I would love to see Tesla try it in one of the lower classes if they can swap the batteries fast enough.
Not sure it would be that fun to see even in the lower classes. They'd probably get crushed because using the battery at max acceleration in the Le Mans straights (where decent cars can get to 200mph+) would suck so much juice they'd be replacing it every 50 miles (vs. ~150 for the gas engines). Not to mention both the Roadster and S are limited to ~125mph max speed (and while they could probably raise the limiter and change the gearing, that would further decrease the mileage...)
Basically, diesel and electric motors are both more expensive, and hybrids already reduce the usefulness of the efficiency of diesels, and so using both just makes a more expensive car with less benefit than you'd think. Especially given a series hybrid only uses the ICE when the battery runs out, which for the majority of drivers of these fairly specific-use vehicles (i.e. best for commuting/short drives) should be the exception.
Or for a specific example - a friend of mine bought a Chevy Volt and has used about 10 gallons of gasoline in the first 5000 miles (of course his miles are mostly commuting). Why would he want to pay an extra few thousand dollars to replace that tiny gas engine with a turbodiesel?
And I guess going further, unless your INCOME is all in BTC then it's even more irrelevant, as you'd have to convert everything you make before using it. And, at least currently, if your income is all in BTC then you are probably not paying taxes in the first place (and hey, we're back on topic to the original article!;)
Stop trying to pretend this is a used car deal ("don't worry about the total, it's just $179 a month!"), let's just put the actual numbers out there - they were fined $1.9B for laundering $680B. The government isn't punishing them by "taking their future profits", it's giving them a massive break by forcing them to give up a small fraction of the profits they already made on illegal activities.
If you were fined 5 weeks of income (and no jail time) after having made a shit-ton of money in the last 4 years doing something illegal, it wouldn't sting at all. In fact, you'd almost be motivated to try it again...
Well, your parents completely failed you, so why should anyone here pay any attention to your rant?
The last post I read from you was some anti-semitic bullshit claiming "that Jew editor Timothy is in Diane Feinsten's pocket". Did you parents teach you that racism? If so, I'm sure they are so proud.
And I also find it ironic that someone celebrating the fact that his rambling racist rants are drug-fueled is calling kids "rotten drugged-up shits". You define the term.
GCC and Linux are MASSIVE in the consumer electronics space right now - almost every networked TV, BD player, and set-top box n the past 5+ years uses them. But some have already started to switch to LLVM and to a lesser extent FreeBSD.
Sony would be one of the big examples here - the PS4 development environment is based on LLVM, and they use a heavily modified FreeBSD as the OS.
I think what gets a lot of the non-GNU folks annoyed is that the GNU folks seem to think their way should be dominate; that the best world is a 100% GNU world.
This may be one of the core pieces behind the animosity. Honestly, how often do you hear GNU/GPL developers (or RMS specifically) ranting about how their way should be the only way? Pretty often. How often to you hear the same from the BSD/Apache/etc folks? Almost never. People laugh when the situation is compared to a religious debate, but the GNU/FSF/GPL attitude seems pretty close to the definition of intolerant religious fundamentalism to me.
LLVM are only getting funding because Apple wants to undermine GCC. Most projects can't be used in that way, so they can't be of any interest to the Apple category of funders
Sony has adopted LLVM (and FreeBSD, the basis for their new OS) for the PS4. Several major mobile and TV/set top chip vendors (previously using Linux and GCC) are doing or considering the same.
This isn't all about Apple. Apple may have started it (like companies such as Tivo and Broadcom started the Linux-in-CE-devices trend) but it's way bigger than their involvement by now.
THIS is one of the most interesting points in the comparison. Why is LLVM replacing GCC? Is it technically superior, is it because of licensing differences, etc? And if it's technically superior, why is that? Because there was less legacy, because the maintainers/developers were better/had fewer internal issues, or because the license encouraged *more* contribution?
Rather than Stallman and others whining about licensing, maybe they should analyze WHY it has become so popular. Ironically, RMS seems to have given up on all engineering rigor and decided legal and marketing issues are more important, which seems seems much more against open source principles than these licensing differences.
Given all of the whiny Facebook users I know who claim "I'm done Facebook!" every couple months and then are inevitably back a week later, you're right, it's probably a much better comparison.
With Facebook ALREADY being the home page of the addicted, and with a Facebook app on just about every mobile device, not many people have to search for Facebook, as it is already at their fingertips. According to Alexa statistics [alexa.com], 99.28% of visitors arrive directly at the site, and only 7.7% arrived from Google. This just screams "Browser Home Page".
Yup. Using "searching for Facebook" as the primary measure of its popularity has become almost as useless as "searching for Google".
Nah, if the power went out for an extended period (or for good, if you are in a bad JJ Abrams show), you'd be screwed in the winter.
But I guess it depends if you are talking apocalyptic events (or even major natural disasters) vs. everyday risks. Because you are so many orders of magnitude more likely to die from one of the latter that the former isn't worth worrying about unless you are the obsessive type.
My favorite are the idiotic Yelp reviews like "I tried to eat there but they are CLOSED ON MONDAYS so I couldn't. 1 star! Horrible restaurant!!" Followed by the "activist" reviews like "I have never used this product, but I read on the Internet that their parent company kills baby seals for fun. 1 star."
Of course they didn't say "black paint is illegal," but CARB (California Air Resources Board) mandated paint on all new cars sold in California after 2016 must meet certain reflectivity requirements (> 20% reflection of solar energy).
They eventually backed off of this because no one could figure out how to make black paint that was > 20% reflective, and obviously banning all black cars was not going to happen. But the point is the number and variety of regulations on automobiles are pretty crazy these days.
Of course it can be bad in other media if you don't use them correctly. But in a side by side comparison of Twitter, email, and phone support all used correctly, Twitter is an absolutely horrible forum vs. the others. 140 character public messages are good for posting tiny amounts of information to everyone, not dealing with individual customer problems. As I said in another post, it's for bitching, not fixing.
I can't be the first one to think this - TWITTER IS THE WORST FORUM FOR CUSTOMER SERVICE EVER INVENTED!
But on the other hand, one of the best forums for public shaming. The problem is when the naive/moronic company employee with access to their Twitter account actually responds to ANYTHING...
Actually, the auto industry is regulated WAY more than they were 50 years ago. Hell, California almost outlawed black paint on cars because it wasn't efficient enough when using the A/C.
Maybe they'll start with higher end models. On a lot of luxury cars most people get a significant number of the options, anyway. On the Tesla S, there were so few orders for the low end battery that they cancelled that option entirely and just gave people the mid-range model (disabled in software, of course!)
Tesla also cancelled their lowest-capacity battery model, but still fulfilled preorders by shipping the medium capacity models with the extra battery disabled in software. If the customer wants, they can pay $10k and get it "upgraded".
It really was the most fair solution, as the alternatives were to cancel the preorder or require the customer pay more for the car. Still, there are no external dependencies in this case except that the customer didn't pay for the larger battery. It's definitely a (special) case of paying extra for an option that already exists on the car...
They told me at the time that they were not really employing, just "testing the market"
Heh, I would have said "hey, that's a coincidence, I'm using you as a practice interview before I apply to the companies I actually want to work for";)
They didn't get very far in terms of regional domination. In fact, NK had to retreat all the way to the Chinese border until China entered the war. The whole thing was really a proxy fight between China (and somewhat USSR) and the US over control of most of East Asia. It's pretty clear if the UN/US did nothing USSR/China/NK would basically have made half of Asia puppet states, RoC would be part of China, etc. So the analogy is still pretty apt.
Slashdot Mirror
I would love to see Tesla try it in one of the lower classes if they can swap the batteries fast enough.
Not sure it would be that fun to see even in the lower classes. They'd probably get crushed because using the battery at max acceleration in the Le Mans straights (where decent cars can get to 200mph+) would suck so much juice they'd be replacing it every 50 miles (vs. ~150 for the gas engines). Not to mention both the Roadster and S are limited to ~125mph max speed (and while they could probably raise the limiter and change the gearing, that would further decrease the mileage...)
Extra cost and diminishing returns.
Basically, diesel and electric motors are both more expensive, and hybrids already reduce the usefulness of the efficiency of diesels, and so using both just makes a more expensive car with less benefit than you'd think. Especially given a series hybrid only uses the ICE when the battery runs out, which for the majority of drivers of these fairly specific-use vehicles (i.e. best for commuting/short drives) should be the exception.
Or for a specific example - a friend of mine bought a Chevy Volt and has used about 10 gallons of gasoline in the first 5000 miles (of course his miles are mostly commuting). Why would he want to pay an extra few thousand dollars to replace that tiny gas engine with a turbodiesel?
And I guess going further, unless your INCOME is all in BTC then it's even more irrelevant, as you'd have to convert everything you make before using it. And, at least currently, if your income is all in BTC then you are probably not paying taxes in the first place (and hey, we're back on topic to the original article! ;)
Cheaper because you don't have to pay money transfer fees.
Until you can pay 100% your housing, utilities, food, and other expenses in BTC, there will always be a price (direct or indirect) to exchange them.
Stop trying to pretend this is a used car deal ("don't worry about the total, it's just $179 a month!"), let's just put the actual numbers out there - they were fined $1.9B for laundering $680B. The government isn't punishing them by "taking their future profits", it's giving them a massive break by forcing them to give up a small fraction of the profits they already made on illegal activities.
If you were fined 5 weeks of income (and no jail time) after having made a shit-ton of money in the last 4 years doing something illegal, it wouldn't sting at all. In fact, you'd almost be motivated to try it again...
Well, your parents completely failed you, so why should anyone here pay any attention to your rant?
The last post I read from you was some anti-semitic bullshit claiming "that Jew editor Timothy is in Diane Feinsten's pocket". Did you parents teach you that racism? If so, I'm sure they are so proud.
And I also find it ironic that someone celebrating the fact that his rambling racist rants are drug-fueled is calling kids "rotten drugged-up shits". You define the term.
GCC and Linux are MASSIVE in the consumer electronics space right now - almost every networked TV, BD player, and set-top box n the past 5+ years uses them. But some have already started to switch to LLVM and to a lesser extent FreeBSD.
Sony would be one of the big examples here - the PS4 development environment is based on LLVM, and they use a heavily modified FreeBSD as the OS.
I think what gets a lot of the non-GNU folks annoyed is that the GNU folks seem to think their way should be dominate; that the best world is a 100% GNU world.
This may be one of the core pieces behind the animosity. Honestly, how often do you hear GNU/GPL developers (or RMS specifically) ranting about how their way should be the only way? Pretty often. How often to you hear the same from the BSD/Apache/etc folks? Almost never. People laugh when the situation is compared to a religious debate, but the GNU/FSF/GPL attitude seems pretty close to the definition of intolerant religious fundamentalism to me.
LLVM are only getting funding because Apple wants to undermine GCC. Most projects can't be used in that way, so they can't be of any interest to the Apple category of funders
Sony has adopted LLVM (and FreeBSD, the basis for their new OS) for the PS4. Several major mobile and TV/set top chip vendors (previously using Linux and GCC) are doing or considering the same.
This isn't all about Apple. Apple may have started it (like companies such as Tivo and Broadcom started the Linux-in-CE-devices trend) but it's way bigger than their involvement by now.
That's part of why LLVM is better than gcc today.
THIS is one of the most interesting points in the comparison. Why is LLVM replacing GCC? Is it technically superior, is it because of licensing differences, etc? And if it's technically superior, why is that? Because there was less legacy, because the maintainers/developers were better/had fewer internal issues, or because the license encouraged *more* contribution?
Rather than Stallman and others whining about licensing, maybe they should analyze WHY it has become so popular. Ironically, RMS seems to have given up on all engineering rigor and decided legal and marketing issues are more important, which seems seems much more against open source principles than these licensing differences.
whistle blows you!
Given all of the whiny Facebook users I know who claim "I'm done Facebook!" every couple months and then are inevitably back a week later, you're right, it's probably a much better comparison.
With Facebook ALREADY being the home page of the addicted, and with a Facebook app on just about every mobile device, not many people have to search for Facebook, as it is already at their fingertips. According to Alexa statistics [alexa.com], 99.28% of visitors arrive directly at the site, and only 7.7% arrived from Google. This just screams "Browser Home Page".
Yup. Using "searching for Facebook" as the primary measure of its popularity has become almost as useless as "searching for Google".
Maybe central Canada somewhere?
Nah, if the power went out for an extended period (or for good, if you are in a bad JJ Abrams show), you'd be screwed in the winter.
But I guess it depends if you are talking apocalyptic events (or even major natural disasters) vs. everyday risks. Because you are so many orders of magnitude more likely to die from one of the latter that the former isn't worth worrying about unless you are the obsessive type.
My favorite are the idiotic Yelp reviews like "I tried to eat there but they are CLOSED ON MONDAYS so I couldn't. 1 star! Horrible restaurant!!" Followed by the "activist" reviews like "I have never used this product, but I read on the Internet that their parent company kills baby seals for fun. 1 star."
Of course they didn't say "black paint is illegal," but CARB (California Air Resources Board) mandated paint on all new cars sold in California after 2016 must meet certain reflectivity requirements (> 20% reflection of solar energy).
They eventually backed off of this because no one could figure out how to make black paint that was > 20% reflective, and obviously banning all black cars was not going to happen. But the point is the number and variety of regulations on automobiles are pretty crazy these days.
Of course it can be bad in other media if you don't use them correctly. But in a side by side comparison of Twitter, email, and phone support all used correctly, Twitter is an absolutely horrible forum vs. the others. 140 character public messages are good for posting tiny amounts of information to everyone, not dealing with individual customer problems. As I said in another post, it's for bitching, not fixing.
Not really the "service" part. How can you really resolve an issue 140 characters at a time? It's a forum for bitching, not fixing.
I can't be the first one to think this - TWITTER IS THE WORST FORUM FOR CUSTOMER SERVICE EVER INVENTED!
But on the other hand, one of the best forums for public shaming. The problem is when the naive/moronic company employee with access to their Twitter account actually responds to ANYTHING...
Actually, the auto industry is regulated WAY more than they were 50 years ago. Hell, California almost outlawed black paint on cars because it wasn't efficient enough when using the A/C.
Maybe they'll start with higher end models. On a lot of luxury cars most people get a significant number of the options, anyway. On the Tesla S, there were so few orders for the low end battery that they cancelled that option entirely and just gave people the mid-range model (disabled in software, of course!)
Except once you hack the car's DRM you will no longer be able to connect to the XBox^H^H^H^H GM network...
Tesla also cancelled their lowest-capacity battery model, but still fulfilled preorders by shipping the medium capacity models with the extra battery disabled in software. If the customer wants, they can pay $10k and get it "upgraded".
It really was the most fair solution, as the alternatives were to cancel the preorder or require the customer pay more for the car. Still, there are no external dependencies in this case except that the customer didn't pay for the larger battery. It's definitely a (special) case of paying extra for an option that already exists on the car...
They told me at the time that they were not really employing, just "testing the market"
Heh, I would have said "hey, that's a coincidence, I'm using you as a practice interview before I apply to the companies I actually want to work for" ;)
They didn't get very far in terms of regional domination. In fact, NK had to retreat all the way to the Chinese border until China entered the war. The whole thing was really a proxy fight between China (and somewhat USSR) and the US over control of most of East Asia. It's pretty clear if the UN/US did nothing USSR/China/NK would basically have made half of Asia puppet states, RoC would be part of China, etc. So the analogy is still pretty apt.