking our freedoms.
Bush isn't the only President that has had to deal with the Space Station. If anything its doing just fine under him. The best thing he ever did for the space station was to drop the Shuttle as a delivery system. It should have been gone in his father's day.
Diverting? How about focusing on something which grants us more opportunities. A space station is low earth orbit does not provide us with a stepping off platform that something more permanent, like a moon base, would. Besides being more difficult to shield from radiation, heat, and micrometeroites, we have to constantly push it back up. Worse, it is planned to come back within the lifetime of many of these other programs being put forward. In other words, unless we have a plan to keep it up permanently why throw money at it.
Blaming Bush for the space station and state of NASA is really reaching. Don't even try that line that NASA would be better off if all the funds from Iraq didn't get spent as Congress never cares for NASA unless it can bash whomever is in the Adminstration at the time.
Its only a monopoly on one sort of communication and as such I don't think it really matters. the barrier of entry was probably too high to begin with, hence they had no choice to merge. The market is just not big enough to support two players, it might not be big enough to support one player.
Consider that both put satellites up there, both developed the receiving hardware as well, and both were essentially fighting for the same customers.
It might just be better for subscribers because it means satellite radio will be around longer.
// "Global Cooling" is a BS red herring that only Greenhouse deniers like you take "seriously".//
I like how its a red herring now. Yet it was the "consensus" of its age and I am quite sure naysayers will equally villified as they are today. Nearly all the dire predictions for it were similar to the "global warming" today, yet none came to pass.
So, since it didn't occur it was never postulated either? Is that how this system works? Anything that is predicted that does not occur yet those with opposing views who bring it up are reaching for straws?
So I guess bring up the mass starvation that was to occur in the late 70s and 80s that never occured is equally a red herring?
Why not admit it. Everyone makes mistakes. If you won't acknowledge those which make you look bad why should people who don't buy into your view accept ANYTHING you say?
As for it being proven that some of this is stoppable thats fine, the issue is, is it what man is doing that is causing the problem. We can surely stop what we are doing but no one has proven conclusively that its man that caused the shift.
What about the other thousand or so Glaciers that ARE ADVANCING?
This whole GW mess is all one sided. You never hear about the thousands of glaciers that are gaining mass. No, you only hear about the ones that are losing it. Why should many of us take the GW side seriously when they report only what advances their case and totally dismiss anything that doesn't? The poison most good sites of information with their campaign of omission. Look at WikiPedia. You can find a huge article with pictures about disappearing glaciers but you won't find information about all the glaciers increasing in mass. Nope, not at all. Guess what, try and put one there with links. Go for it. Really....
Sorry, but for a community that supposedly prizes facts and discussion the holy war waged by the Global Warming supporters on/. would make the Inqusitors from long ago proud. I don't doubt that there are campaigns staged by groups to tilt the discussion at websites such as this. That is one of the mechanisms they promote.
Oh well, glaciers come and glaciers go. Just figure this out, some of these Glaciers were fine up till a decade ago. What shifted THAT suddenly to make them vanish. Sorry, it wasn't man. After all most claims it was the industrial revolution that started the mess, advancing well into the late 20th century where the real damage started. Yet some of these glaciers did just fine until very very recently. To me that indicates something bigger than us happened. Hopefully we will realize it before we go off an ruin the standard of living for millions
Slashdot Mirror
how many people out there will wreck their finances this way?
Amazing, just a few years ago most people didn't think they had to have a cell phone, let alone use it all the time. Yet these days I know some families that have gone over the top with them.
Sorry, but having a $50 to $100+ new monthy expense is not my idea of progress. What is truly amazing is that the Cell providers marketing worked so well. Pay by the minute? I guess unlimited coming so expensive makes sense because people will convince themselves they are getting a deal.
We have unlimited local calling on some plans in the Atlanta area and a few give you unlimited national calling too. These plans are regularly less than $50 a month but the only hang up is limited local coverage even though they piggy back on another network.
Now unlimited high speed data "might" be worth it. Might be because for the most part people don't need it. Businesses and self employed might need it. Say going to a client and making a presentation and you need stuff from outside at the last minute. Regular people? What, watch YouTube on my phone? I guess some will.
$100+ a month for voice - not for me, I can put that $100 to far better use. Kill yourself with monthlies and keep moaning about how you don't get paid enough - I won't
It may be hard to get a copy but its a very good read. Nothing out of this world, well unless you count the "Black Cloud". Very good science fiction with a good dose of politics; though tied to the times the politics would fit well today.
wiki link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Cloud
quite a few copies are available in various used forms from Amazon
and put it in front of your computer.
Watch DVDs while you use either. If your real inventive put the keyboard on the damn machine and attach a mouse pad. Then you play your world of warcraft and get a work out as well.
I think installing some versions of linux will provide enough time for a work out too. Installing XP may make you into an Olympic athlete so I advise not doing it too much as people will wonder what your up to.
PS: I use an elliptical and watch DVDs (good old geek stuff like Red Dwarf / Stargate / South Park / etc)
By loading up on official sounding degrees, titles, etc, he could just bully the system.
What you end up with is people siding with him for no other reason that he "has credentials" regardless of what he does. He could post the most inane shit somewhere else but the majority of people wouldn't go so far as to look.
wikipedia has no place for anonyminity. There should be no "may do it", if someone is an adminstrator then they must prove their credentials.
Hell, the bias of some admins on wikipedia is beyond belief. You have to love some of the articles tagged as incomplete, not up to standards, or whatnot. You can tell some are pushing agendas and I would not doubt there are many more "pretenders" about that they want to admit to.
So this has made it all the way to law schools?
If the speech does not libel or slander then who should care what is said?
If people on forums are worried about what is said about them then they need to either get out or shape up.
Pretty soon it will be a hate crime to say anything bad about anyone, then what right to speech will you have?
I do remember reading articles related to the NY settlement that stations were paid or coerced into playing her album. Too many bands are foisted upon us and most listeners don't even realize it. Still long term I doubt it will have that much impact, the record companies will come up something similar that fits in the rules.
Hell, CDs are still essentially price fixed, and how long has that been going on?
See, hunting for killer asteroids requires money, that money can serve Congress better by buying votes through some "aid" program. NASA will continue to get the short end of the stick because we as American citizens keep putting back the same aristocracy that is allowing the US to fall behind the world in science.
NASA doesn't need to justify it, we the people need to justify ourselves by putting people more concerned about advancing this nation instead of advancing their own status.
That $300 billion tab in Iraq is meaningless in this conversation as NASA's budget would still be what it is. The money would have just vanished down some vote buying program that forever indebts us.
and I usually read multiple reviews of the same game to insure I get a better understanding of what its about, how it works, and how it doesn't work as it should.
So for me reviews are still warranted. If I cannot find a review I will rely on friends and if they don't have it I then wait for a demo. Reading usenet can help as well. Still its great to see pictures and read the reviewers take on gameplay. Sometimes even games I wanted that got decent reviews I ended up not purchasing because the game play was not what I was expecting..
Because that is a far better question. People here and elsewhere take it about as seriously as their voting, which means not very much.
Look, I don't care who is the President as the result is the same. NASA gets the short end of the stick because Congress cannot buy votes with it. Making a moonbase, increasing our scientific knowledge, or working with others around the world, DOES NOT BUY VOTES.
thats the real problem. A new local library buys votes, a funding program for cow farts at your local university buys votes, promising medical care for all buys votes.
Science isn't dieing because of a President, its dieing because people keep putting back into power the same aristocrats they always put in power. We know why they do , these aristo-polis use their position to buy their continued existance. So keep voting based on that R or D... and you will get no R&D
As for corporate computing, nothing wrong with it, so if it comes preloaded figure business will eventually use it. Hell it took my company until a little over a year ago to deploy large number of XP machines. All under the guise of thorough testing but the real truth is, the PC group is slower than molasses in winter, lazier than the people in a welfare line, and more interested in new gadgets than running an OS through the testing requirements we have.
For the masses its just fine, my parents recently bought a new laptop which has Vista. Other than finding a few items moved or renamed they just use it. The key is, its just a damn operating system. It doesn't mean DIDDLY to them. they don't care. they saw a laptop with features they wanted at a price they wanted to pay. OS be damned, it didn't matter. All they wanted was to get mail while on the road, connect to wireless, and use WORD.
As for AERO, fwiw, if you have a video card with 32mb of memory you might just see a performance boost with it turned on, especially with low system ram installations.
Why do so many developers lead off with this or a similar statement?
:)
Are they all admitting they have no chance to be as popular either because of subject matter or skill? I think some would delude themselves into believeing its subject matter but mostly its skill.
Even Vangard is this way, hell they go out of their way to not only claim they aren't like WOW but worse, to dismiss WOW as a kids game. I guess thats one way of convincing yourself.
If any game should have a shot its LOTR but we all know its going to fall on its face because of who is producing it; Turbine.
Warhammer Online looks fun, watching some of the developer videos "and I heal, and I heal" are just outright a blast. Imagine a game where you finally don't have some twit who just sits back and spams "heal". Kind of like Quakeworld the MMORPG
still, that line of "we aren't wow, or we aren't going to replace wow" comes off as "we suck, but it sounds better and looks better to point to the elephant in the room"
Which was a surprise to me as I always see customers in there.
I cannot say I am surprised that the corporation is having problems, moving into TVs had to be painful and their pricing strategy cannot withstand the big box stores. Now with Best Buy offering Apple products there is less reason for many to visit a Comp USA
So, when does the Radio Shack follow suit?
I don't care about the price, if I wanted one price would not have been my determining factor. It probably kills its for some others. One thing I didn't consider earlier is the number of people I know who won't get one because its too big. Its the old idea of, its a phone, if I wanted a pc I would get one.
The killer problem with the iPhone in my book, and it seems to get knocks from others I know as well, is the fact it doesn't have a battery you can changeout on the fly. I travel, and I don't always have access to a power outlet. Worse, the iPhone is designed to do things other than just being a phone, hence I will need to use it more often. So, whats with this fixed battery?
boneheaded.
Then again Apple is about looks more than anything in their consumer side. There are a few bright ideas in their PC group that seriously need to come over to the iPod/iPhone side.
and with the strings attached its not always wanted either.
Most US advances are not made with government money. It just doesn't work that way. Look towards the corporations leading the edges of technology to see what is really getting done that applicable to everyday life.
The problem with government grants is that you end up with both good and bad, new ways to heal people and usually multiple ways to kill them. At least pharms are a one way street in the corporate world... still...
don't bemoan a problem that isn't as drastic, let alone far reaching as many claim it is. What harms science is regulation an inteference by government, not lack of funds from it
just tagging a message... no comment otherwise
just a tag
One of the problem with the games that folded before release is that everyone involved can play "what release would have been like" with impunity. Too many developers promise the world and then get crushed trying to deliver it. Some suffer feature creep as the go along forever not finishing the game as intended simply because they cannot stay focues.
Its probably best they do not release, if the developer cannot be realistic before release how can we expect them to be so after? I have been in games where bugs went unchecked for a long time because the developer kept adding features. Instead of fixing what was there they got caught in the trap of new stuff is fun, who wants to work on old code.
There have a been a few games which I think were just tossed out there to see what response would be. Its easy to throw together a bunch of mock ups, its even easier to put up a webpage of things your game will have, getting it all delivered is a whole 'nuther story.
Because the skill that most people profess to have, and constantly rail that WOW players do not have, only exists in their own minds.
Its up to the player to decide if the effort required is worth it to them. The nice thing about WOW is that you don't have to do that. You can play the game just for fun or you can spend your life in it.
One of the reasons there are "countless" level 60+ players who are clueless is simply because the game has so many damn players its beyond hope they would all be good. Want a hint? Guilds, the bigger the better. The more hardcore the guild the less likely your will be surrounded by idiots.
Finally, for all those who love to call WOW "easy mode - requires no skill" Its obvious you didn't play very long. RAIDs require not only skill and cooperation but the ability to react to situations when someone screws up. Whats so much fun is I can find these complainers in other games, usually getting good groups wiped.
NASA's budget has increase each year under Bush. While it appears mostly inflation type increases.
Other than when the moon program ended the budget only decreased twice, under Carter and Clinton. Bush's dad actually jumped it up a bit more than Reagan, it got decent increases under Clinton till his second term, also when NASA was having problems.
The opportunities are always missed regardless of who is in office. We can only look back and play "what ifs". Congress is more interested in vote buying schemes than real science. If you want to lay the real blame for NASA's lack of funding look no farther than Congress. A Congress which would rather build bridges to nowhere, pay for research into useless areas, and enact new ways of taking our freedoms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Budget
Bush isn't the only President that has had to deal with the Space Station. If anything its doing just fine under him. The best thing he ever did for the space station was to drop the Shuttle as a delivery system. It should have been gone in his father's day.
Diverting? How about focusing on something which grants us more opportunities. A space station is low earth orbit does not provide us with a stepping off platform that something more permanent, like a moon base, would. Besides being more difficult to shield from radiation, heat, and micrometeroites, we have to constantly push it back up. Worse, it is planned to come back within the lifetime of many of these other programs being put forward. In other words, unless we have a plan to keep it up permanently why throw money at it.
Blaming Bush for the space station and state of NASA is really reaching. Don't even try that line that NASA would be better off if all the funds from Iraq didn't get spent as Congress never cares for NASA unless it can bash whomever is in the Adminstration at the time.
What does Google have in its YouTube acquisition?
Probably a lot of angry stock holders is my future bet.
I hope they have something big in the works because its sure a lot to pay for a site that is suddenly looking mighty bare.
Its only a monopoly on one sort of communication and as such I don't think it really matters. the barrier of entry was probably too high to begin with, hence they had no choice to merge. The market is just not big enough to support two players, it might not be big enough to support one player.
Consider that both put satellites up there, both developed the receiving hardware as well, and both were essentially fighting for the same customers.
It might just be better for subscribers because it means satellite radio will be around longer.
// "Global Cooling" is a BS red herring that only Greenhouse deniers like you take "seriously". //
I like how its a red herring now. Yet it was the "consensus" of its age and I am quite sure naysayers will equally villified as they are today. Nearly all the dire predictions for it were similar to the "global warming" today, yet none came to pass.
So, since it didn't occur it was never postulated either? Is that how this system works? Anything that is predicted that does not occur yet those with opposing views who bring it up are reaching for straws?
So I guess bring up the mass starvation that was to occur in the late 70s and 80s that never occured is equally a red herring?
Why not admit it. Everyone makes mistakes. If you won't acknowledge those which make you look bad why should people who don't buy into your view accept ANYTHING you say?
As for it being proven that some of this is stoppable thats fine, the issue is, is it what man is doing that is causing the problem. We can surely stop what we are doing but no one has proven conclusively that its man that caused the shift.
That is why they go AC. GW is a religion here.
/. would make the Inqusitors from long ago proud. I don't doubt that there are campaigns staged by groups to tilt the discussion at websites such as this. That is one of the mechanisms they promote.
As to the issue at hand.
What about the other thousand or so Glaciers that ARE ADVANCING?
This whole GW mess is all one sided. You never hear about the thousands of glaciers that are gaining mass. No, you only hear about the ones that are losing it. Why should many of us take the GW side seriously when they report only what advances their case and totally dismiss anything that doesn't? The poison most good sites of information with their campaign of omission. Look at WikiPedia. You can find a huge article with pictures about disappearing glaciers but you won't find information about all the glaciers increasing in mass. Nope, not at all. Guess what, try and put one there with links. Go for it. Really....
Sorry, but for a community that supposedly prizes facts and discussion the holy war waged by the Global Warming supporters on
Oh well, glaciers come and glaciers go. Just figure this out, some of these Glaciers were fine up till a decade ago. What shifted THAT suddenly to make them vanish. Sorry, it wasn't man. After all most claims it was the industrial revolution that started the mess, advancing well into the late 20th century where the real damage started. Yet some of these glaciers did just fine until very very recently. To me that indicates something bigger than us happened. Hopefully we will realize it before we go off an ruin the standard of living for millions
because not all their profits are from gasoline.
:)
hell, quite a few oil companies don't even own refineries anymore. A lot of the gas people buy today comes from independant refineries.
I don't think we will outgrow carpet, plastic bags, and the millions of other items that currently use oil.
Plus, they have all that land now, think about it, ready made recharging stations