If efficiency is emissions per passenger mile, then it is the right thing to compare
But they are not measuring emissions per passenger mile, they are measuring passenger miles per gallon. Two different things, particularly when they are using different fuels. If you don't care about emissions, then what it the point of the comparison to start with?
The SEC is actively working on reducing the burden precisely to allow small investments via crowdfunding, but I haven't followed their progress.
Yeah, I haven't heard anything in the last year or two about the crowdfunding regulation they were supposedly developing. Its probably getting just too complex because they are trying to be overprotective.
Interesting. Thanks. But the entire fleet was not down, only several dozen. The ipads "powered down unexpectedly", not the type of behavior you expect from changes to a document data change, but a very common problem when an app or OS has been updated or changed in some manner.
The update was likely to some item of data the application uses, not the application itself.
I don't see how you have any information to support this assumption. I'd guess its more likely an IOS update and some resulting incompatibility. Updating the data itself is probably the least likely change to cause error. Also, that data probably doesn't change very often, so it would have been pretty obvious if that were a root cause.
Redundancy doesn't need to be hardcopies. Either bring backup I-pads, or better maybe a backup windows tab so you have both diversity and redundancy.
Also, since this happened to many at about the same time, I assume an update or change was to blame. Don't update these unless there is a reason. And test if you do update, or keep a non-updated backup on hand until the update is proven reliable.
never underestimate people's capacity to be mind-glowingly evil...
it seem's they have this thought in mind
Or overestimate the risk. Just think how many easy ways there are to rig something or randomly poison something and do great harm to people, yet it rarely happens the 'sneaky' way. More often someone will blatantly cause harm and to others and often themselves as well. I think for many the risk of getting caught doing something that evil via hacking is likely a deterrent as well. It certainly would bring pretty harsh penalties.
I'm not saying we shouldn't take reasonable steps to prevent these risks, just keep the fear within reason.
I get the feeling that the Professor is the one with the issues. Not the students.
I am inclined to think that as well. I sounds to me like this professor could not earn the respect of his students. If you can't manage to do that, then you might not be a very good teacher of this topic.
I think your calculation is simply a big guess. Going from watts to gallons of diesel is a pretty big leap, I'd like to see your assumptions. Given that there is not indication of the efficiency of the conversion process presented, and that hydrogen production alone is quite inefficient, and that you need to consider process input and transport costs, I'll assume your guess is very far from reality.
Its actually a poor logical argument. Only a small percentage of new ideas actually succeed, so the odds are greatly in favor of the critics. Employing critical thought and challenge is a key to success.
I agree warnings have limitations, but they didn't have anything in Indonesia at the time and they have since been deployed. They may be a 'given' but that doesn't matter in a discussion of what is likely to be most beneficial in an event.
Walls pretty much ruin a beach, so if you have a beach, tourist area a wall is not really desirable. I get the concept of personal or small group type protective devices, but they must be low cost and deployed in an easily accessible manner, and this particular solution doesn't fit that. Then, when you do deploy a solution, you must make sure everyone on the beach knows what to do and how to use them in an organized manner. Not an easy thing to pull off, and made more complicated if you want to a parent with children, etc.
To protect a sea side village, sea walls make more sense. Probably a lower cost than moving a large community.
This provides a solution that allows you to survive with less reaction time. Which may be a good thing.
Only if it is more accessible by many people than the escape paths. Imagine 5 people panicking and fight to get into one of these things. It really makes no sense. Is it even remotely realistic that a country would line its beaches with thousands of these things? Then everyone that does manage to get into one of these gets swept out to sea. Seems like a very poor solution path to me.
Aeronautical engineer Julian Sharpe, founder of Survival Capsule, got the idea for his capsules after the 2004 Indonesian tsunami. He believes fewer people would have died had some sort of escape pod existed
What the Indonesians needed was a warning, not an escape pod. With no warning, the pods are useless. With warning, just get out of the path.
If you reduce the chance, you do prevent it in at least some cases. So, your statement is in fact not accurate, as there is HOPE. I will repeat it, EATING well does prevent cancer in at least some people.
I suppose its just semantics, but if it is really eating poorly that causes risk to increase, then not eating poorly is not really preventing cancer, just not causing it. So, its really not eating bad food that lowers cancer risk.... and of course that implies eating well. Kind of like saying not riding in a car prevents you from getting a serious injury from an accident...technically true but kind of useless when looking for prevention techniques.
It's not people switching back, it's people buying a second car for their household.
The numbers reported are based on trading in their EV for and SUV, a switch, not those that keep one and buy a second vehicle. You could be right, but you have no data to show that they own a second EV at the time of trade in.
Slashdot Mirror
If efficiency is emissions per passenger mile, then it is the right thing to compare
But they are not measuring emissions per passenger mile, they are measuring passenger miles per gallon. Two different things, particularly when they are using different fuels. If you don't care about emissions, then what it the point of the comparison to start with?
I found the following. A bus fuel efficiency...
This is one of those arguments where the units can really change perception.
I don't see why we should even be comparing efficiency. If emissions is the thing we care about then compare emissions, not efficiency.
Well, I suppose that a data update could trigger some bug already in the software, an option I didn't think about until reading your response.
The SEC is actively working on reducing the burden precisely to allow small investments via crowdfunding, but I haven't followed their progress.
Yeah, I haven't heard anything in the last year or two about the crowdfunding regulation they were supposedly developing. Its probably getting just too complex because they are trying to be overprotective.
Interesting. Thanks. But the entire fleet was not down, only several dozen. The ipads "powered down unexpectedly", not the type of behavior you expect from changes to a document data change, but a very common problem when an app or OS has been updated or changed in some manner.
The update was likely to some item of data the application uses, not the application itself.
I don't see how you have any information to support this assumption. I'd guess its more likely an IOS update and some resulting incompatibility. Updating the data itself is probably the least likely change to cause error. Also, that data probably doesn't change very often, so it would have been pretty obvious if that were a root cause.
I agree, wasn't debating your point, just adding....
Redundancy doesn't need to be hardcopies. Either bring backup I-pads, or better maybe a backup windows tab so you have both diversity and redundancy.
Also, since this happened to many at about the same time, I assume an update or change was to blame. Don't update these unless there is a reason. And test if you do update, or keep a non-updated backup on hand until the update is proven reliable.
never underestimate people's capacity to be mind-glowingly evil... it seem's they have this thought in mind
Or overestimate the risk. Just think how many easy ways there are to rig something or randomly poison something and do great harm to people, yet it rarely happens the 'sneaky' way. More often someone will blatantly cause harm and to others and often themselves as well. I think for many the risk of getting caught doing something that evil via hacking is likely a deterrent as well. It certainly would bring pretty harsh penalties.
I'm not saying we shouldn't take reasonable steps to prevent these risks, just keep the fear within reason.
Not respecting a professor is NO excuse for cheating in his/her class.
I didn't say or imply it was. Just saying there are some red flags flying when a professor pretty much loses an entire class.
I get the feeling that the Professor is the one with the issues. Not the students.
I am inclined to think that as well. I sounds to me like this professor could not earn the respect of his students. If you can't manage to do that, then you might not be a very good teacher of this topic.
I'm so excited... I can't wait till it gets discovered again! It gets better every time.
I think your calculation is simply a big guess. Going from watts to gallons of diesel is a pretty big leap, I'd like to see your assumptions. Given that there is not indication of the efficiency of the conversion process presented, and that hydrogen production alone is quite inefficient, and that you need to consider process input and transport costs, I'll assume your guess is very far from reality.
Its actually a poor logical argument. Only a small percentage of new ideas actually succeed, so the odds are greatly in favor of the critics. Employing critical thought and challenge is a key to success.
Lots of theories about the demise of these civilizations. I don't recall mercury poisoning being discussed as a contributor, but it seems plausible.
I agree warnings have limitations, but they didn't have anything in Indonesia at the time and they have since been deployed. They may be a 'given' but that doesn't matter in a discussion of what is likely to be most beneficial in an event.
Walls pretty much ruin a beach, so if you have a beach, tourist area a wall is not really desirable. I get the concept of personal or small group type protective devices, but they must be low cost and deployed in an easily accessible manner, and this particular solution doesn't fit that. Then, when you do deploy a solution, you must make sure everyone on the beach knows what to do and how to use them in an organized manner. Not an easy thing to pull off, and made more complicated if you want to a parent with children, etc.
To protect a sea side village, sea walls make more sense. Probably a lower cost than moving a large community.
This provides a solution that allows you to survive with less reaction time. Which may be a good thing.
Only if it is more accessible by many people than the escape paths. Imagine 5 people panicking and fight to get into one of these things. It really makes no sense. Is it even remotely realistic that a country would line its beaches with thousands of these things? Then everyone that does manage to get into one of these gets swept out to sea. Seems like a very poor solution path to me.
Aeronautical engineer Julian Sharpe, founder of Survival Capsule, got the idea for his capsules after the 2004 Indonesian tsunami. He believes fewer people would have died had some sort of escape pod existed
What the Indonesians needed was a warning, not an escape pod. With no warning, the pods are useless. With warning, just get out of the path.
Who is saying what can't be done, specifically, or is this just some general point unrelated to the topic or discussion?
Cue Slashdotters claiming it is either impossible or a really bad thing in 3..2..1..
Well, we don't have the information. Its a really expensive thing. My first question is how long will they last before they degrade significantly?
If you reduce the chance, you do prevent it in at least some cases. So, your statement is in fact not accurate, as there is HOPE. I will repeat it, EATING well does prevent cancer in at least some people.
I suppose its just semantics, but if it is really eating poorly that causes risk to increase, then not eating poorly is not really preventing cancer, just not causing it. So, its really not eating bad food that lowers cancer risk.... and of course that implies eating well. Kind of like saying not riding in a car prevents you from getting a serious injury from an accident...technically true but kind of useless when looking for prevention techniques.
Not eating anything will prevent cancer.
Eliminate any exceptions to the CAFE standard for SUVs.
And while they are at it, find a way to get EV owners to pay their share of taxes for road maintenance, now covered largely by the gas tax.
Obviously, those choices are all better than your broken car in for repairs, at the moment.
My Camry Hybrid is quieter, smoother, and has over 30 extra HP compared to the 4 cyl Camry.
What HP does it get compared to the 6 cylinder?
It's not people switching back, it's people buying a second car for their household.
The numbers reported are based on trading in their EV for and SUV, a switch, not those that keep one and buy a second vehicle. You could be right, but you have no data to show that they own a second EV at the time of trade in.