I pointed out a comment that was modded up which should not because it was implied and not factual. But don't worry, the majority of users on/. took care of making sure it was treated like fact just because it goes with their own opinion. It's just unfortunate opinions for some aren't based on facts.
What he wrote is no different than me writing that you have no credibility because you score is zero or because you are posting anonymously. Do you agree that the prior statement has no foundation?
If you agree then you'll agree that the parent comment had no foundation and was intended to draw in the sheep behind him because you know how spitting on authorities is popular on/.
If we are going to start modding up implied facts then we are in for further dilution of content on/.
And because the FBI lied, why should I have confidence in law enforcement at all?
You sir are what I call a literal piece of shiat!
You are no better than the cops that do their job by the book with no considerations for the fact that people aren't numbers. "Sir, you were exceeding the speed limit by 1 MPH so I had to pull you over..."
To go from an implied lie to "should we have confidence..." is a long stretch. Screw people like you that turn whatever they read into unneeded arguments just because they have nothing better to do with their crummy life.
You can do any sort of speed test you want on Vista and then upgrade to Windows 7 IN PLACE and that same speed test will be improved.
That is true of ANY OS from MS. Win95 Win98 WinXP... I left out ME because it was as dress up, not a new OS. The H/W level optimizations are only as good as the OS support for it.
My comments were more inclined towards common complaints about Vista at the time. In this case, OS stability.
Vista eventually ran properly after MANY updates. I would argue an updated Vista is probably better than a non SP1 Windows 7. VISTA was garbage at launch, that I won't argue. I still have 3 users running VISTA on older laptops that we are about to replace and I have yet to hear complaints. Maybe they've lost the will to live... I don't know.
Global stats shows Vista at 2% of North American desktops. Won't be long before it's gone.
I'm arguing against those which paint Tesla as a "looser" because they aren't profitable
Absolutely. Companies with lots of capital to spend should follow their lead. Unfortunately not all company leaders inspire adventure, risk taking and innovation like Musk.
Last time I was at small claims you could claim any damages you would like no matter how crazy they were. I requested re-imbursement for the cost of photocopying.
I think it depends on your local justice system. It's going to be different to country to country and I believe from state/province to another. I know where I live the judge on pre-trial told me that I could not.
For one, not all mail services are free and those that aren't usually have extended functionality. Second, IMO losing your main email address is far more costly than $300. My network of people is tones more important to me than one little piece of hardware I can replace. Obviously not everybody values their email address the same but I do an most business people in my circle do as well.
But lets put that aside for a second. The issue is not the internet of things here. It would be like blaming phone technology for a carrier stopping service. The problem is that a company made a decision to end hosting of whatever their service is and doesn't offer alternatives. If they pony up the source code people will take it on and host these services. Will it be free? Probably not. IMO, it should never free FOREVER unless your revenue model allows for it (such as cell phone plans). I say this because there's massive cost in hosting services for users and the one time revenue for a device makes it difficult to sustain.
At the end of the day it's the company's fault for not planning ahead and providing a self hosted solution within the device. Possibly they though most users didn't have the technical expertise to setup dyndns, open the firewall ports and hookup directly.
So is the outrage justified? Yes Can you blame the internet? Absolutely not.
$75 to file at small claims. This was 8 years ago so I'm assuming it's probably closer to $100 now. The fees incurred to go to small claims in most cases cannot be added to the damage claimed.
Also, last I checked, most electronic manufacturers that offer lifetime warranties only offer it for a year after EOL. If your product has a revision that was EOL, you need to make sure you are within the window specified in the small print.
If enough of these cases come through, the vendor will make arrangements with the court to schedule most pre-trials and trials on the same day. This usually highly benefits the vendor.
If only a few people go through the process, they will probably just pay up.
If Tesla wanted to be profitable, they could easily do so by just reducing capital and R&D investments.
Not sure that is correct. They are only attractive because of their continuous innovation at the moment. People don't buy their cars for the same reason they buy a Corolla or Focus. The future is very bright for Tesla but their R&D cost will be high until the tech is mature and technological advancements ahead are minor or not worth seeking. At that point they hopefully have a foothold as strong as Apple's in the mobile space.
I honestly think Tesla has the most innovative way to obtaining R&D money. Cater to those who want to promote innovation while looking good doing it.
You nailed it and I totally get it. I'm just saying that the cars themselves have not yielded a profit yet if you include the R&D required to get them out the door. This also needs to include after sales service which has been expensive because all new tech has issues. Here are the number right from Tesla: http://ir.teslamotors.com/rele...
The investors are investing not because of their amazing track record of profit but rather the potential the R&D bring and the ROI long therm. They see the next Apple and it's very attractive for early investors.
R&D spending is not considered part of Cost of Goods Sold
Where is this written? All spending is part of goods sold but R&D today is not for products sold today. R&D for previous vehicles should be applied to said vehicles.
The formula to determine if you've made money is simple; Revenue - all spending. From a historical standpoint Tesla has not made money yet. The R&D They spent in the past was required for them to be where they are today. Without the R&D then there is no car. Could the company continue to produce the car without R&D and start becoming highly profitable? Absolutely. But because this tech is still requiring tones of R&D it is not making money and probably won't for another 2 years. This is why many investors have pulled back. The ROI is just not there by 2020 as promised by Musk.
As an investor in the future this company has great promise but if this was a SMB seeking a bank loan they would be denied unless they could prove the red ink will bring tones of black ink down the road.
That's correct. The model 3 will go for 35k USD. In Canada that will be 45k. The government provides a 8.5k credit which brings the car to a more reasonable price range.
Additionally your upkeep should be 1-4k less over 5 years at about 25km / year. No oil changes, no coolant changes, not as many brake changes, no air filters... Adversely, at the 8 year mark the battery will probably need replacing and I'm sure that won't be cheap.
If you buy the Model 3 you don't do it to save money, you do it to promote innovation.
That statement is only partially correct. Yes, Tesla reinvests a lot of it's gains into R&D but this R&D is for future vehicles, not previously sold vehicles so you need to use the R&D applied to the sales made, not the sales not made.
The equation is simple: R&D cost + Manufacturing cost + service cost is smaller than the revenue per car which means they aren't making money yet. Last year was the first year they broke even for a single year.
This is not to say that they won't get there but many investors have gotten on board with hopes Musk's promise is going to realize itself by 2020 while others have pulled out realizing what GM CEO has already expressed about electric cars.
So their current R&D cost is very high but eventually they should reach a tipping point that will allow them to make money year to year.
Here we go. Another MS bashing contest. There's nothing refreshing about coming here anymore. It's like talking to two dumb rednecks that argue that Dodge is better than Ford. Whatever happened to constructive arguments that aren't intending to just draw MOD UP from a few angry computer users.
"No ADs" will kill free services. You can argue with me until you're red in the face but that is just fact. No money, no service. Nobody is going to fork up their time, hosting expenses and whatever other expenses to provide users with free everything. You know that 25GB of storage, well they aren't free to those hosting it so ads pay for that. The minute the ad value goes down (and it already has significantly), you will see less and less revenue.
MS has a very small portion of the ad market so an alternative to beating your competitor is to slow him down. Blocking adds on their browser will block far more revenue from Google than MS. That depending on who you ask could be a real win.
Blocking ads on the desktop, well, yeah can bet that's one thing that will never happen, not your OS, not your computer.
You have ads on your desktop? I'm asking because I've had Windows 10 installed since August and have yet to see 1 ad. And regardless of your answer there will always be a version that has no ads because corporations will never tolerate it.
Government, at it's best, is an intermediary to determine where one person's liberties end and another's begins
It's about time someone said it.
People tend to forget that we are all government and that the crazies in power come and go. We as voter hardly practice our rights to fight decisions made at our government that we in majority disagree with. There is no doubt our officials are trying to pull the rug from under us on some issues but until it's significant enough that the majority feels oppressed, the majority will remain inactive on the issues.
In my experience automation is often used to stream line processes, increase quality and increase output which all result in lower cost at some point. Humans aren't reliable in nature (generalizing). People get sick, they strike, have real life obligations that get in the way of work and lets be honest, most of us work as a mean to our life objectives (eating, sex and entertainment).
All that being said, if we didn't have to worry about competing with China (and friends) then increasing the minimum wage would see reduced crime and even reduced health cost. This was proven with before/after statistics coming out of Europe. There was a TED talk about this worth watching.
To me, any business that tells me their ability to stay in business hinges on $40 / day / employee is just FN crazy. Other than global exports, the local restaurants will all be impacted the same way so it's an even playing field.
What do you categorize the crusades as? Some of the later crusades were meant to eliminate variations of the same religion. Starting to sound familiar isn't it?
I have a few Muslim friends and work with many others, none of which agree with any of the violence that the Jihadist have embraced. These Jihadist are no different than our Westboro Baptist Church people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church) or the KKK. The only difference is they are a minority in a country that won't tolerate violence.
Most of the Muslims that join these violent groups lived in war thorn regions. If our heavily trained war heroes come back with PTST after 2-3 years of service, imagine how bad it would be for kids raised into adulthood within the same setting.
The Muslims I know are some of the most gentle people I've met and seeing them get tossed into the same bowl as the 0.01% of extremists pisses me off.
Slashdot Mirror
I pointed out a comment that was modded up which should not because it was implied and not factual. But don't worry, the majority of users on /. took care of making sure it was treated like fact just because it goes with their own opinion. It's just unfortunate opinions for some aren't based on facts.
What he wrote is no different than me writing that you have no credibility because you score is zero or because you are posting anonymously. Do you agree that the prior statement has no foundation?
If you agree then you'll agree that the parent comment had no foundation and was intended to draw in the sheep behind him because you know how spitting on authorities is popular on /.
If we are going to start modding up implied facts then we are in for further dilution of content on /.
And because the FBI lied, why should I have confidence in law enforcement at all?
You sir are what I call a literal piece of shiat!
You are no better than the cops that do their job by the book with no considerations for the fact that people aren't numbers. "Sir, you were exceeding the speed limit by 1 MPH so I had to pull you over..."
To go from an implied lie to "should we have confidence..." is a long stretch. Screw people like you that turn whatever they read into unneeded arguments just because they have nothing better to do with their crummy life.
You can do any sort of speed test you want on Vista and then upgrade to Windows 7 IN PLACE and that same speed test will be improved.
That is true of ANY OS from MS. Win95 Win98 WinXP ... I left out ME because it was as dress up, not a new OS. The H/W level optimizations are only as good as the OS support for it.
My comments were more inclined towards common complaints about Vista at the time. In this case, OS stability.
Vista eventually ran properly after MANY updates. I would argue an updated Vista is probably better than a non SP1 Windows 7. VISTA was garbage at launch, that I won't argue. I still have 3 users running VISTA on older laptops that we are about to replace and I have yet to hear complaints. Maybe they've lost the will to live... I don't know.
Global stats shows Vista at 2% of North American desktops. Won't be long before it's gone.
I'm arguing against those which paint Tesla as a "looser" because they aren't profitable
Absolutely. Companies with lots of capital to spend should follow their lead. Unfortunately not all company leaders inspire adventure, risk taking and innovation like Musk.
I believe it's the same elsewhere in Canada.
8 years ago it was in Ontario. That's the last time I used the small claims.
Last time I was at small claims you could claim any damages you would like no matter how crazy they were. I requested re-imbursement for the cost of photocopying.
I think it depends on your local justice system. It's going to be different to country to country and I believe from state/province to another. I know where I live the judge on pre-trial told me that I could not.
For one, not all mail services are free and those that aren't usually have extended functionality. Second, IMO losing your main email address is far more costly than $300. My network of people is tones more important to me than one little piece of hardware I can replace. Obviously not everybody values their email address the same but I do an most business people in my circle do as well.
But lets put that aside for a second. The issue is not the internet of things here. It would be like blaming phone technology for a carrier stopping service. The problem is that a company made a decision to end hosting of whatever their service is and doesn't offer alternatives. If they pony up the source code people will take it on and host these services. Will it be free? Probably not. IMO, it should never free FOREVER unless your revenue model allows for it (such as cell phone plans). I say this because there's massive cost in hosting services for users and the one time revenue for a device makes it difficult to sustain.
At the end of the day it's the company's fault for not planning ahead and providing a self hosted solution within the device. Possibly they though most users didn't have the technical expertise to setup dyndns, open the firewall ports and hookup directly.
So is the outrage justified? Yes
Can you blame the internet? Absolutely not.
This is one horror story amongst thousands of success story. You can't crap on the model because one went belly up.
There are benefits to offline or online and hosted or not hosted. Just a matter of picking your poison.
Email is a perfect example of a hosted service that most rely on and never give a second thought.
$75 to file at small claims. This was 8 years ago so I'm assuming it's probably closer to $100 now. The fees incurred to go to small claims in most cases cannot be added to the damage claimed.
Also, last I checked, most electronic manufacturers that offer lifetime warranties only offer it for a year after EOL. If your product has a revision that was EOL, you need to make sure you are within the window specified in the small print.
If enough of these cases come through, the vendor will make arrangements with the court to schedule most pre-trials and trials on the same day. This usually highly benefits the vendor.
If only a few people go through the process, they will probably just pay up.
If Tesla wanted to be profitable, they could easily do so by just reducing capital and R&D investments.
Not sure that is correct. They are only attractive because of their continuous innovation at the moment. People don't buy their cars for the same reason they buy a Corolla or Focus. The future is very bright for Tesla but their R&D cost will be high until the tech is mature and technological advancements ahead are minor or not worth seeking. At that point they hopefully have a foothold as strong as Apple's in the mobile space.
I honestly think Tesla has the most innovative way to obtaining R&D money. Cater to those who want to promote innovation while looking good doing it.
You nailed it and I totally get it. I'm just saying that the cars themselves have not yielded a profit yet if you include the R&D required to get them out the door. This also needs to include after sales service which has been expensive because all new tech has issues. Here are the number right from Tesla: http://ir.teslamotors.com/rele...
The investors are investing not because of their amazing track record of profit but rather the potential the R&D bring and the ROI long therm. They see the next Apple and it's very attractive for early investors.
Let me help you with that one. WOOSH!
Only took me the first 15 words to figure out the humor.
R&D spending is not considered part of Cost of Goods Sold
Where is this written? All spending is part of goods sold but R&D today is not for products sold today. R&D for previous vehicles should be applied to said vehicles.
The formula to determine if you've made money is simple; Revenue - all spending. From a historical standpoint Tesla has not made money yet. The R&D They spent in the past was required for them to be where they are today. Without the R&D then there is no car. Could the company continue to produce the car without R&D and start becoming highly profitable? Absolutely. But because this tech is still requiring tones of R&D it is not making money and probably won't for another 2 years. This is why many investors have pulled back. The ROI is just not there by 2020 as promised by Musk.
As an investor in the future this company has great promise but if this was a SMB seeking a bank loan they would be denied unless they could prove the red ink will bring tones of black ink down the road.
That's correct. The model 3 will go for 35k USD. In Canada that will be 45k. The government provides a 8.5k credit which brings the car to a more reasonable price range.
Additionally your upkeep should be 1-4k less over 5 years at about 25km / year. No oil changes, no coolant changes, not as many brake changes, no air filters...
Adversely, at the 8 year mark the battery will probably need replacing and I'm sure that won't be cheap.
If you buy the Model 3 you don't do it to save money, you do it to promote innovation.
That statement is only partially correct. Yes, Tesla reinvests a lot of it's gains into R&D but this R&D is for future vehicles, not previously sold vehicles so you need to use the R&D applied to the sales made, not the sales not made.
The equation is simple: R&D cost + Manufacturing cost + service cost is smaller than the revenue per car which means they aren't making money yet. Last year was the first year they broke even for a single year.
This is not to say that they won't get there but many investors have gotten on board with hopes Musk's promise is going to realize itself by 2020 while others have pulled out realizing what GM CEO has already expressed about electric cars.
So their current R&D cost is very high but eventually they should reach a tipping point that will allow them to make money year to year.
Here we go. Another MS bashing contest. There's nothing refreshing about coming here anymore. It's like talking to two dumb rednecks that argue that Dodge is better than Ford. Whatever happened to constructive arguments that aren't intending to just draw MOD UP from a few angry computer users.
"No ADs" will kill free services. You can argue with me until you're red in the face but that is just fact. No money, no service. Nobody is going to fork up their time, hosting expenses and whatever other expenses to provide users with free everything. You know that 25GB of storage, well they aren't free to those hosting it so ads pay for that. The minute the ad value goes down (and it already has significantly), you will see less and less revenue.
MS has a very small portion of the ad market so an alternative to beating your competitor is to slow him down. Blocking adds on their browser will block far more revenue from Google than MS. That depending on who you ask could be a real win.
Blocking ads on the desktop, well, yeah can bet that's one thing that will never happen, not your OS, not your computer.
You have ads on your desktop? I'm asking because I've had Windows 10 installed since August and have yet to see 1 ad. And regardless of your answer there will always be a version that has no ads because corporations will never tolerate it.
Not from Tesla sales though! The Tesla I believe just broke even last year. It's still bleeding money start to now (last I checked).
But I admire their investment in the future. Clearly lots of people with money are willing to fund the future for a little something.
At least they can get from A to B without a charge.
Government, at it's best, is an intermediary to determine where one person's liberties end and another's begins
It's about time someone said it.
People tend to forget that we are all government and that the crazies in power come and go. We as voter hardly practice our rights to fight decisions made at our government that we in majority disagree with. There is no doubt our officials are trying to pull the rug from under us on some issues but until it's significant enough that the majority feels oppressed, the majority will remain inactive on the issues.
In my experience automation is often used to stream line processes, increase quality and increase output which all result in lower cost at some point. Humans aren't reliable in nature (generalizing). People get sick, they strike, have real life obligations that get in the way of work and lets be honest, most of us work as a mean to our life objectives (eating, sex and entertainment).
All that being said, if we didn't have to worry about competing with China (and friends) then increasing the minimum wage would see reduced crime and even reduced health cost. This was proven with before/after statistics coming out of Europe. There was a TED talk about this worth watching.
To me, any business that tells me their ability to stay in business hinges on $40 / day / employee is just FN crazy. Other than global exports, the local restaurants will all be impacted the same way so it's an even playing field.
http://www.theweathernetwork.c...
This is a recent article backed with some scientific data.
What do you categorize the crusades as? Some of the later crusades were meant to eliminate variations of the same religion. Starting to sound familiar isn't it?
I have a few Muslim friends and work with many others, none of which agree with any of the violence that the Jihadist have embraced. These Jihadist are no different than our Westboro Baptist Church people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church) or the KKK. The only difference is they are a minority in a country that won't tolerate violence.
Most of the Muslims that join these violent groups lived in war thorn regions. If our heavily trained war heroes come back with PTST after 2-3 years of service, imagine how bad it would be for kids raised into adulthood within the same setting.
The Muslims I know are some of the most gentle people I've met and seeing them get tossed into the same bowl as the 0.01% of extremists pisses me off.